HAND/ARM VIBRATION
WHAT CONTROLS CAN AN EMPLOYER PUT IN PLACE TO PREVENT OR MINIMISE HAND-ARM
VIBRATION EXPOSURE? The employer must eliminate exposure at the source by investigating other working methods or purchasing low-vibration tools. If elimination at the source is not reasonably practicable, then reducing exposure to ALARP is required via a programme of organisational or technical measures. Controls include:
• Providing auxiliary equipment. •
Implementing an appropriate maintenance programme for work equipment.
• Limiting the duration of the task involving vibration exposure.
• Providing rest facilities and adequate break periods.
• Encouraging good blood circulation, for example, keeping warm and dry.
• Encouraging workers to massage and exercise their fingers during break periods.
• Ensuring that workers are aware of how to use equipment correctly and safely in order to minimise their exposure to vibration. This includes avoiding gripping or forcing a tool more than necessary.
• Promoting a healthy lifestyle (such as offering help to quit smoking, given that smoking reduces blood flow).
ARE ANTI-VIBRATION GLOVES EFFECTIVE AT
HELPING TO CONTROL EXPOSURE LEVELS? It must be understood that injury caused by HAV exposure is dependent on the magnitude, duration and frequency of vibration. Anti-vibration gloves have little effect at the most damaging frequencies. Some evidence suggests the use of anti-vibration gloves increases the worker’s grip and could actually increase the overall risk. Investment in good quality gloves to
24
help keep the employee’s hands warm and dry in cold conditions and help maintain good circulation to the fingers, is likely to be more beneficial.
WHEN DOES AN EMPLOYER NEED TO IMPLEMENT
HEALTH SURVEILLANCE FOR THEIR WORKERS? Should it be likely that workers are exposed to levels at or above the EAV or if the risk assessment indicates that there is a health risk, health surveillance is required under the CVW Regulations.
Research from a number of sources has shown that employees regularly exposed to vibration above the ELV have a 50% chance of developing HAVS, a clear risk to health. The same research has shown that workers regularly exposed to vibration between the EAV and the ELV have a 28% chance of developing HAVS, this is still a significant risk. Although the regulations infer that no further action is required when exposure is below the EAV, research has shown that there is still a 6% chance of developing HAVS. In addition, exposure at or below the EAV may result in worsening of the symptoms of someone with pre-existing HAVS.
There is some evidence that indicates the risk of HAVS to be insignificant below 1m/s2 A(8). Health surveillance is advisable at this level, as it has an important role to play in monitoring the effectiveness of exposure controls. Nevertheless, it should be noted that health surveillance at 1m/s2 A(8) is not a statutory requirement but is rather considered as a more precautious approach to worker health protection. As the EAV is not deemed a ‘safe’ limit, this is the reasoning behind the requirement of applying ALARP in all cases of HAV exposure.
If any employee is diagnosed with an ill-health effect or correlating disease as a result of HAV exposure, the employer must inform the employee and review the risk assessment and consider some alternative work duties for that employee to prevent the condition from developing further.
www.socotec.co.uk www.tomorrowshs.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
