Occupational safety and health practice: a study at Infrastructure construction work

Safety is the state of being “safe”, the condition of being protected against physical, social, spiritual, financial, political, emotional, occupational, psychological, educational or other types of consequences of failure, damage, error, accidents, harm or any other event which could be considered non-desirable. Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. In that case, Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) is an act that ensure the well-being of workers in a broad scope of many specialized fields. This study is focused on the construction of a police headquarters located in Seriab, Perlis. A big number of construction companies in Malaysia might not perform safety practice for their workers, lack of safety appliances, and did not perform a regular safety check-up on their workers as the reason was they want to earn more profits and they took the safety measures of their foreign workers for granted. Note that most of construction workers in Malaysia are immigrants. The data collection was carried out through site investigation using Preliminary Hazard analysis (PHA), HIRARC form and interview session with a worker in the construction site. The objective of this study is to spread the awareness of the importance of safety among workers in the construction site based on the existing potential hazards. This report was initially to identify the hazard on the construction site and to analyse the occupational safety and health factor in the workplace. The results are to analyse and suggest recommendations for improving occupational safety and health act in the construction site. Practicing a good safety measures in the workplace will ensure the well-being of workers

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries