Prevention Through Design Research Articles

Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities Sector

Prevention through Design (PtD) is a core element of injury prevention. This report on PtD as it applies to the transportation, warehousing and utilities sector was offered at a recent PtD workshop hosted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and held in July 2007. Occupations within the transportation, warehousing and utilities industry account for 5% of U.S. workers and 15% of workplace fatalities. Workers in these industries also are at risk of injury or illness for accidents, overexertion, electrocution, vehicle emissions and falls. Members of a workgroup representing these industries identified several needs for increasing the use of PtD. First, there is a need to involve users (i.e., workers) during the initial planning process as well as throughout the development and use of PtD initiatives. Second, to incorporate PtD, NIOSH needs to collaborate with groups such as associations, schools, companies, unions and the public sector. Finally, NIOSH and its partners need to develop a business case to convince companies of the value of PtD.

Research Issues in Prevention through Design

Prevention through Design (PtD) research is central to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) national PtD initiative. Research is needed to support PtD efforts in all of the other three functional areas (Practice, Policy, and Education) and within all eight industry sectors. The PtD concept is new to many industry sectors. An understanding of how the PtD concept can be effectively implemented, and the resulting impacts and outcomes, is lacking in some industries and in need of fine tuning in others. Research will provide the opportunity to explore and gain further understanding of the concept, and evidence to support a national PtD initiative.

Policy Issues in Prevention through Design

Introduction: Many countries introduced mandatory Design for Safety (DfS) or Prevention through Design (PtD) requirements to reduce construction accident rates. However, there is a knowledge gap on the relative importance of industry level interventions to improve the implementation of DfS regulations. Thus, this study aims to identify and prioritize a set of industry level interventions to help regulators and industry associations understand the industry’s perceptions and improve the implementation of mandatory DfS. Method: A mixed method approach consisting of 59 semi-structured interviews, four focus group discussions, and an online poll was implemented. Results: Key challenges faced during DfS implementations were identified (lack of guidelines, lack of commitment towards DfS, the inadequate capability of DfS team, and limited effectiveness of DfS Professionals (DfSPs)). The study elicited eight industry level interventions to overcome these challenges and ranked them based on effectiveness and ease of implementation. The ranked industry level interventions in descending order are continuing training for DfSPs, samples and guidelines, DfS training for non-DfSPs, Building Information Modelling (BIM) for DfS review, strengthening DfSP as a profession, DfS awards for developers, third party audits for DfS reviews, and submission of DfS Risk Register to regulator. Conclusions: Identified interventions were classified into four intervention categories: (a) improving competency/ knowledge; (b) technological tools; (c) checks/ audits; and (d) recognitions/ certifications. The key contributions of this study are the identification and prioritization of industry level interventions for DfS, and the classification of safety interventions available to industry associations and regulators. Practical applications: Findings from this study help regulators and industry associations prioritize their resources to improve the implementation of mandatory DfS. Moreover, regulators and industry associations can also use the generic framework of industry level interventions to identify possible interventions to improve other mandatory WSH processes.

National Prevention through Design (PtD) Initiative

Introduction The most effective means of preventing and controlling occupational injuries, illness, and fatalities is to “design out” hazards and hazardous exposures from the workplace. There is a long history of designing for safety for the general public and to a lesser degree for workers. Method We now have the experience and insight from thoughtful, previous efforts to call for a comprehensive national strategy to implement a Prevention through Design (PtD) Initiative. Results This paper describes that initiative in terms of four overarching areas where action can be directed: practice, policy, research, and education. To obtain stakeholder input for issues in these four areas and to focus implementation efforts, eight sector divisions of the economy will be addressed. A seven year strategy is envisioned.

Application of Prevention through Design for Hearing Loss in the Mining Industry

Introduction Overexposure to noise remains a widespread and serious health hazard in the U.S. service providing and goods producing industries. Excessive noise can lead to poor verbal communication and reduce the ability to recognize warning signals. These dangerous work conditions can also cause stress and fatigue. Occupational hearing loss is a permanent illness, with no recovery currently possible. Method National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recognized Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) as one of the ten leading work-related diseases and injuries in the United States, and has emphasized its importance as one of the critical areas expressed in the National Occupational Research Agenda. Results One of the most serious noise problems in the goods producing industries is the operation of continuous mining machines during underground coal mining. In order to minimize occupational hearing loss, noise hazards are “designed out” early in the design process. NIOSH is leading a national initiative called Prevention through Design (PTD) to promote this concept. This paper describes the quiet-by-design approach of a noise control that reduced noise exposures of continuous mining machine operators by 3dB(A) using the four functional areas of PTD, namely Practice, Policy, Research, and Education.

Prevention through Design (PtD): History and Future

Achieving construction projects (CPs) with minimal waste requires not only good construction planning, but also effective management for safety and waste of resources through the project cycle. The aim of this paper is to identify and rank safety factors (SF) during the design phase (DPh) of a project that have positive effects in minimizing waste (cost, time and materials) during its construction. Data and information was gathered from available literature, structured interviews, and questionnaire conducted for 111 randomly selected construction organizations. Triangulation method to enhance the validity and reliability of the study findings was used. The research revealed 18 important SF that had positive effects on minimizing waste in CPs during the DPh. The five most important SF that should be considered to minimise waste are: capabilities and behaviour of the design team in the safety field, appropriateness of quantities and specifications for safety system (SS), appropriateness of foundation system for SS, appropriate public and special conditions for SS and appropriate electrical design for SS. The best linear model was developed on the basis of the importance index of the identified factors. A model was developed to minimize waste in CPs by using SS during the DPh. It is recommended that adequate attention must be given to safety criteria during DPh to minimize resources waste.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Prevention through Design (PtD) Workshop Closing Remarks

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Prevention through Design (PtD) Workshop Closing Remarks

Prevention through Design (PtD) from the Insurance Perspective

Experts have been developing design for sustainability tools and methods for several decades, but their practical application remains challenging and varies in different contexts. The limited literature on design for sustainability in Turkey reflects the inadequacy of legislation, market demand and companies' practices; nonetheless, one can find good examples of design for sustainability in the country. This study investigates the best performing companies in Turkey's sustainability field through a survey that addresses the barriers they face, the benefits they achieve, their further needs for achieving sustainability and the scope of, and drivers for, the practices. Findings indicate that among the design for sustainability strategies, the sample companies are more active in ‘producing and manufacturing’ and ‘packaging’. They are driven to ‘boost brand value and reputation’ but not to ‘increase exports’. Inadequate ‘market demand’ and ‘legislation’ are by far the biggest barriers. Companies' needs to carry out sustainability activities are high, but mostly with regards to ‘research & development’. Recent results differ somewhat from the earlier findings in Turkey and to a greater extent from previous studies in Europe. In Turkey, design for sustainability is still comprehended as an issue of production needing the attention and expertise of designers. It can generate benefits even when its practice is limited. Promoting design for sustainability within the industry by providing good examples can increase its impact. This study builds a background for future research on design for sustainability and for spreading its use by companies, universities, intermediaries and policy makers. The results might be applicable to other contexts experiencing similar setbacks on sustainability as the Turkish industry.

Prevention through Design (PtD) Safe Design from an Australian Perspective

Prevention through Design (PtD) Safe Design from an Australian Perspective

Prevention through Design (PtD)

Achieving construction projects (CPs) with minimal waste requires not only good construction planning, but also effective management for safety and waste of resources through the project cycle. The aim of this paper is to identify and rank safety factors (SF) during the design phase (DPh) of a project that have positive effects in minimizing waste (cost, time and materials) during its construction. Data and information was gathered from available literature, structured interviews, and questionnaire conducted for 111 randomly selected construction organizations. Triangulation method to enhance the validity and reliability of the study findings was used. The research revealed 18 important SF that had positive effects on minimizing waste in CPs during the DPh. The five most important SF that should be considered to minimise waste are: capabilities and behaviour of the design team in the safety field, appropriateness of quantities and specifications for safety system (SS), appropriateness of foundation system for SS, appropriate public and special conditions for SS and appropriate electrical design for SS. The best linear model was developed on the basis of the importance index of the identified factors. A model was developed to minimize waste in CPs by using SS during the DPh. It is recommended that adequate attention must be given to safety criteria during DPh to minimize resources waste.

Cradle to Cradle Design Initiatives: Lessons and Opportunities for Prevention through Design (PtD)

Cradle to Cradle Design Initiatives: Lessons and Opportunities for Prevention through Design (PtD)

Lessons Learned from Aviation Safety

The principles of Prevention through Design (PtD) may be broadly applied. For example, physicians collect information on adverse effects of drugs from the field. They then turn this information over to the pharmaceutical companies. In response, the pharmaceutical companies evaluate the data and make necessary changes, such as altering the label of a drug, talking to practitioners about their findings, or pulling the product from the market. The data are then given to their Research and Development department and their molecular designers. They identify which portion of the molecular structure had the potential to cause the adverse side effects. The portion that is necessary for the preferred pharmacological effect is kept in. They try to maximize the good, while minimizing the bad. That's a good example of PtD. The same principles of PtD apply for the aviation industry. How? Take, for example, our new Navy helicopter, the CH-53K Heavy Lift. We went back to the engineering department developing this new model with all of our data. Rising rates of ergonomic related injuries were being seen in the original model and our engineers were looking for ways to eliminate them. They designed safe manufacturing into the build process. From initial feedback, the Sikorsky Corporation will be very successful in controlling their future workers' compensation costs for employees building this new model. Leading and trailing indicators of performance are something we study. Our mantra is that we want our helicopters to be the safest to fly (we have the lowest aviation accident rates in our field), the safest to build, and the safest to own. If anything happens in the field, we pick the information up through the customers and our reps, and give the data to the Aviation Safety Board. During routine maintenance other things may also be picked up. When we redesign parts, we immediately supply designers of the new models with them, as well as including them in the old models. Our hazard resolution process is to: identify the potential hazard, assess the risk level, contain the hazard, investigate the root cause, eliminate or control the hazard, ensure the corrective action is effective, and convey information back to the programmers and engineers. Language: en