肖颖衡, 朱晓俊, 李丽萍, 张建芳. 不良作业条件、职业心理及企业风险因素对职业伤害发生影响的路径分析[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2023, 40(10): 1141-1146, 1154. DOI: 10.11836/JEOM23176
引用本文: 肖颖衡, 朱晓俊, 李丽萍, 张建芳. 不良作业条件、职业心理及企业风险因素对职业伤害发生影响的路径分析[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2023, 40(10): 1141-1146, 1154. DOI: 10.11836/JEOM23176
XIAO Yingheng, ZHU Xiaojun, LI Liping, ZHANG Jianfang. Impacts of poor working conditions, occupational psychology, and enterprise risk factors on occupational injury by path analysis[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2023, 40(10): 1141-1146, 1154. DOI: 10.11836/JEOM23176
Citation: XIAO Yingheng, ZHU Xiaojun, LI Liping, ZHANG Jianfang. Impacts of poor working conditions, occupational psychology, and enterprise risk factors on occupational injury by path analysis[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2023, 40(10): 1141-1146, 1154. DOI: 10.11836/JEOM23176

不良作业条件、职业心理及企业风险因素对职业伤害发生影响的路径分析

Impacts of poor working conditions, occupational psychology, and enterprise risk factors on occupational injury by path analysis

  • 摘要: 背景

    职业伤害可能导致工人缺勤、残疾或死亡,职业伤害与不良作业条件有着密切关系。但对作业条件进行改良往往改良周期长且涉及大量经济成本。职业心理及企业风险因素都被证明与职业伤害发生存在关联性,但在不良作业条件对职业伤害发生的影响路径中的作用尚不明确。

    目的

    探讨职业心理及企业风险因素在不良作业条件对职业伤害发生影响中的作用,为存在不良作业条件的企业开展有针对性的职业伤害干预提供科学依据。

    方法

    获取欧洲企业新兴风险调查(ESENER)数据库中5997家制造业企业调查数据,提取其中有关企业风险特征、职业伤害、作业条件及职业心理因素数据并进行赋值。使用χ2检验分析不同企业特征间职业伤害发生差异,使用Spearman检验研究变量间的相关性,利用AMOS 26软件以Bootstrap法进行路径分析,以卡方自由度比(χ2/ν比较拟合指数(CFI)、Tucker-Lewis指数(TLI)及近似均方误差(RMSEA)值评估路径分析模型拟合情况,以效应值及其占比分析职业心理因素、企业风险因素、不良作业条件对职业伤害的中介效应。

    结果

    被调查企业职业伤害得分MP25P75)为40(20,50)分,不良作业条件得分为50(30,60)分,职业心理因素得分为20(10,30)分。存在职业伤害的企业占25.5%(1550家)。不同企业规模、分公司情况、临时用工、语言障碍及创立时间的企业职业伤害检出分布均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Spearman检验中,职业伤害与作业条件(rs=0.440)、职业心理因素(rs=0.205)、企业规模(rs=0.307)、临时用工(rs=0.282)、语言障碍(rs=0.158)呈正相关,与分公司情况(rs=−0.180)及创立时间(rs=−0.176)呈负相关(P<0.05)。路径分析中,模型拟合度指数为χ2/ν=2.85、CFI=0.997、TLI=0.993、RMSEA=0.018(90%CI:0.011~0.025);企业风险及职业心理因素在不良作业条件对职业伤害作用中的间接效应值及其构成比分别为0.166(30.01%)及0.013(3.13%);职业心理因素在企业风险因素对职业伤害作用中的间接效应值及其构成比为0.022(6.85%)。

    结论

    存在不良作业条件的企业可以通过减少企业内的语言障碍及临时用工,开展职业心理干预及优化工时制度等方法对职业伤害进行防治;同时,可将大型企业、未设立分公司、创立时间较早的企业作为职业伤害防控重点。

     

    Abstract: Background

    Occupational injuries, which can result in absenteeism, disability, or death, are closely related to poor working conditions. However, the improvement of operating conditions are often time-consuming and require significant economic inputs. Both occupational psychology and enterprise risk factors have been proved to be related to the occurrence of occupational injuries, but their roles in the influence path of adverse working conditions leading to occupational injuries remain unclear.

    Objective

    To explore the roles of occupational psychology and enterprise risk factors in the impact of adverse working conditions on occupational injury, so as to provide a scientific basis for enterprises with adverse working conditions to carry out targeted occupational injury intervention programs.

    Methods

    The survey data of 5997 manufacturing enterprises were obtained from the European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks (ESENER) database. The data on enterprise risk characteristics, occupational injuries, working conditions, and occupational psychological factors were extracted and assigned. Occupational injury differences by enterprise categories were examined by chi-square test. Correlations between interest variables were evaluated by Spearman test. Path analysis with Bootstrap method was conducted using AMOS 26 software, and ratio of chi-square statistic to degree of freedom (χ2/ν), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to evaluate the path model candidates. The effect size and its proportion were calculated for variables (occupational psychological factors, enterprise risk factors, and adverse working conditions) included in the final model.

    Results

    The M (P25, P75) scores of occupational injuries, adverse working conditions, and occupational psychological factors were 40 (20, 50), 50 (30, 60), and 20 (10, 30), respectively. The enterprises that reported occupational injuries accounted for 25.5% (1550 enterprises) of the total enterprises. Proportions of the enterprises that reported occupational injuries varied significantly by company scale, branch companies, temporary employment, language barriers, and establishment time (P<0.05). The results of Spearman test showed that occupational injuries were positively correlated with working conditions (rs=0.440), occupational psychological factors (rs=0.205), company scale (rs=0.307), temporary employment (rs=0.282), and language barriers (rs=0.158); but negatively correlated with branch companies (rs=−0.180) and establishment time (rs=−0.176) (P<0.05). In the path analysis, the fitness indexes of the final model were χ2/ν=2.85, CFI=0.997, TLI=0.993, and RMSEA=0.018 (90%CI: 0.011, 0.025). The indirect effect size values and constituent ratios of enterprise risk factors and occupational psychological factors in the effect of adverse working conditions on occupational injuries were 0.166 (30.01%) and 0.013 (3.13%) respectively. The indirect effect size value of occupational psychological factors in the effect of enterprise risk factors on occupational injuries and its constituent ratio were 0.022 and 6.85%.

    Conclusion

    Enterprises with adverse working conditions may control the risk of occupational injuries by offering better solutions to surmount language barriers and temporary employment, developing occupational psychological intervention and optimization programs such as improving working hours system. At the same time, large enterprises, enterprises without branches, or enterprises with a long history are the focus of occupational injury prevention and control.

     

/

返回文章
返回