MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W94439473

Occupational hazards and radiation safety in veterinary practice including zoo veterinary practice in Australia

2003· article· en· W94439473 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph S. Jeyaretnam

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Paramedicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMurdoch UniversityEdith Cowan University
KeywordsVeterinary medicineVeterinary public healthMedicinePublic healthNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis contains reviews and research on the occupational hazards of zoo veterinary practitioners in Australia. Although occupational hazards have long been recognised in the veterinary profession, little information is available on the number and magnitude of injuries to veterinarians in Australia, the United Kingdom or the United States. Apart from anecdotal accounts and some limited data, most of the available information is on occupational zoonoses, generally well recognized by veterinarians. Other occupational hazards to which veterinarians are exposed have received scant attention. The veterinary practitioner in a zoo environment has to treat a range of captive wild species which are much more unpredictable and dangerous than domesticated animals. A comprehensive study on occupational hazards sustained by veterinarians in zoological gardens has not been undertaken in Australia. Only one study had been undertaken in the US amongst zoo veterinarians, while comprehensive may not be able to be transposed to zoos in Australia as the species held in Australian zoos differ from those in the US. Personal communication with some senior veterinarians in the zoological gardens in Australia, have elicited further information on the prevalence of occupational hazards sustained by the zoo and wildlife park veterinarians. The prevalence of physical hazards including radiation, chemical and biological hazards reported by veterinary practitioners and the author's own experience as a veterinary practitioner, chairman of the safety committee, member of the animal ethics committee and manager, research In the zoological gardens in Perth, Western Australia have demonstrated a need for a comprehensive study on occupational hazards prevalent among zoo veterinarians. To investigate the occupational hazards including radiological hazards amongst zoo veterinarians in Australia, a self-administered 14-page comprehensive questionnaire comprising 58 questions was mailed to 27 practising zoo veterinarians in Australia. The questionnaire focused on physical injuries, chemical exposures, allergic and irritant reactions, biological exposures, radiological hazards including problems encountered with x-ray machines, use of protective gear and ancillary equipment for radiography, personnel involved in x-ray procedures and in restraining animals, compliance with the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Code of Practice (1982), Radiation Safety Regulations (1988) and National Standard for Limiting Occupational Exposure to Ionising Radiation (1995) The result of the study revealed that 60% of the participants sustained physical injuries such as crushes, bites and scratches inflicted by a range of species with some Injuries requiring medical treatment. Also, 50% of the participants suffered from back injuries while 15% reported fractures, kicks, bites necessitating hospitalization. Ninety percent of the participants sustained needlestick injuries ranging from one to 16+ times. Other significant findings include: necropsy injuries, animal allergies, formaldehyde exposure, musculoskeletal Injuries and zoonotic infections. The survey also identified that veterinary practitioners and their staff were exposed to radiation by not complying with the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Australian Code of Practice for the Safe Use of Ionising Radiation (1982) which has been framed to minimize exposure to ionising radiation. The majority of the veterinarians in the study group indicated that radiation exposure Is a major occupational hazard to the veterinary profession. Subsequent to the review and research, discussions were held with few senior zoo veterinarians, the Registrar of the Veterinary Surgeons Board and a number of practising senior veterinarians In Australia to collect information on occupational hazards. Additional information was obtained on occupational injuries sustained by the zoo veterinarians through formal discussions with the Director and the two senior veterinarians In the zoological gardens in Sri Lanka. The discussions with the veterinary practitioners in government and private practice revealed that veterinarians experienced a range of occupational hazards including exposure to rabies. Discussions with the dean and the professor of the animal science department focused on the nature of injuries and preventive strategies. In order to obtain information on occupational hazards in the health care industry, the professor of anatomy of the faculty of medicine and a senior surgeon in Sri Lanka were interviewed. This study identified that the zoo veterinarians are routinely exposed to a wide range of occupational hazards. The literature review among veterinary practitioners In US, UK, Australia and Canada have also identified numerous occupational hazards sustained by the veterinarians. The discussions held in Sri Lanka with the professionals in veterinary and health care industry showed that occupational injuries have been common amongst them and they do not have appropriate preventive guidelines in place. This thesis has incorporated recommendations in the form of preventive strategies for minimizing occupational hazards among veterinary practitioners both in zoological gardens and veterinary practices In Australia and in the developed and developing countries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of ParamedicineSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207