Characterizing Heat Stress and Strain in Electric Utility Workers by Means of a Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent field work we showed that the high physical demands combined with restrictions to heat loss due to protective work uniforms caused some electric utility workers to experience dangerous levels of hyperthermia (J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015;12:708). These findings indicate that heat stress in the electric utility industry may be detrimental to worker health and safety. In the present study, 414 workers in the power generation and delivery industry across 15 US states completed a two‐part on‐line questionnaire anonymously. Part 1 comprised 15 general questions on the worker's age, sex, role in the organization, general duties, workplace location, work shift duration, years of experience, level of physical activity, frequency of heat exposure, other. The second part consisted of a validated questionnaire for the assessment of heat stress at the workplace – the ‘Heat Strain Score Index (HSSI)’ (Int J Prev Med 2013; 4:631). It was composed of 18 questions which included key factors in heat stress evaluation (environmental parameters, work intensity, level of heat exposure, clothing insulation and permeability, etc.) and indicators of heat strain (sweat rate, fatigue, thirst, symptoms of heat‐related illness, etc.) with cut‐off scores as follows: ≤13.5, green zone or safe level; 13.6 to 18.0, yellow zone or alarm level; >18.0, red zone or danger level. The average (±SD) age of the respondents was 46(10) years and they reported being in their present position for 11(10) years. They typically performed 5(1) consecutive days of work lasting 10(6) hours each day. For all job types (all workers), 79% of respondents reported heat stress was a problem. This number was greater (93%) in those performing physically demanding jobs (e.g. linesman). Further, 30% and 67% of all workers indicated they were exposed to heat stress occasionally and daily, respectively. In contrast, 81% of linesman reported being exposed to heat stress on a daily basis with only 19% experiencing occasional exposure. Based on the HSSI, 43% of all workers and 68% of linesman were categorized in the red zone (danger level) and therefore at an elevated risk of a heat‐related injury (both p<0.01). Our findings demonstrate that electric utility workers are likely to experience excessive heat strain and research must be conducted to explore methods to effectively and efficiently manage heat stress and strain in these workers. Support or Funding Information Human and Environmental Physiology Research Unit (G.P. Kenny). This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".