See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231315785
Workplace Risk Assessment
Chapter · January 2010
CITATIONS
READS
0
3,376
4 authors, including:
Elisaveta Stikova
Neda Milevska-Kostova
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje
Center for Regional Policy Research and Cooperation - Studiorum
100 PUBLICATIONS 377 CITATIONS
65 PUBLICATIONS 219 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Doncho Donev
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje
282 PUBLICATIONS 655 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Millennium Development Goals in R. Macedonia View project
Development of new Schools of Public health in SEE"" View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Doncho Donev on 19 January 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
SEE PROFILE
METHODS AND TOOLS IN PUBLIC HEALTH
A Handbook for Teachers, Researchers and Health Professionals
Title
Workplace Risk Assessment (WRA)
Module:
ECTS (suggested): 0,5
Elisaveta Stikova, MD, PhD, Professor
Author(s), degrees,
National Public Health Institute, Faculty of Medicine,
institution(s)
University “Ss. Cyril and Methodius”, Skopje, R. Macedonia
Neda Milevska-Kostova, MSc, MCPPM, Program Director
Centre for Regional Policy Research and Cooperation
“Studiorum”, Skopje, R. Macedonia
Petar Bulat, MD, PhD, Professor
University of Belgrade, School of Medicine, Occupational
Health Department, Belgrade, Serbia
Doncho Donev, MD, PhD, Professor
Institute of Social Medicine, Institutes, Faculty of Medicine,
University “Ss Cyril and Methodius”, Skopje, R. Macedonia
Elisaveta Stikova, MD, PhD, Professor
Address for
Faculty of Medicine, University “Ss. Cyril and Methodius”,
Correspondence
Skopje, R. Macedonia
50 divizija 6, 1000 Skopje, R. Macedonia
Tel: +389 70 230 183
e-mail: estikova@ukim.edu.mk or estikova@gmail.com
Workplace, risk assessment,
risk analysisis, risk
Keywords
management
After completing this module students and public health
Learning objectives
professionals should be able to:
 understand and define the terms risk, risk analysis - risk
assessment, risk communication and risk management;
 understand the concept and elements of workplace risk
assessment;
 understand the team work for workplace risk assessment;
 perform workplace risk assessment using elaborated
techniques.
Workplace risk assessment is a new approach in the
Abstract
traditionally oriented occupational health, practiced to date in
the SEE countries. Current techniques for recognising and
managing occupational safety and health risks were mainly
oriented and defined as “workplace analysis” and they lack a
risk management and risk quantification component. This
module introduces a modern approach to risk quantification
that incorporates recent scientific and legal advances in
occupational safety and health, consistent with the
Framework Directive 89/391/EEC, the ILO conventions and
other relevant binding documents that are part of the
International and EU regulations.
In the introductory lecture the students will be introduced
Teaching methods
with the concept of risk assessment at the workplace, with
special focus on the four key steps of the risk assessment:
hazard identification, exposure assessment, dose-response
assessment and risk characterization. The theoretical
knowledge will be supported by a presentation of a case
study.
After the theoretical lecture, the students will be required to
assess the risk at a given workplace, while referring to the
recommended readings. The findings will be presented and
shared with other students in the class.
1
Specific recommendations
for teachers
Assessment of students
 ECTS: 0,5;
 work under teacher supervision/individual students’ work
proportion: 30%/70%;
 facilities: lecture room;
 equipment: LCD projection equipment, flip chart;
 training materials: recommended readings and
matrices/chart tables;
 target audience: undergraduate and master degree students
according to the Bologna process.
Multiple choice questionnaire, seminar paper, oral exam.
2
WORKPLACE RISK ASSESSMENT (WRA)
Elisaveta Stikova, Neda Milevska-Kostova, Petar Bulat, Doncho Donev
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Introduction – Workplace risks
According to the estimations of the International Labour Organization (ILO), every year there are
approximately 2.2 million deaths, or on average 6,000 die every day as a result of work-related accidents or
diseases. Also, every year, there are about 270 million reported injuries at the workplace that lead to absences
from work for 3 days or more, and about 160 million incidents of work-related disease, as a result of exposure
to hazardous physical, chemical or biological agents, as well as improper working conditions. About 30-40%
of them become chronic and irreversible conditions, and 10% lead to complete and permanent loss of working
ability (1,2,3).
Hazardous substances kill about 438,000 workers annually, and 10% of all skin cancers are estimated
to be attributable to workplace exposure to hazardous substances. There are more than 150 registered physical
and chemical agents, classified as occupational cancerogens, and to which about 20-30% of the male and 520% of the female professionally active population are exposed (4).
Occupational malignant diseases are cause of about 146,000 deaths or 1,4 million disability adjusted
life years (DALYs). Occupational exposure is cause of death for 10% of all cases of malignant diseases of the
lungs, bronchi and trachea, and to 24% of all cases of leukaemia. Asbestos alone claims about 100,000 deaths
every year and the figure is rising annually. Although global production of asbestos has fallen since the 1970s,
increasing numbers of workers are now dying from past exposure to asbestos dust (5).
Another occupational disease, silicosis - a fatal lung disease caused by exposure to silica dust – still
affects tens of millions of workers around the world.
There are 35 million health workers in the world. Significant occupational risk for them represents
the percutaneous injury with sharp objects with which they work, such as needles, scalpels, peans, etc. The
analyses show that every year nearly 3 million injuries at work are registered, where health professionals have
come in contact with contaminated blood. In 2 million of the cases, they have been exposed to Hepatitis B, in
0,9 million of the cases with Hepatitis C, and in 170,000 cases they have been exposed to the HIV virus. As a
consequence, every year, there are 85,000 cases of professionally contracted infectious diseases in the health
professionals’ community (6).
The analysis of the influence of the professional exposure in the total burden of disease shows that 5 18% of all cases of asthma and 14% of cases of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) are related
to work. Every year, 234,000 deaths are reported due to COPD with occupational ethiology, which represents
0.4% of the total number of deaths from this cause. This is related to 3 million disability adjusted life years
(DALYs).
Occupational exposure to noise is a cause for hearing loss of 16% of those that have hearing
impairment. In the total burden of disease, the professionally acquired deafness accounts for 0.3% or 4.2
millions of DALYs (7).
Although these figures represent basis for serious concern, the problem is additionally aggravated, if
we take into account the large number of occupational diseases that remain undiagnosed or unaccounted for.
The direct costs for diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of the work-related injuries and
occupational diseases represent a significant burden to the healthcare system. The indirect costs related to the
absence from work, loss of working ability or decreased productivity represents a further burden to the
national budgets of each country.
Occupational safety and health is one of the European Union's most important social policy areas: every
three and a half minutes, somebody in the EU dies from work-related causes; this means almost 167,000 deaths a
year as a result of either work-related accidents (7500) or occupational diseases (159,500).
According to European Statistics on Accidents at Work (ESAW), about 4 million accidents at work
resulting in more than three days off work occurred in EU-15 in 2004. If accidents causing no absence from
work or an absence of up to 3 days are added, the estimated total number rises to more than 7 million every year.
It means that every four-and-a-half seconds, a worker in the EU is involved in an accident that causes three or
more days absence from work (8,9).
3
According to the data from the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA),
occupational diseases and work-related injuries that are consequence of improperly organized system for
protection at work cost each country between 2.6-3.8% of GDP.
In the EU about 1 250 million working days are lost each year due to health problems in general. Within
the structure by causes (Fig. 1) about 210 million days are lost due to accidents at work and 340 million due to
work-related diseases (10,11).
Figure 1. Causes for the sickness absence in EU
The consequences of accidents at work and of work-related ill health are multiple and complex. The total costs
of accidents at work and work-related ill health are not equally divided between the different players. The total
labour costs attributable to accidents at work in EU-15 in the year 2000 were estimated at around 48 billion
euros. Other costs were estimated at around 6.6 bilion euros (12).
Thus, the safety and health of workers represents not only a legal requirement and obligation , but also
substantial need for improvement of the productivity and economic progress of each country. At the same
time, that means a possibility for establishing a balance between the economic interest, productivity and the
health and working ability of the working population. The occupational safety and health is economically
oriented category, which is aimed at protection of the interests of the workers, companies, health insurance
companies, health workers, and finally of the country and European community as a whole (13).
Workers’ safety and health is protected in Europe by an approach based on assessing and managing
the risk. In order to carry out effective workplace risk assessement, all those involved require a clear
understanding of the legal context, the roles of the main actors involved in the process, as well as the concepts
and the process of assessing the risk (14, 15).
Legal Context and the role of the main players
The legal context of the risk assessment is set out in the EU Framework directive and other related so-called
sisters’ directives (16).
All European Union countries have legislation that set out measures to protect worker safety and health
in order to improve quality in safety and security in the workplace. These laws are based on European Directives
that lay down minimum obligations for employers and workers, covering the prevention of all types of risks and
each activity or sector where risks exist. This legislation is in place to protect workers against occupational
accidents and diseases and to assist in the prevention of occupational hazards (17).
Employers have a general duty to ensure the occupational safety and health in every aspect related to
work and carry out a risk assessment. The EU framework directive highlights the key role played by risk
assessment and sets out basic provision and measures that must be followed by every employer.
Every employer is responsible for taking the appropriate measures such as ensuring the availability of
sufficient resources, carrying out a risk assessment, preventing occupational risk, informing, training and
consulting workers.
The employer has a duty to:
4





Organise risk assessment
Select the person (s) to carry out risk assessment and ensure they are competent
Assess the risk and implement protective measures
Consult the employees or their representatives about the organisation of the risk assessment
Ensure all affected workers are informed of any hazard and any harm to which they may be
at risk and the all protective measures taken to prevent such harm.
The employer has a duty and responsibility to make a final decision and to designate the people who
carry out risk assessment. They can be:
 The employer
 Employees designated by the employer
 External assessor and/or services if there is a lack of competent person within the company
(16).
Among the most important characteristics of designated or nominated person/company should be
competence. They don’t need to be occupational safety or health experts, but they should demonstrate their
competencies. They should have competencies to understand the general approach to the risk assessment and
capabilities to apply this understanding, knowledge and skills to the workplace. But, they should have ability to
identify the situations that overwhelmed their competencies in terms to ask for proper help and further assistance
.They should demonstrate their competencies by showing they would be able to:
 Identify safety and health problems,
 Assess and prioritise the need for action,
 Suggest options available to eliminate or minimise risk,
 Evaluate their effectiveness and
 Promote safety and health good practices.
The last but not the least point in the risk’s chain are workers and their representatives. They have a
right to be consulted for organisation of the risk assessment, to participate in the risk assessment, to alert the
designated person for perceived risk and to be informed about the risk on the work place and their safety and
health.
What is risk?
According to WHO (1993) risk represents a likelihood of an occurrence of hazardous event and the likelihood of
an occurence of injury or damage to the health of people caused by this event. Risk is a combination of the
likelihood of an occurrence of a hazardous event and the severity of injuries or damage to the health of people
that might be caused by this event.
Thus, the term professional risk embeds the probability of occurrence of negative effects on the
workers' health and life, as a result of presence of certain hazards at work or exposure of the workers to
hazardous agents in the working environment (17, 18).
Occupational risk is expected frequency of occurrence of occupational diseases and work-related
injuries or death, that are consequential to the exposure to different hazardous events or substances, and physical,
chemical or biological factors of the working environment. A risk is a chance, higher or low, that somebody may
be harmed by the hazard. A hazard can be anything –work materials, equipment, work methods or practices that
have potential to cause harm.
Bearing in mind that it is practically impossible to eliminate the probability of occurrence of hazardous
agents in the working environment, it is clear that the risk is always present. From expert point of view, it is
inevitable to assess the actual and real level of risk, and furthermore important – to define the acceptable levels
of risk (19).
Acceptable risk level means that the likelihood of occurrence of hazardous health effects can
justifiably be considered as insignificant, and that the occurring effects are so minimal that can not be further
minimized, neither through increased regulatory mechanisms nor through further investment for risk elimination.
Usually, acceptable risk level is agreed between all participants in the decision-making process –
scientists, public health professionals, policy makers, administrative and legislative structures.
Risk analysis is a process that enables insight into the correlation between the exposure, dose and
effects from one side, and the measures for mitigation and elimination of the risk and the ways of informing the
stakeholders.
Risk analysis consists of 3 consecutive and interrelated processes, i.e. procedures:
 risk assessment,
 risk management and
 risk communication.
5
Phases of risk analysis and interrelatedness of its segments are presented in the Figure 2 below.
Figure 2. Interrelatedness of the phases of risk analysis
The starting key point in the risk analysis is the risk assessment. Risk assessment is quantitive measure
of the likelihood of occurrence of hazardous health effects as a result of existing hazards at the workplace
(20,21).
Workplace risk assessment is the process of evaluating risk to workers’ safety and health from
occupational hazards. It is a systematic examination and evaluation of all aspects of work that consider:
 What could cause injury or harm,
 Whether the hazards could be eliminated, and if not
 What preventive or protective measures are, or should be, in place to minimise and control the
risk.
Workplace risk assessment means quantification of the likehood of an occurrence of hazardous event at
the workplace and related negative effects (injuries at work or work related diseases)
Next phase in the risk analysis process is the risk management. The risk management represents
assessment of the successfulness of the preventive and mitigation measures (22).
Risk management includes the following activities:
 control of the decision made during the risk assessment,
 determination of the acceptable risk level,
 implementation of mitigation (corrective) measures and
 monitoring of the management.
Risk management is a process in which direct responsibility falls with those that participate in the
decision-making process and creating policies for safety and health – from the level in the company where the
risk assessment is made to the highest national structures (15). The elements for decision making are taken from
the scientific research and expert opinions, standards and good practices established on national or international
level (23, 24).
Risk communication represents interactive exchange of information and opinions/forecasts related to
the confirmed risk. The information is exchanged between those that participate in the risk assessment and risk
evaluation, those that manage the risk and those responsible for making the decisions related to the whole
process (25).
Information obtained through monitoring of the working environment in the process of health
professional risk assessment are combined with the information from other sources, such as epidemiological
studies for the impact of a certain professional exposure, referent values for the maximum allowed
concentrations in the workplace, etc.
The strategy for risk communication should be determined, established and agreed at the beginning of
each risk analysis. That should be a continuous process in which at first, the stakeholders as well as key
6
responsible persons and methods of communication are identified. At the same time, the most appropriate ways
of communication should be defined. The most often used ways of risk communication are:
 public gatherings,
 technical and expert meetings,
 written and published documents,
 written and published results of related research and
 establishment of website.
Risk communication represents a legal obligation for the employers to inform the employees about the
identified and confirmed level of risk to which they are exposed during their work as well as about the measures
and procedures that they, both employer and employees, have to comply with in order to achieve successful risk
management.
The interrelatedness of the processes and activities of risk analysis and risk assessment, as well as risk
management are shown on the Figure 2.
What is risk assessment?
As already shown, the starting and key point of the risk analysis is the risk assessment.
Risk assessment is an important step in the overall process for protecting the workers and business as
well as complying with the low. It should be focused on the level of risk with potential to cause harm (17, 26). In
addition, risk assessment is quantitive measure of the likelihood of occurrence of hazardous health effects as a
result of existing hazards at the workplace.
Risk assessment is based on the quantification of the probability that the hazardous event will occur
during the working process and on the assessment of the severity of the hazardous effects that those events will
have on the health of the exposed workers (27). Risk assessment represents obligation of the employers, and has
the aim to enable them to:
 make easier identification of the dangers and hazards at the workplace,
 determine measures for occupational safety and health,,
 check the efficiency of the measures undertaken and
 manifest responsibility in front of the authorities and workers in undertaking necessary preventive
measures.
Risk assessment consists of several groups of consecutive activities (Figure 3) that have to be
undertaken in the proper order, in magnitude and timeframe that are consistent with the determined objectives
(28,29). Those are:
 hazard identification,
 exposure assessment,
 dose-response assessment, and
 risk characterization.
Hazard identification
Hazard identification is a procedure of recognition of hazardous factor in the working environment and
defining its physical, chemical and other properties. In the course of hazard identification, the "fate" of
hazardous agent is determined, either in the external environment or in the organism, but also its properties to
cause negative health effects or disease.
Exposure assessment
The assessment of the exposure means determination of the level of hazardous substances that are
present in the working environment and their internalization/intake into the organism of the professionally
exposed workers.
According to the intake route of the substance into the human organism, the exposure can be:
 direct and
 indirect.
Dose-response assessment
Dose response assessment is process of making a conection between the data of the exposure
assessment and occurence of the work-related diseasses and other harm of the health of the exposed workers.
Risk characterization
The last step in the risk assessment process means characterisation of the actual risk on the examined
workplace. It is essential and most visible phase of the quantification of the percived risk. It means establismnet
7
of the interrelation among all information, data and results obtained from the previous steps. For practical use of
the whole risk assessment proces in this phase the quantification of the probability of the occurence of the hazard
and the severity of the harm caused by respective hazard is made.
Figure 3. Group of activities that form the risk assessment
Methodological approach to risk assessment
Preconditions for commencement of risk assessment are:
 Existence of appropriate legal framework (obligation, responsibility and conditions),
 Existence of national standards, guidelines, technical guides, agreed best practices, determined
levels of maximum allowed concentrations (levels), manufacturer's guidelines, professional
associations' standards, etc. and
 Existence of legally and professinally defined hierarchy for risk prevention:
o avoidance of hazards (modernization and automatization of the technology process),
o replacement of hazardous with harmless or less hazardous substances (substitution),
o combating hazards at their source (separation, hermetization),
o applying collective protection measures,
o adjustment to the new technological knowledge and their appliance into practice and
continuous promotion of the care for safety and health at work.
Workplace risk assessment begins with the decision of the employer for commencement of the
procedure and appointment of expert person from the pool of employees that will be responsible for the overall
process of risk assessment (30,31). At the same time, depending on the size of the company, the employer
appoints representative or representatives of the workers that are participating in the process of risk assessment,
or the Committee for safety and health at work might be established.
The flow chart of the risk assessment and control consists of several procedures, as follows:
 Preparation of Action Plan and monitoring of its implementation,
 Data collection about the working environment and workplace (access, safety of working
surfaces, safety of equipment and tools, microclimate conditions, lighting, chemical and
biological hazards, etc.),
 Identification of working processes and operations with description and/or identification of
hazards and dangers,
8





Data collection on occurence of hazards and/or dangers during the working process,
Data collection on the employees,
Analysis of the recorded effects and/or diseases related to the working conditions,
Quantification of the likelihood of occurence of hazardous effects,
Quantification of the severity of the expected hazardous effects and/or diseases and injuries at
workplace,
 Defining priorities for prevention, reduction and elimination of workplace-related hazards,
 Implementation of the control measures and assessment of their effectiveness,
 Review of the risk assessment in pre-determined conditions (change of the technological
process, occurence of severe, death or group injuries, etc.).
Starting point in the risk assessment is preparation of the action plan, which preparation,
implementation and monitoring is under the responsibility of the employer.
The action plan should include:
 Organization and coordination of the risk assessment,
 Appointment of competent persons that will work on the risk assessment,
 Appointment of representatives of the workers that will be involved in the risk assessment
process,
 Defining the flow of information and conditions under which the necessary data for risk
assessment will be used (confidentiality),
 Defining the monitoring of the preventive and/or corrective measures and undertaking
responsibility for their implementation by signing written act,
 Informing the employees about the identified conditions during the risk assessment and the
preventive and corrective measures undertaken.
According to the European directives, and depending on the conditions in one company, the risk
assessment can be made by (16):
 The employer,
 Employed expert personnel appointed by the employer or
 External professional services.
The defining criterion regarding the selection of the responsible party that will undertake the risk
assessment is the size of the company, working conditions and the competence of the appointed person for risk
assessment in the company. In practice, very often a need is imposed for engaging a team of different specialties
from various fields (outsourcing).
The persons involved in the risk assessment process are confirming their competencies by showing
evidence of formal education in the field (if they have such education), as well as by showing competency and
capability to:
 Understand and be familiar with the general concept of risk assessment;
 Have and apply their professional knowledge in particular conditions and workplaces for which the
risk assessment is conducted.
Such approach requires that the persons involved in the risk assessment have knowledge and
information based on which they will be able to:
 Recognize the problems related to the occupational safety and health ,
 Prioritize accordingly the activities related to the occupational safety and health,
 Predict the potential dangers and hazards, as well as consequences that can be expected in case of
their occurence, based on relevant evidence,
 Identify conditions that surpass their competencies, in order to seek additional expert opinions and
 Know the methodologies for risk assessment, including as much as necessary the complex logic
analyses and technical simulations.
Key elements in risk assessment
Risk assessment is in fact reconsideration of all aspects of the work and work process, in order to
identify and quantify the hazards that can inflict injury, professional disease or injury at workplace, for the
purpose of reducing or removing them, or if possible, to introduce as much as justifiable, preventive and
protection measures with which the risk will be eliminated or decreased and controlled.
The risk assessment should embed all predictable dangers and hazards at work in all aspects of work
process. It is conducted with participation and consultation of all those involved in the work process – from
workers to their employers.
9
Risk assessment is applicable to all workers and work positions that are in direct or indirect relation and
interaction with the hazards present in the working environment, and special attention should be paid to the
particularly vulnerable groups of workers – young people, pregnant and lactating women, disabled, etc.
Risk assessment is a set of procedures during which an analysis of the available information is
undertaken. During the risk analysis, the appointed person or team does not conduct any measurements, analyses
or medical check-ups, but rather makes overview and analysis of the existing situation and available
documentation (32,33).
The information necessary for conducting risk assessment can be obtained through (but not limited to):
 Analysis of the work opreations and procedures,
 Filling stadndardized or adjusted check lists and questionnaires for workers,
 Consultation and conversation with workers and their representatives (interviews),
 Overview of the technical specifications and guidelines provided by the manufacturers or
distributers of the equipment, tools and substances,
 Databases of relevent information for safety and health at work and other scientific and technical
literature,
 Guidelines, directives and good practices given by national referent bodies in the field of
standardization, scientific institutes or professional assocaitions,
 Data for recorded accidents and injuries at work,
 Data for the recorded morbidity (professional and other work-related diseases),
 Data from undertaken mesurements of the factors in the working environment and
 National standards, criteria and lists of maximum allowed concentrations and biological exposure
tests, etc.
The official and recorded data are used available from the records of the company, and, in the same
way, all of the procedures would be recorded as part of the risk assessment.
Methodology for risk assessment can be semi-quantitative or numerically quantitative, and that depends
on the national legislation, as well as of the type of certain working process at the workplace.
Regardless of the methodology chosen for undertaking risk assessment, each of the methodologies is
based on defining the potential spectrum, i.e. severity of the potentially hazardous effects and the probability for
their occurrence.
The spectrum, i.e. the severity of potentially hazardous effects on the health of professionally exposed
workers falls into the following categories:
 Insignificant consequences,
 Accedent without injury,
 Light injury,
 Severe injury, acute poisoning or chronic professional disease,
 Death,
 Death of more workers at the same time.
The probability (likelihood) for occurrence of these hazardous effects as a result of professional
exposure can be:
 Very unlikely (practically improbable)
 Likely (moderate probability)
 Very likely (high probability)
In combination of these possibilities and with the use of risk assessment matrix, the result is semiquantitative risk assessment (20). In this case the result can be low, medium or high, or a numerical scale can be
used (for example, scale with values from 1-10 with pre-defined criteria about the interpretation of the meaning
of each of the values on the scale).
Below is a sample for semi-quantitative matrix for risk quantification. This matrix is recommended by
European Agency for safety and Health at Work (34).
Table 1. Likelihood for severity of damage/level of risk in 3x3 matrix
Severity of damage / level of risk
Likelihood
Very unlikely
Likely
Very likely
Low
Low risk (1)
Low risk (1)
Moderate risk (2)
Moderate
High
Low risk (1)
Moderate risk (2)
High risk (3)
Moderate risk (2)
High risk (3)
High risk (3)
10
Legend:
Frequency of occurence
Severity of the expected negative health effects
Very unlikely:
Not expected to occur during the
whole working lifetime
Low severity: injuries and diseases that do not cause prolonged/longterm health problems (e.g. small injuries, eye irritation, headache,
etc.)
Likely:
IT can occur several times during the
working lifetime
Moderate severity: injuries or disease that cause moderate but
prolonged/long-term and periodically repetitive health problems (e.g.
wounds, simple fractures, burns of second degree to a limited part of
the body, skin allergies, etc.)
Very likely:
It can occur repetitively during the
working lifetime
High severity: injuries or diseases that cause severe and permanent
health problems or death (e.g. amputations, complex fractures with
disability, cancer, burns of 3rd degree covering large part of the
body, etc.)
Below is a more complex quantification of the risk assessment by using the Risk matrix 5x5 (35).
Table 2. Likelihood for severity of damage/level of risk in 5x5 matrix
Consequences
A-
Likelihood
BCDE-
Almost certain
to occur in most
circumstances
Likely to occur
frequently
Possible and
likely to occur
at some time
Unlikely to
occur but could
happen
May occur but
only in rare and
exceptional
circumstances
1 – Insignificant
Dealt with by inhouse first aid, etc
2 – Minor
Medical help
needed. Treatment
by medical
professional/hospital
outpatient, etc
3 – Moderate
Significant nonpermanent
injury.
Overnight
hospitalisation
(inpatient)
4 – Major
Extensive
permanent
injury
(eg loss of
finger/s)
Extended
hospitalisation
5 – Catastrophic
Death.
Permanent
disabling injury
(eg blindness, loss
of hand/s,
quadriplegia)
High (H)
High (H)
Extreme (X)
Extreme (X)
Extreme (X)
Moderate (M)
High (H)
High (H)
Extreme (X)
Extreme (X)
Low (L)
Moderate (M)
High (H)
Extreme (X)
Extreme (X)
Low (L)
Low (L)
Moderate
(M)
High (H)
Extreme (X)
Low (L)
Low (L)
Moderate
(M)
High (H)
High (H)
How to Prioritise the Risk Rating
Once the level of risk has been determined the following table may be of use in determining when to act to
institute the control measures.
Table 3. Risk rating and prioritization of measures
Risk rating
Immediate measures
Interim measures
Extreme
Act immediately to mitigate the risk.
Either eliminate, substitute or implement
engineering control measures.
High
Act immediately to mitigate the risk.
Either eliminate, substitute or implement
engineering control measures.
If these controls are not immediately
Remove the hazard at the source. An identified
extreme risk does not allow scope for the use of
administrative controls or PPE, even in the short
term.
An achievable timeframe must be established to
ensure that elimination, substitution or
engineering controls are implemented.
NOTE: Risk (and not cost) must be the primary
11
accessible, set a timeframe for their
consideration in determining the timeframe. A
implementation and establish interim risk timeframe of greater than 6 months would
reduction strategies for the period of the
generally not be acceptable for any hazard
set timeframe.
identified as high risk.
Medium
Take reasonable steps to mitigate the
risk. Until elimination, substitution or
Interim measures until permanent solutions
engineering controls can be
can be implemented:
implemented, institute administrative .
 Develop administrative controls to limit the
…or personal
protective
Take
reasonable
steps to equipment
mitigate and
Low
use or access.
controls.
These
level”
controls
monitor the
risk.“lower
Institute
permanent
 Provide supervision and specific training
must
notin
bethe
considered
permanent
controls
long term.
Permanent
related to the issue of concern.
solutions.may
Thebetime
for which they
are
controls
administrative
in nature
(See Administrative Controls below)
established
be based
on risk.
At
if
the hazardmust
has low
frequency,
rare
the end of the
if the risk
has not
likelihood
andtime,
insignificant
consequence.
been addressed by elimination,
substitution or engineering controls a
riskof
assessment
musttobeminimize occupational exposure
Table 4.further
Hierarchy
control in order
undertaken.
Eliminate the hazard.
Elimination
Provide an alternative that is capable of performing the same task and is
Substitution
safer to use.
Provide or construct a physical barrier or guard.
Engineering Controls
Develop policies, procedures practices and guidelines, in consultation
Administrative Controls
with employees, to mitigate the risk. Provide training, instruction and
supervision about the hazard.
Personal equipment designed to protect the individual from the hazard.
Personal Protective
Equipment
There are many other methodologies for quantification of the likehood of occurrence of the hazardous
event at the workplaces as well as a consequences of those events to the workers’ health (like AUVA’s or BG
methodologies), but it seams that matrix’s approach is the most applicable one.
The documentation which is a part of the process of risk assessment should be made available to:
 Experts responsible for implementing the measures for occupational safety and health
 Persons – representatives of workers, involved in the process of occupational safety and health.
It is especially important to predict the time and conditions under which every employer is obliged to initiate the
revision of the once undertaken risk assessment, but also there should be a legal obligation established for
revision of risk assessment at any occasion when there are changes in the technological process or collective
injury/death at work.
Process of risk assessment - case study
There are a lot of resources in which it is possible to find a case studies and examples for good
practices (23,36). The usefulness and applicability of such case study or good practice depend of the sector,
size of the company, age, gender and other characteristics of workforce in the company, technological
improvement, management and organization of the work etc. Many case studies should be find on the web site of the EU-OSHA or other agencies.
Process of risk assessment - exercise
Theoretical approach to the risk assessment seems to be very complicate and inapplicable. But, it is so
simple process if basic tools and essentials are accepted (34). According to the European Agency for
Occupational Health and Safety, workplace risk assessment consists of 5 simple steps (Fig. 4):
12
Figure 4. Five steps to the workplace risk assessment (34)
Step 1 – What information should be collected and how?
What information are collected?
For the workplace risk assessment it is necessary to have the following information at hand:
 location of the workplace,
 characteristics of the equipment, materials and processes,
 description of work operations,
 identified hazards and their sources,
 potential consequences,
 protection measures,
 number of exposed workers,
 number of workers from vulnerable groups (pregnant women, young workers, workers with
disabilities),
 occurrence of professional diseases, work-related diseases and injuries at work (32,37).
How information are collected?
Possible sources of information are:
 technical data on the equipment, materials and substances that are used in the production process,
 technological procedures and work protocols,
 results of measurements about the hazards at the workplace (workplace analysis),
 specification of the properties of chemical substances (registry),
 legal framework and technical standards,
 scientific and technical literature,
 observing the working environment
 observing the task performed at workplace,
 Interviewing the workers,
 data on workplace injuries and professional diseases (registry), (33).
Step 2 – How hazard can be identified?
1.1. The identification of the hazards in all aspects of work should be approached by:

walking around the workplace and looking at what could cause harm
13




consulting workers and/or their representatives about any problems they have encountered. Often
the quickest and surest way to identify the details of what really happens is to ask the workers
involved in the activity being assessed. They will know what process steps they follow, whether
there are any short cuts, or ways of getting over a difficult task, and what precautionary actions
they take
examining systematically all aspects of the work,
considering long-term hazards to health, such as high levels of noise or exposure to harmful
substances, as well as more complex or less obvious risks such as psychosocial or work
organisational risk factors
looking at company accident and ill-health records
The hazard identification is usually performed by using hazard specific check lists. These are adjusted to the
need and aim of the investigation/assessment itself. EU-OSHA on its website gives one general check list that
can be used as model for design of own check lists for every particular company or workplace for which a risk
assessment needs to be conducted. But, at the same time other additional check lists exist that are related to the
most common hazards and dangers that occur at the workplace and for which a risk assessment is required and
necessary. The check lists can be of a general type and specific type, where particular and specific professional
hazards and very particular technological processes and workplace are assessed. In general, the check lists are
aimed at fast and simple orientation in the process of hazard identification, frequency of its occurrence and
severity of the damage that can be caused by it.
Usually, the check lists are prepared in cooperation with all workers involved in the working process in
question (38). Besides the general, there are also specific check lists for the hazards and sectors (Table 5).
Table 5. Check lists for workplace hazards and related sectors
Check lists – hazards
1) Uneven slippery surface;
2) Vehicles and moving machines;
3) Machines with movable parts;
4) Electric installations;
5) Fire;
6) Explosion;
7) Chemical substances;
8) Noise;
9) Vibrations;
10) Lighting.
Check lists – sectors
- administrative (office) work;
- food production;
- wood processing;
- agriculture;
- small and surface mining.
*Additional info and specific check lists are
available at: www.osha.europa.eu
1.2. The identification of all those who might be exposed to the hazards
For each hazard it is important to be clear about who could be harmed; it will help in identifying the best way of
managing the risk.
Account should be taken of workers interacting with the hazards whether directly or indirectly, e.g. a
worker painting a surface is directly exposed to solvents, while others workers in the vicinity, engaged in other
activities, are inadvertently and indirectly exposed. This doesn’t mean listing everyone by name, but identifying
groups of people such as ‘people working in the storeroom’ or ‘passers-by’. Cleaners, contractors and members
of the public may also be at risk.
Particular attention should be paid to groups of workers who may be at increased risk or have particular
requirements: workers with disabilities, migrant workers, young and old workers, pregnant women and nursing
mothers, untrained or inexperienced staff and temporary and part-time workers.
Step 3 – How to assess the risk araising from identified hazard?
The next step is evaluating the risk arising from each hazard. This can be done by considering:
 how likely it is that a hazard will cause harm;
 how serious that harm is likely to be;
 how often (and how many) workers are exposed.
Based on the likelihood of the hazard or danger to occur and on the severity of the expected
consequences on the health of professionally exposed workers, a decision on the level of professional risk should
14
be performed. As previously said in the part on methodology, the matrices 3x3 and 5x5 can be used for this
purposes; or other semi quantitative or numerical matrices (for risk quantification).
The next very important step is to decide whether risk arising from a hazard is acceptable or
unacceptable. In general:
 high risk is unacceptable,
 small and medium risk is acceptable,
 If legal requirements are not complied with, risk is not acceptable!
The risk assessment should always be carried out with the employees’ active involvement. When
deciding on the acceptability of risk, bear in mind their input, and take into account gender, age, and also health
of the employees for whom assessment is conducted.
A straightforward process based on judgement and requiring no specialist skills or complicated
techniques could be sufficient for many workplace hazards or activities. These include activities with hazards of
low concern, or workplaces where risks are well known or readily identified and where a means of control is
readily available. This is probably the case for most businesses (mainly small and medium-sized enterprises —
SMEs). Risks should then be prioritised and tackled in that order.
Step4 – How the actions to eliminate or reduce the risk arising from hazard can be planed?
It is essential that any work to eliminate or prevent risks is prioritised. How should the activities for risk
elimination or reduction be prioritised? The basic principles are:
 if the risk is high and assessed as unacceptable, the measures for its reduction should be
undertaken immediately,
 if the risk is moderate and assessed as acceptable, it is recommended to plan the activities for
reduction of the risk level,
 if the risk is low and assessed as acceptable, it is essential to ensure that it will be reduced or at
least remain on the same level.
When preventing and controlling risks, the following general principles of prevention have to be taken
into account:
 avoiding risks (elimination of hazard/risk) by modernization and automatization of the
technical process;
 substituting the dangerous by the non-dangerous or the less dangerous substances;
 combating or isolating the risks at source (separation, hermetization);
 minimization of the hazard/risk with organizational measures
 minimization of the hazard/risk with collective protection measures;
 minimization of the risk through appropriate personal protective means
 applying collective protective measures rather than individual protective measures (e.g. control
exposure to fumes by local exhaust ventilation rather than personal respirators);
 adapting to technical progress and changes in information;
 seeking to improve the level of protection
The next group of activities is to put in place the preventive and protective measures. It is important to
involve the workers and their representatives in the process. Effective implementation involves the development
of a plan specifying:
 the measures to be implemented;
 who does what and when;
 when it is to be completed.
Step 5. How to document, monitor and review the process?
The risk assessment for each workplace should be documented in the appropriate record for risk assessment. The
record should contain the following sections of information:
 Basic information: name of the company and address, name of the workplace, number and
names of workers on the assessed workplace, date of the assessment and name of the person
conducting the assessment;
 Name of the hazard if identified;
For every identified hazard should be noticed:
 Preventive/protection measures used for alleviation and limitation of the risk,
 Results of risk assessment/evaluation,
 Planned activities for reduction of the risk.
15
The risk assessment has to be reviewed regularly depending on the nature of the risks, the degree of
change likely in work activity or as a result of the findings of an accident or ‘near miss’ investigation. Risk
assessment is not a once-and-for-all activity.
Risk assessment tools are available at the web-page of the EU-OSHA and they should be used and
modified in accordance with specific condition and needs of the company. The translation and modification of
the check list and final report is necessary (34).
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
ILO. Programme on Safety and health at Work and the Environment. Global Estimates of Fatal Work Related
Diseases and Occupational Accidents, World Bank Regions 2005. Available from:
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/download/sh_background.pdf. (Accessed: 6.07.2008).
International Labour Organization.Yearbook of Labour Statistics. Volume 59, Geneva, 2000.
Hamalainen P, Takala J, Saarela KL. Global estimates of occupational accidents. Safety Science 2006; 44: 137–56.
Leigh J, Macaskill P, Kuosma E, Mandryk J. Global Burden of Disease and Injury Due to Occupational Factors.
Epidemiology 2005; 10 (5): 626-31.
Driscoll T, Nelson DI, Steenland K, Leigh J et al. The global burden of disease due to occupational carcinogens.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2005; 48(6): 463-71.
Verschuren R, De Groot B, Nossent S. Working conditions in hospitals in the European Union. European
Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Luxembourg: Office for official publications
of the European Communities.1995: 19-49 & 55-62.
Schulte PA.Characterizing the Burden of Occupational Injury and Disease. Journal of Occupational &
Environmental Medicine 2005; 47(6): 607-22.
The European Statistics on Accident at Work. ESAW 2003 Databasa, Available from
http://www.av.se/dokument/statistik/english/Accidents2003_EU15.pdf. (Accessed: 6.09.2008).
Healthy Workplaces. Good for you. Good for business. A European Campaign on risk assessment. Campaign
Summary. European Agency for safety and Health at work, 2008. Available from
http://osha.europa.eu/en/campaigns/hw2008/campaign/campaignsummary. (Accessed: 6.09.2008).
Falkdal AH, Edlund C, Dahlgren L. Experiences within the process of sick leave. Scand J Occup Ther 2006;
13(3):170-82.
Hansen A, Edlund C, Branholm IB. Significant resources needed for return to work after sick leave. Work. 2005;
25(3):231-40.
Eurostat. Statistical analysis of socio-economic costs of accidents at work in the European Union, Eurostat.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004.
Occupational Medicine in Europe: Scope of competencies. EUR/ICP?EHBI 02 02 04. Available from:
http://www.who.int/occupational_health/publications/eurmedicine/en/index.html (Accessed: 24.10.2006).
Kolluru RV, Bartell SM, Pitblado RM, Stricoff RS. Risk assessment and management handbook : For
environmental, health, and safety professionals. McGraw-Hill, 1996.
Eduljee GH. Trends in risk assessment and risk management. The Science of the Total Environment. 2000; 249 (13):13-23.
European Council. Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of the measures to
encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work.
European Legislation (occupational safety and health). Available from: http://osha.europa.eu/legislation (Accessed:
24.10.2006).
Covello VT, Merkhofer MW. Risk Assessment Methods, Approaches to Assessing the health and environmental
risk. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation; 1993.
Carrivick PJW, Lee A, Kelvin K. Effectiveness of a Workplace Risk Assessment Team in Reducing the Rate, Cost,
and Duration of Occupational Injury. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine 2002; 44(2):155-9.
Hertz-Picciotto I. Epidemiology and quantitative risk assessment: A bridge from science to policy. American
Journal of Public Health 1995; 85(4): 484-91.
Kromhout H. Design of measurement strategies for workplace exposures. Education Occupational &
Environmental Medicine. 2002; 59(5): 349-54.
Jardine C, Hrudey S, Shorteed J. et all. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks. J
Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003; 6(6):569-720.
WHO Regional Office for Europe. Towards good practice in health, environment and safety management in
industrial and other enterprises. EUR/ICP/EHCO 02 03 04/13, WHO, 1999. Available from:
http://www.who.int/occupational_health/publications/goodpractice/en/index.html (Accessed: 24.10.2006)
Franco G: Evidence-based decision making in occupational health: Occup Med 2005; 55: 1-2 15.
Cuny E, Jorgensen V, Galligan J. Comprehensive training for hazard communication. Compend Contin Educ Dent
2005; 26(3 Suppl):28-31.
Scholz JT, Gray WB. OSHA enforcement and workplace injuries: A behavioral approach to risk assessment.
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1990; 3(3):283-305.
Concha-Barrientos M, Nelson DI, Driscoll T et all.: Comparative Quantification of Health Risks – Selected
occupational risk factors. WHO, 2004.
Stikova E. Risk and risk analysis [In Macedonian]. Republic Institute for Health Protection-Skopje; 2008.
16
29. Stikova E. Health Ecology [In Macedonian]. Univerzity »Ss. Cyril and Methodius, 2006.
30. Nelson DI, Concha-Barrientos M, Driscoll T et al. The global burden of selected occupational disease and injury
risks: Methodology and summary. Am J Ind Med. 2005; 48(6): 400-18.
31. Maroni M, Faneti AC, Metruccio F. Risk assessment and management of occupational exposure to pesticides in
agriculture. Med Lav 2006; 97(2):430-7.
32. Bugajska J. Occupational data cards as a source of information for health prevention purposes. Med Pr 2000;
51(6):551-61.
33. ILO. Recording and Notification of Occupational Accidents and Diseases. ILO code of practice, 1996.
34. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Safety and health at work is everyone's concern – checklists.
Available from: http://osha.europa.eu/en/campaigns/hwi/ra_tools_checklists/ (Accessed: 7.07.2008).
35. Worcestershire, NHS. Future consequence or level of impact resulting from accident or incident. 5X5 scoring
matrix. Available from:
http://www.worcestershirehealth.nhs.uk/EXTRANET_Library/LINDAMARRIOTT/County%20Risk%20Matrix%
202.pdf (Accessed: 7.07.2008).
36. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Guidelines on the collection, evaluation and disemination of good
practice information on the internet. Bilbao, 2002. Availavble from: http://osha.europa.eu/en/good_practice/.
(Accessed: 7.07.2008).
37. Money C, Margary SA. Improved Use of Workplace Exposure Data in the Regulatory Risk Assessment of
Chemicals within Europe. Annals of Occupational Hygiene 2002; 46(3):279-85.
38. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Safety and health at work is everyone's concern risk assessment
essentials. Available from: http://osha.europa.eu/en/topics/riskassessment. (Accessed: 7.07.2008).
17
View publication stats