Indmedica Home | About Indmedica | Medical Jobs | Advertise On Indmedica
Search Indmedica Web
Indmedica - India's premier medical portal

Indian Journal of Community Medicine

Injuries In the Glass Factory Workers, Nagpur

Author(s): K.P. Brahmapurkar, A.G. Lanjewar, J.R. Biranjan, S.P. Zodpey

Vol. 31, No. 3 (2006-07 - 2006-09)

K.P. Brahmapurkar1, A.G. Lanjewar2, J.R. Biranjan3, S.P. Zodpey4

Introduction

The International Labour Organization has observed that an estimated 50 million work related injuries occur every year or 1,60,000 every day. In the lower income countries such as those of South Asia and Africa, injuries are one of the leading causes of adult mortality and a major contributor to disability1. Injuries are common in glass factory workers i.e. cuts, burns etc. The health hazard of glass factory have been enlisted in ILO encyclopedia2. Very few studies are there dealing with the prevalence of injuries in the glass factory workers. It was with this background that the present study was undertaken to find out the prevalence of injuries in the Glass Factory workers, Nagpur.

Material and Methods

The study design was cross sectional study with comparison group. The Study duration was from December 2003 to June 2004 and the study setting was the Glass Factory, Nagpur situated at 12 km. from Government Medical College, Nagpur. The study population was 263 Glass Factory workers along with 263 from Comparison group from adjacent area; age, sex, socioeconomic status matched and not working in the similar working environment (Glass Factory). For matching, group matching was carried out. 10 to 15 workers were studied and then in the community the comparison group was matched for age (±2 years), sex and socioeconomic status (Using modified Kuppuswami’s scale). The purpose of the study was discussed with the workers. The time schedule was prepared, so that workers could participate in the study conveniently.

The pilot study was carried out in the month of December 2003 with predisigned proforma. Interview technique and general observation were used for data collection. The pilot study was carried out on 30 workers and 30 from comparison group. Depending upon the findings of the pilot study, suitable corrections were made in the proforma and the proforma was modified. The predisigned, pretested proforma was used for data collection. In the statistical analysis Percentage and Chi-square test were used.

Results

Table I shows distribution of injuries in the study subjects. Incised injury 156 (59.3%) in the workers and 32 (12.2%) in the comparison group. This difference was found to be statistically significant [χ2=127.3, df=1, p<0.001]. Burns were 73 (27.7%) and 0 (0.0%) in the workers and comparison group respectively. This difference was found to be statistically significant (χ2=84, p<0.001). In injury, blunt injury 08 (3%) in the workers and 20 (7.6%) in comparison group. This difference was found to be statistically significant (χ2=4.5, p<0.05). Blunt injury was significantly more seen in comparison group. In injury, abrasion 08 (3%) and 52 (19.8%) in workers and the comparison group respectively. This difference was found to be statistically significant when clubbed with laceration 6 (2.3%) in workers and 0(0.0%) in comparison group (χ2=23.1, df=1, p<0.001). Abrasions were significantly more in comparison group.

Table I: Distribution of Injuries in the Study Subjects

ICD Code Morbid Condition Study Subjects χ2 P Value
Worker Comparison Group
No. (%) No. (%)
W25 Incised injury (Cuts) 156 (59.3) 32 (12.2) 127.3 <0.001, HS
T 30.1 Burns 73 (27.7) 0 (0.0) 84 <0.001, HS
T 14 Blunt injury 08 (3.0) 20 (7.6) 4.5 <0.05, S
T 140 Abrasion 08 (3.0) 52 (19.8) 23.1 <0.001, HS
T 141 Laceration 06 (2.3) 0 (0.0)  

239 (90.9%) workers had the work related injuries sustained in last one year period and in comparison group it was 66 (25.1%). This difference was found to be statistically significant (χ2=230, df=1, p<0.0001). It was found that 23 (8.7%) workers had injury during study period and 09 (3.4%) subjects from comparison group had injury during study period, this difference was found to be statistically significant (χ2=6.5, df=1, p<0.01). It was observed that, as per site of injury, superior extremity 211 (80.2%) and 62 (23.6%) was common site of injury in workers and comparison group respectively. This is followed by inferior extremity 66 (25.1%) and 53 (20.1%) in workers and comparison group respectively. 4 (1.5%) workers and 01 (0.4%) in comparison group had injury over thorax and abdomen, only 3 (1.1%) workers had the injury over head, neck and face. Table II shows 100% workers in Lehr and Furnace section had injury during last one year period and in Manufacturing section 98% workers had injury and in Raw section it was 90%; whereas in other (Packaging, Loading) the percentage of injury was 58.1%. Out of 263 workers with injuries 206 (78.3%) had occasional injuries (< 1 injury per week) in last one year period, 29 (11.0%) had 1 – 2 injuries per week and only 4 (1.5%) had 3 – 4 injuries per week.

Out of 152 from Manufacturing section, 136 (89.5%) had occasional injuries and 11 (7.2%) had 1 – 2 injuries per week. In Lehr, 24 (80%) had occasional injury and 6 (20%) with 1-2 injuries with no one in 3-4 injuries per week. In raw, 15 (50.0%) had occasional injury per week and 10 (33.3%) had 1-2 injuries per week and 2 (6.7%) had 3-4 injuries per week. In furnace, 6 (75%) had occasional injury and 2 (25%) had 1-2 injuries per week. In other out of 43, 25 (58.1%) cases had occasional injury and 18 (41.9%) had no injury in last one year period.

Table II: Sectionwise Distribution of Workers with Injury and Frequency of Injury in Last one Year Period

Section
Frequency of Injury Raw Furnace Manufacturing Lehr Other Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
No Injury 03 (10.0) 0 (0.0) 03 (1.9) 0 (0.0) 18 (41.9) 24 (9.1)
Occasional 15 06 136 24 25 206
<1 injury/wk (50.0) (75.0) (89.5) (80.0) (58.1) (78.3)
1-2 injury/wk 10 (33.3) 02 (25.0) 11 (7.2) 6 (20.0) 0 (0.0) 29 (11.0)
3-4 injury /wk 02 (6.7) 0 (0.0) 02 (1.3) 0 (0.0 0 (0.0) 04 (1.5)
Total 30 (100) 08 (100) 152 (100) 30 (100) 43 (100) 263 (100)
*Other section includes Packaging & Loading

Table III: Frequency of Injury In Relationship to the Total Length of Exposure in Year

Workers
Total
Length of
Exposure
in Year
Total no.
of Workers
No. of
Workers
with Injury
Frequency of Injury
Occasional
(<1 injury/wk)
1-2
injury/wk
3-4
injury/wk
No. % No. % No. % No. %
<5 123 103 (83.7) 80 (65.0) 20 (16.3) 03 (2.4)
5-9 46 46 (100.0) 38 (82.6) 07 (15.2) 01 (2.2)
10-14 30 29 (96.7) 27 (90.0) 02 (6.7) 0 (0.0)
15-19 30 28 (93.3) 28 (93.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
20-24 22 22 (100.0) 22 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
> 25 12 11 (91.7) 11 (91.7) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Total 263 239 (100.0) 206 (86.2) 29 (12.1) 04 (1.7)

Table III dealing with frequency of injury in relationship to total length of exposure shows that, as length of exposure increases, the occasional injury increases, whereas the 1-2 injuries per week, 3-4 injuries per week decreases and it was seen that in less than 5 years length of exposure 83:7% had the injury and in 5-10 had 100% injury. Out of total 263 workers, 239 had the injury and after 5-9 years length of exposure, injury per year of workers decreases as length of exposure increase.

Discussion

Prevalence of injury in the workers of Glass Factory was more than subjects in comparison group. Superior extremity (80.2%) was common site of injury followed by inferior extremity (23.6%). The injuries were more in the Lehr section (100%), Furnace section (100%) followed by Manufacturing section (98.0%), Raw section (90.0%) and in other (Loading, Packaging) it was 58.1%. Occasional injuries were more common (78.3%) than 1-2 injury (11.0%) per week and 3-4 injury per week (1.5%). Occasional injuries were common in Manufacturing section whereas 1-2 injuries per week and 3-4 injuries per week were commion in Raw section. After 5-9 years of length of exposure, the frequency of injury decrease as length of exposure increases.

Bazroy et al3 studied magnitude of injuries in glass bottle manufacturing plant. They found cuts and laceration 50.1%, injuries to eye 30%, sprains 8% and burns 7.1%. They found that 347 injuries among 341 glass workers followed for one year. They also noted that hand and wrists as most common site of injury (40.6%) whereas eye, foot, ankle and other body parts had 30%, 14.6%; 10.6% and 4.2% of injuries respectively and the study revealed experience less than 2 years as significant risk factor.

References

  1. www.who.int/inf-pr-1999/en/pr99-31-html – The Burden of occupational illness; Press release WHO/31; 8 June 1999.
  2. ILO Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety, Vol. I, 3rd (revised) ed., 1983 ILO : 966 – 970.
  3. Bazroy J, Gautam Roy, Ajit Sahai, MB Soudarssanare. Magnitude and risk factors of injuries in glass bottle manufacturing plant. J Occup Health 2003; 45: 53 – 59.

1 Deptt. of Preventive and Social Medicine, Indira Gandhi Government Medical College, Nagpur.

2 Deptt. of Preventive and Social Medicine, Government Medical

Access free medical resources from Wiley-Blackwell now!

About Indmedica - Conditions of Usage - Advertise On Indmedica - Contact Us

Copyright © 2005 Indmedica