The need for healthcare workers (HCWs) to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic heightens their risk of thermal stress. We assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCWs from India and Singapore regarding PPE usage and heat stress when performing treatment and care activities. One hundred sixty-five HCWs from India (n = 110) and Singapore (n = 55) participated in a survey. Thirty-seven HCWs from Singapore provided thermal comfort ratings before and after ice slurry ingestion. Differences in responses between India and Singapore HCWs were compared. A p-value cut-off of 0.05 depicted statistical significance. Median wet-bulb globe temperature was higher in India (30.2 °C (interquartile range [IQR] 29.1–31.8 °C)) than in Singapore (22.0 °C (IQR 18.8–24.8 °C)) (p < 0.001). Respondents from both countries reported thirst (n = 144, 87%), excessive sweating (n = 145, 88%), exhaustion (n = 128, 78%), and desire to go to comfort zones (n = 136, 84%). In Singapore, reports of air-conditioning at worksites (n = 34, 62%), dedicated rest area availability (n = 55, 100%), and PPE removal during breaks (n = 54, 98.2%) were higher than in India (n = 27, 25%; n = 46, 42%; and n = 66, 60%, respectively) (p < 0.001). Median thermal comfort rating improved from 2 (IQR 1–2) to 0 (IQR 0–1) after ice slurry ingestion in Singapore (p < 0.001). HCWs are cognizant of the effects of heat stress but might not adopt best practices due to various constraints. Thermal stress management is better in Singapore than in India. Ice slurry ingestion is shown to be practical and effective in promoting thermal comfort. Adverse effects of heat stress on productivity and judgment of HCWs warrant further investigation.
BackgroundHealth concerns unique to women are growing with the large number of women venturing into different trades that expose them to hot working environments and inadequate sanitation facilities, common in many Indian workplaces.ObjectiveThe study was carried out to investigate the health implications of exposures to hot work environments and inadequate sanitation facilities at their workplaces for women workers.DesignA cross-sectional study was conducted with 312 women workers in three occupational sectors in 2014–2015. Quantitative data on heat exposures and physiological heat strain indicators such as core body temperature (CBT), sweat rate (SwR), and urine specific gravity (USG) were collected. A structured questionnaire captured workers perceptions about health impacts of heat stress and inadequate sanitary facilities at the workplace.ResultsWorkplace heat exposures exceeded the threshold limit value for safe manual work for 71% women (Avg. wet bulb globe temperature=30°C±2.3°C) during the study period. Eighty-seven percent of the 200 women who had inadequate/no toilets at their workplaces reported experiencing genitourinary problems periodically. Above normal CBT, SwR, and USG in about 10% women workers indicated heat strain and moderate dehydration that corroborated well with their perceptions. Observed significant associations between high-heat exposures and SwR (t=−2.3879, p=0.0192), inadequate toilet facilities and self-reported adverse heat-related health symptoms (χ2=4.03, p=0.0444), and prevalence of genitourinary issues (χ2=42.92, p=0.0005×10−7) reemphasize that heat is a risk and lack of sanitation facilities is a major health concern for women workers.ConclusionsThe preliminary evidence suggests that health of women workers is at risk due to occupational heat exposures and inadequate sanitation facilities at many Indian workplaces. Intervention through strong labor policies with gender sensitivity is the need of the hour to empower women, avert further health risks, and also enhance productivity for the few million women workers who contribute largely to the country's economy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.