METHODS: This was a descriptive case study conducted in three selected small footwear factories located in Ciomas, Bogor, Indonesia. The assessment was conducted using the chemical health risk assessment method by the Department of Safety and Health Malaysia Year 2018.
RESULTS: Results showed that the level of risk of chemicals through inhalation fell on the moderate and high-risk categories, indicating that high exposure could lead to carcinogenic effects. Dermal exposure was categorised as moderate risk, causing such health effects as skin and eye irritation.
CONCLUSION: Factory X, Y, and Z have been found to have a significant risk of hazardous chemical exposure (i.e., benzene and toluene), specifically at the glueing stations, either from inhalation or dermal contact.
METHOD: Variables included in our model are categorized into four pillars: (i) incidence of cases, (ii) reliability of case data, (iii) vaccination, and (iv) variant surveillance. These measures are combined based on weights that reflect their corresponding importance in risk assessment within the context of the pandemic to calculate the risk score for each country. As a validation step, the outcome of the risk stratification from our model is compared against four countries.
RESULTS: Our model is found to have good agreement with these benchmarked risk designations for 27 out of the top 30 countries with the strongest travel ties to Malaysia (90%). Each factor within this model signifies its importance and can be adapted by governing bodies to address the changing needs of border control policies for the recommencement of international travel.
CONCLUSION: In practice, the proposed model provides a turnkey solution for nations to manage transmission risk by enabling stakeholders to make informed, evidence-based decisions to minimize fluctuations of imported cases and serves as a structure to support the improvement, planning, and activation of public health control measures.
AREAS COVERED: We searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, ACM, Embase, IEEE and Ingenta. We explored various evaluation aspects of MD and EMR to gain a better understanding of their complex integration. We reviewed numerous risk management and assessment frameworks related to MD and EMR security aspects and mitigation controls and then identified their common evaluation aspects. Our review indicated that previous evaluation frameworks assessed MD and EMR independently. To address this gap, we proposed an evaluation framework based on the sociotechnical dimensions of health information systems and risk assessment approaches for MDs to evaluate MDI-EMR integratively.
EXPERT OPINION: The emergence of MDI-EMR cyber threats requires appropriate evaluation tools to ensure the safe development and application of MDI-EMR. Consequently, our proposed framework will continue to evolve through subsequent validations and refinements. This process aims to establish its applicability in informing stakeholders of the safety level and assessing its effectiveness in mitigating risks for future improvements.
Context: The survey is nationally representative and community based and is conducted by the Institute for Public Health, part of the National Institutes of Health, to generate health-related evidence and to support the Malaysian Ministry of Health in policy-making. Its planned scope for 2020 was the seroprevalence of communicable diseases such as hepatitis B and C.
Action: Additional components were added to the survey to increase its usefulness, including COVID-19 seroprevalence and facial anthropometric studies to ensure respirator fit. The survey's scale was reduced, and data collection was changed from including only face-to-face interviews to mainly self-administered and telephone interviews. The transmission risk to participants was reduced by screening data collectors before the survey and fortnightly thereafter, using standard droplet and contact precautions, ensuring proper training and monitoring of data collectors, and implementing other administrative infection prevention measures.
Outcome: Data were collected from 7 August to 11 October 2020, with 5957 participants recruited. Only 4 out of 12 components of the survey were conducted via face-to-face interview. No COVID-19 cases were reported among data collectors and participants. All participants were given their hepatitis and COVID-19 laboratory test results; 73 participants with hepatitis B and 14 with hepatitis C who had been previously undiagnosed were referred for further case management.
Discussion: Preparing and conducting the National Health and Morbidity Survey during the COVID-19 pandemic required careful consideration of the risks and benefits, multiple infection prevention measures, strong leadership and strong stakeholder support to ensure there were no adverse events.