Quantitative differences between common occupational health risk assessment models

OBJECTIVES: Methodological studies on occupational health risk assessment (OHRA) models are rarely reported. This study aimed to explore the quantitative differences between common OHRA models. METHODS: The risk ratios (RRs) in five typical industries (leather, wooden furniture manufacturing, printing and dyeing, printing, and garment manufacturing) were investigated using six OHRA models, namely the models from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Singapore, the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH), Australia, Romania, and International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). The consistency, correlation, and reliability were evaluated for quantitative differences between the models. RESULTS: The order of the RRs obtained from the EPA, Singaporean, and COSHH models in the five industries was consistent with the order of the inherent risk levels in those industries. The EPA and Singaporean models could effectively distinguish the inherent risk levels of risk factors like xylene and ethyl acetate. The order of RR between the six models was: RR (EPA) > RR (COSHH) > RR (Singaporean) > RR (Australian) > RR (Romanian) and RR (ICMM) (P < .05). The EPA model had the weakest correlations with other models. The Singaporean model had positive correlations in RRs with the other models (P＜0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The EPA and Singaporean models exhibited good reliability since they could distinguish the inherent risk of the industry or risk factor and tended to get higher risk levels. The EPA model was independent and the Singaporean model had a good correlation with other models. More studies on OHRA methodology are needed.