Strategies for construction hazard recognition
Selection of project cases
Download 2.75 Mb. View original pdf
|
- Navigate this page:
- Method for assessing hazard recognition performance
| Selection of project cases We solicited large and stable projects from our expert panel to conduct two-week immersive case studies. Because we desired diversity in the cases studies, we selected an oil and gas plant that manufactured oil additives and the construction of a fluff pulp manufacturing plant. To minimize bias we ensured that our expert participants were not directly or indirectly involved in overseeing the project cases. On both project sites we selected three independent work crews involved indifferent trades to be studied simultaneously. Hence, our study involved six baseline studies involving diverse trades (mechanical, civil, maintenance, electrical, structural and insulation) from two independent project sites. This sample size exceeds the requirement of two baselines for making meaningful inferences suggested in literature (Barlow et al. 2009; Blount et al. 1982; Fleece et al. 1981; Kazdin and Kopel 1975; Van Houten et al. 1985; Wolf and Risley 1971). Method for assessing hazard recognition performance To assess the impact of an intervention using the multiple baseline testing approach we developed a reliable and meaningful metric for hazard recognition, known as the hazard recognition index (HR index ) (see Equation 1). 𝐻𝑅 = 𝐻 𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 𝐻 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 (1) Where H crew represents the total number of hazard-signals identified by the crew during the planning phase for each task and H total represents the total number of identifiable hazard-signals the crew was exposed to during work which was identified through field observations by a site- based panel. 56 To reliably compute HR index, we developed a strict protocol to measure H crew and H total . To compute H crew we observed the total number of hazards identified and communicated by the crew during the pre-task safety meetings prior to the commencement of work. Two site-specific safety managers with at least 12 years of relevant experience and familiarity with the tasks performed also observed meetings and validated measures. For H total we measured the total number of identifiable hazards to which the workers were exposed during the work period. This was defined as all identifiable hazards that were identified by the safety managers, researchers and workers before, during and after the completion of each work period. After observing each work period, H total was computed based on consensus within the researchers and the site leadership to ensure validity and reliability. Also, to preserve consistency, a catalogue of hazards was developed from historical hazard assessments which was later refined for each work period. Although it was highly unlikely that the panel would identify all hazard- signals through observations, the rigorous protocol was maintained for consistency. Each work period generally consisted of four-hour before and after lunch, and the study was conducted overwork periods for each crew (48 work periods per project. Download 2.75 Mb. Share with your friends:
|