Formative research to reduce mine worker respirable silica dust exposure: a feasibility study to integrate technology into behavioral interventions

Abstract

BackgroundThe use of formative research as a critical component of intervention planning is highly supported in the literature. However, studies that report such processes in practice are minimal. This paper reports on the formative data collection and analysis that informed the development of a multilevel intervention that utilizes mine assessment technology to bridge health communication between workers and management to reduce mine worker overexposure to respirable silica dust.MethodsFormative research to assess the feasibility and utility of this intervention design included stakeholder meetings and feedback, mine visits and observations, interviews with mine workers, and a focus group with mine management. Data collection took place at several US industrial mineral mine sites and a southeastern regional safety meeting. Interviews inquired about workers’ perceived susceptibility and severity to respirable silica exposure, barriers to preventing overexposure, behaviors that reduce exposure, and perceptions about respirable dust-monitoring technology. A focus group discussed mine stakeholders’ uses of various dust assessment technology.ResultsThe data was qualitatively analyzed and coded using a thematic and theoretical analysis. Researchers found recurring themes for both target audiences that informed the need and subsequent development of a mixed-method multilevel intervention to improve communication quantity and quality around dust-control practices.ConclusionsResults indicate that formative research is critical to: identify and develop an intervention that meets target audience needs; accurately represent the health problem; and develop positive relationships with research partners and stakeholders.

Selecting behaviour change priorities for trachoma ‘F’ and ‘E’ interventions: A formative research study in Oromia, Ethiopia

“…However, these limitations do not invalidate its worth because, as Leviton, et al (1999) explain, the aim of formative research “is not to answer questions about intervention definitively but, rather, to decrease uncertainty about what the intervention should be” [21]. These studies often go unpublished and there remains a lack of clarity around how formative research objectives are formulated; how methods are identified and used; and how data are used to inform programmatic decisions [22, 23].…”

Occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica among US metal and nonmetal miners, 2000–2019

“…Halldin et al 26 reported that miners may not always receive substantial respiratory protection training on the hazards of dust. Haas et al 38 found bagger operators were aware that their primary health concern at their worksite was silica dust exposure, and seeing dust circulate in the air served as a reminder for workers to wear respirators, even if it was not required in a certain area. Though these attitudes relaxed with the length of mining tenure, moderately tenured miners perceived less susceptibility as compared to new miners and miners nearing retirement 38 .…”

A case study exploring field-level risk assessments as a leading safety indicator

“…Worksites often face challenges of determining the best ways to measure and develop suitable tools to facilitate consistent risk measurement (Boyle, 2012; Haas and Yorio, 2016; Haas, Willmer and Cecala, 2016). For example, research shows that assessing site risks using a series of checklists or general observations during site walkthroughs is more common (Navon and Kolten, 2006).…”