Risk factors of small scale work places in an industrial site in relations to quality of life

Objective: Working environments include many factors that affect the workers' health, their social and cultural situations. Quality of life is an important outcome measure for evaluation of health conditions. This study determines the risk factors of workers in small-scale work places in an ind...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Turkish journal of public health 2015-05, Vol.13 (2)
Hauptverfasser: Uskun, Ersin, Öztürk, Mustafa, Kisioglu, Ahmet Nesimi, Sönmez, Yonca
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; tur
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective: Working environments include many factors that affect the workers' health, their social and cultural situations. Quality of life is an important outcome measure for evaluation of health conditions. This study determines the risk factors of workers in small-scale work places in an industrial site and evaluates their relationship with quality of life. Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed at an industrial site which includes 500 small scale work places. 125 work places were selected by randomized sampling and all workers (n=298) in these work places were asked to completed a questionnaire. The World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale (Turkish Version) (WHOQOL-BREF-TR) was used to measure the quality of life. For analysis, descriptive statistics, Mann Whitney U, independent t test, variance analyses, Pearson's correlation and linear regression were used. Results: The mean age of the study group was 34.8±10.9 and 94.6% of the subjects were male. Physical, psychological, social, environmental and national environmental domain scores (mean±standart deviation) were found as 15.5±2.4, 14.7±2.5, 15.3±3.0, 13.8±2.5 and 14.9±4.3 respectively. In the working environment, the most common risks were (respectively) psychosocial (96.3%), ergonomic (67.1%), chemical (32.9%), physical (32.2%) and biological risks (28.5%). Physical, psychological, and national environmental domain scores of workers who were exposed at least one risk were found to be lower than others. Conclusion: Sex, perception of own economic potential and the working environment were risks with significant relevance for the quality of life. The study concluded that the working environment in particular includes risks that were the most important factor on physical and psychological domains.
ISSN:1304-1096
1304-1088