Since these methods on their own can protect only a proportion of workers, the team considered the costs and benefits of each in combination with PPE. Local exhaust ventilation on its own has a benefit-to-cost ratio of 4.4 at a cost of $15.5 million, though it averts only 40 cases. The wet method on its own can avert 55 cases at a cost of $42.0 million-a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.2. However, PPE would have higher implementation costs, about $81.1 million, resulting in a lower benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.2. The results showed the use of PPE on its own can deliver similar outcomes as the use of the wet method in combination with local exhaust ventilation, in terms of averted cases (96 cases). This pairing of methods would cost $57.6 million a year to implement, resulting in a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.9. Using the wet method in combination with local exhaust ventilation can avert 95 cases. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.3, meaning that for every dollar spent, a benefit of $1.30 is gained. It would cost $138.6 million per year to cover all Ontario construction workers exposed to silica dust. The highest number of lung cancer cases can be averted when workplaces use a combination of all three methods-for a total reduction of 107 cases per year. Here’s how the different methods compare. In recent years, Tompa has used this method to estimate the societal costs of occupational cancers caused by asbestos in Canada, and the societal costs of work injuries and diseases in European Union countries. For the cost-benefit analysis, the team used a method developed by IWH Senior Scientist and study lead Dr. For estimates of silica dust exposure in Ontario’s construction sector, the team relied on work by the Occupational Cancer Research Centre and CAREX Canada. The study used an innovative method that drew on past studies on the epidemiology and economic burden of occupational cancer, and on workplace interventions to reduce silica dust exposure. He adds that the team is working on another paper that offers an estimated timeline to realize maximum net benefits. Mofidi notes, however, that due to long latency periods, the benefits realized as a result of averted cases of lung cancer are only seen many years after the interventions are first introduced. With a higher level of exposure, the combined use of all three methods is expected to result in a higher net benefit.
levels at or below 0.025 milligrams per cubic metre-the team’s recommendation would be the wet method combined with local exhaust ventilation, he explains. Amir Mofidi, lead author of the open access article about this study, published in BMC Public Health in February 2020 ( doi: 10.1186/s1288-7). The level of exposure is an important variable to consider in selecting the most cost-beneficial intervention, says Dr. This pairing can deliver $1.40 in benefits for each dollar spent-a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.4. However, the most cost-beneficial approach is the wet method used in combination with local exhaust ventilation.
The team found a combination of all three methods can avert the highest number of lung cancer cases (107 cases per year). To help construction workplaces decide which of these three methods-or combination thereof-would be the most cost-beneficial, a team of researchers led by the Institute for Work & Health ( IWH) conducted an economic evaluation of the options in Ontario’s construction sector.
0 kommentar(er)
