• Enlarge

HSE: The Awareness and Control of Risks from Hand-Arm Vibration

Article supplied by HSE.gov.uk

Introduction
While Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome, or HAVS for short, doesn’t conjure up the sinister overtones usually associated with the likes of cancer or Motor Neurone Disease its victims often suffer a similar loss of dignity and quality of life. Imagine intense skeletal pain in your hands and fingers at the merest hint of cold weather; the frustration of not being able to hold a cup of tea, or use a knife and fork; of not being able to feel anything properly through your hands again. Closely associated with that little lot could be the indignity of having to be fed; of having to have someone help you when you go to the toilet and of not being able to hold your grandchildren in case you drop them.

HSE research during the 1990s estimated that around five million British workers were exposed to HAV in the workplace. Approximately 1.7 million were believed to be exposed at levels above the exposure action value (EAV) with around 900,000 of these exposed above the current exposure limit value (ELV). The EAV is a daily amount of vibration exposure above which employers are required to take action to control exposure. The greater the exposure level, the greater the risk and the more action employers will need to take to reduce the risk. For HAV the EAV is a daily exposure of 2.5 m/s2 A(8). On the other hand the ELV is the maximum amount of vibration an employee may be exposed to on any single day. For HAV the ELV is a daily exposure of 5 m/s2 A(8). It represents a high risk above which employees should not be exposed. At the end of the 90’s around 288,000 people were estimated to have Vibration White Finger (VWF).

Is the picture still that bleak? Let’s say it could have been if people had adopted the all too common ostrich approach in the mistaken belief that they are invincible and ‘bad things’ only happen to someone else. Fortunately though industry has risen to the challenge and is, by and large, proactively seeking to address the situation. Most companies with employees making regular and extensive use of powered hand-tools appear to have a well established general awareness of the risks arising from excessive exposure to HAV. This isn’t really surprising given that VWF has been a reportable disease since the mid 1980s and that there have been campaigns by various lobby groups to raise awareness. However, the difficulty seems to arise when companies attempt to assess the likely risk from HAV and review the adequacy of existing control measures.

 
The regulations
The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations require employers to prevent or reduce risks to health and safety from exposure to vibration at work, including:

• assessing the vibration risk to employees;
• taking action to reduce vibration exposure that produces those risks
• deciding if employees are likely to be exposed above the:
• daily EAV and if they are: introduce a programme of controls to eliminate risk, or reduce exposure to as low a level as is reasonably practicable;
• daily ELV and if they are: take immediate action to reduce their exposure below the limit value;
• making sure the legal limits on vibration exposure are not exceeded;
• providing information and training to employees on health risks and the actions being taken to control those risks;
• carrying out health surveillance (regular health checks) where there is a risk to health;
• consulting trade union safety representatives or employee representatives on proposals to control risk and to provide health surveillance
• keeping a record of the risk assessment and control actions;
• keeping health records for employees under health surveillance;
• reviewing and updating the risk assessment regularly.
  

Health surveillance
Employers must provide health surveillance for all their employees who, despite their action to control the risk, are likely to be regularly exposed above the EAV or are considered to be at risk for any other reason.

The purpose of health surveillance is to:

• identify anyone exposed or about to be exposed to HAV who may be at particular risk, for example people with blood circulatory diseases such as Raynauds Disease;
• identify any vibration-related disease at an early stage in employees regularly exposed to HAV;
• help prevent disease progression and eventual disability;
• help people stay in work;
• check the effectiveness of the vibration control measures.
  

It is important that employees understand that the aim of health surveillance is to protect them from developing advanced symptoms of ill health so that they can continue to work. It will need their understanding and co-operation if health surveillance is to be effective.

The role of HSE
For HSE’s part it may help if I outline a little of what’s been put in place to help tackle HAVS. For the record though we haven’t got an office in Whitehall and we don’t wear bowler hats or carry rolled up umbrellas. In fact there isn’t even a team, in the traditional sense that is. Colleagues can be found in towns and cities from the South West right up to Aberdeen and the majority are scientists, specialists, medical professionals and inspectors with years of training and experience. That said, with the advances in technology I suppose you can say we exist as a virtual team with the ability to communicate on a one-to-one basis or as a community at the touch of a button. The striking thing is that we are all passionate and committed to alleviating the challenges presented by HAV.

Obviously we have a legal role to play but in the remainder of this article I’d like to share our strategy with you. At the highest level we have a programme of activities, in partnership with leading stakeholders, aimed at:

• seeking 90% compliance by 2010 with the exposure limit values for HAV set out in the 2005
  Regulations
• Controlling new cases of HAVS (as an occupational disease) sufficiently to enable workers to remain at work without disability by 2015.

 
Additionally we will continue to work with supplier stakeholders, e.g. machinery and equipment manufacturers, to help and influence them in developing HAV control technology in their products and in providing sufficient information to enable employers to carry out their risk assessments.
We will also continue to:

• write to key manufacturers and suppliers of powered hand-tools in target sectors to raise awareness of their duties under the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 as amended and employers’ duties under the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005;
• inspect a range of suppliers of powered hand-tools to ascertain, for example, the extent to which they supply information to enable the machine to be used safely or take steps to minimise HAV at source in the design of their products, and
• report on the level of compliance with supply legislation in the manufacturers and suppliers visited.
  

Working with frontline stakeholders, e.g. construction, heavy fabrication and foundries, we will continue to focus on the development and take up of reasonably practicable controls for HAV. We have already identified high vibration processes for which there are alternatives, but wish to work with industry to help develop the next generation of controls. Here we will be aiming to:

•  
  develop, promote and enforce reasonably practicable control options in the targeted sectors;
• deliver improvements in the level and quality of occupational health surveillance for HAVS , and
• work with industry to foster good practice and identify further reasonably practicable controls.
  

What has been encouraging is the success of the recent pilot project to promote worker awareness and involvement in noise and HAV control in construction and manufacturing sectors. Worker involvement (WI) supports one of the Executive’s (formerly the Health and Safety Commission’s) strategic aims, i.e. to promote WI in the management of health and safety risks in the workplace. Research has shown that WI is associated with a strong health and safety culture. Moreover, even when the effects of good health and safety management are allowed for, the evidence suggests that good WI is associated with better risk control.

Conclusion
Obviously there have been highs and there have been lows. We have always known that there would be challenges. Let’s face it life would be pretty boring without them. For me though the way forward is about partnership and the sharing of knowledge and good practise. When it comes to protecting our health and safety I don’t believe anyone can claim the monopoly on good ideas. If you have any, feel free to get in touch. You never know, that one little gem may alleviate an awful lot of pain and suffering while improving efficiency and the good old bank balance.

For further information please contact:
Colin Chatten, Senior Policy Advisor in HSE’s Noise and Vibration Team.
Tel: 0151 951 4005
Fax: 0151 951 3771
E-mail: Colin.Chatten@hse.gsi.gov.uk