See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/349038779

Assessment of Health and Safety tools used on construction projects in Lagos

State, Nigeria

Conference Paper · November 2020

CITATIONS READS

0 237

2 authors:

Bamidele Arijeloye Ijieh Treasure

Federal University of Technology, Akure Federal University of Technology, Akure
13 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Educational Building Construction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bamidele Arijeloye on 04 February 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the 5th Research Conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF QUANTITY SURVEYORS:

5TH RESEARCH CONFERENCE NIQS RECON5
9TH 10TH NOVEMBER 2020

THEME:
Confluence of Research, Theory and Practice in the
Built Environment

EDITORS:
Dr L. O. Oyewobi
Dr A. A. Shittu
Dr Y. D. Mohammed
Dr A. A. Oke

© Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors, 2020

i
 Proceedings of the 5th Research Conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Proceedings of the 5th Research Conference of the Nigerian Institute of

Quantity Surveyors

All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieved system
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise without prior written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN: 978-978-962-473-7

Correspondence:
Chairman
Association of Quantity Surveyors Lecturers/Educator
The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors
No.84,4th Avenue Gwarinpa, Abuja,
Nigeria.

NOV. 9TH NOV. 10TH 2020

Federal University of Technology, Minna 2020

ii
 Proceedings of the 5th Research Conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Contents
Foreword III
Preface ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
Acknowledgements V
Declaration VI
The Peer Review Process VI
Scientific Committee VII
Conference Organising Committee VIII
Local Organising Committee VIII
Table Of Contents X
Perceived Education Courses That Inculcate Sustainability Awareness In Students Of Higher
Institution Of Learning In Nigeria 1
Women Quantity 9
Impact Of Health And Safety Prevention Cost On Construction Cost In Kwara State 23
Appraisal Of The Level Of Awareness And Practice Of Total Quality Management (Tqm)
Principles In The Construction Industry In Imo State, Nigerian 35
Constraints To Implementation Of Public Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects In North
Central, Nigeria 49
Predesign Cost Planning Of Building Wall Envelopes Using A Novel Mathematical Model 61
Impact Of Non-Monetary Incentives On Workers Performance In Nigeria Construction Firms76
Determination Of Activity Based Safety Risk Hazard In Building Construction Projects In
Abuja, Nigeria 87
Mitigating The Effects Of Delay On Educational Institutional Building Projects In Niger State
97
Critical Success Factors For The Adoption Of Lean Principles In Construction Firms In Abuja
111
Framework For Integrated Web-Based Price Analysis To Incorporate Builders Mark-
Decision 122
Practices Of Performance Measurement Of Construction Firms In Abuja, Nigeria 135
Motivation As A Management Strategy For Improving Productivity In Construction Projects In
Abuja 151
Influence Of Materials Price Fluctuation On Cost Performance Of Building Contractors In
Abuja, Nigeria 161
Assessing The Willingness Of Quantity Surveyors To Pay For 5d Bim 176
Prioritizing Evaluation Criteria For Contractor Selection In Nigerian 188
Effect Of Supervision On Construction Project Delivery In Abuja, Nigeria 205
Assessing Change Order Causes In The Pre-Construction And Construction Phase Of
Construction Projects 221
x
 Proceedings of the 5th Research Conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Determination Of Effective Strategies For Truck Transit Parks Management Practice 242
Multiskilling Of Quantity Surveyors In The Nigerian Construction Industry: Empirical Analysis
Of Propelling Measures 256
Assessment Of The Occurrence Of Construction Claims In Building Projects In Nigeria 263
A Conceptual Framework For Developing Machine Learning Models For Procurement
Processes 273
Influence Of Critical Success Factors And Constraints On The Implementation Of Quality
Management By Construction Firms In Bauchi State 286

Nigeria 305
Enriching Quantity Surveying Curriculum For Leadership In The Built Environment 315
al Estates In Abuja,
Nigeria 333
Assessment Of Financial Risk Factors In Adoption Of Building Information Modelling For
Construction Projects In Abuja 348
Evaluation Of Causative Factors Of Construction Delay In High-Rise Building Projects: A Case
Of Lagos State 356
Assessment Of Level Of Application Of Knowledge Management Systems In Construction
Firms In Abuja, Nigeria 367
Appropriateness Of The Methods Used By Building Contractors For Allocating Overhead Cost
In Nigeria 382
Innovation Drivers And Barriers In The Nigerian Construction Industry 390
Impact Of Stakeholders On Public Private Partnership Projects Delivery In Nigeria 400
Assessment Of Health And Safety Tools Used On Construction Projects In Lagos State, Nigeria
407
Appraisal Of The Level Of Awareness On Health And Safety Measures Among Construction
Workers In Lagos State, Nigeria 418
Development Of Forensic Framework For Post Contract Construction Cost 431
Assessment Of Communication Channels In Use By Professionals On Construction Projects In
Abuja, Nigeria 442
Inhibiting Factors To The Adoption Of Digital Technologies In The South African Construction
Industry 455
Whole Life Costing Practices Employed By Design Teams Of Building Construction Projects
In Abuja, Nigeria 462
Development Of A Readiness Assessment Tool Kit For Partnering Adoption In The Nigerian
Construction Industry 475
Assessment Of Risk Management Capability Level Of Building Clients In Abuja, Nigeria 494
Assessing The Readiness Of Clients To Implement Whole Life Costing In The Construction
Industry 507
Assessing The Pattern Of Quantity Surveying Practice In The Nigerian Informal Sector 520

xi
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Treasure Oriabure Ijieh, Bamidele Temitope Arijeloye, and Dolapo Oyediran

Department of Quantity Surveying, Federal University of Technology Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria

ABSTRACT
Health and safety tools are equipment that protect the human body from chemical, physical,
electrical, infectious and biological hazards during construction process. Hence the attitude of
construction workers towards the usage of safety tools determines the frequency of injury to be
sustained. The purpose of the paper is to assess the health and safety tools used on construction
site. A total number of 140 questionnaire where distributed among artisans. The research work
was based on construction activities carried out on twenty (20) construction sites. The data
collected were analyzed using factor analysis, mean score and standard deviation. The result
shows that safety boots, safety gloves and breathing protective wears were the most utilized health
and safety tools on construction site by artisans. Four factors were extracted from the factor
analysis. The study concluded that various identified health and safety tools were moderately used
by construction workers on construction site. The study recommends that in order to enhance the
usage of health and safety tools, health and safety personnel should sensitize construction workers
on the dangers of not complying with health and safety measures on construction site.

Keywords: Construction site, Construction workers, health and safety, tools

INTRODUCTION
Construction workers attitude towards the use of health and safety tools has been explored from
different perspectives. Al-Kilani (2011) described that construction workers sustain injuries on
some part such as hand, leg, skin, eyes and other part of the body which is a result of not using
personal protective equipment (PPE) on site. According to Fauzania, Aryanti, Dalil and Putri
(2018), health and safety tools are mostly used in large construction projects and most of the
construction workers do not comply to the use of health and safety tools which are as a result of
no provision of this tools by the construction companies. Mamin, Dey and Das (2019)
corroborate that most construction workers do not comply to the use of Personal Protective
Equipment (PPEs) in construction sites. Eyiah, Kheni and Quartey (2019) opined that most of
construction site operatives and site managers lack adequate knowledge about the use and
maintenance of PPEs. Construction workers find it hard to use PPEs as a result of discomfort
when wearing them or due to their first experience in using this equipment such as eye goggles
hard hats, hand gloves, protective overall, safety boot, safety harness (Eyiah et al., 2019).
Vitharana, Subashi and Silva
construction sites to be one of the causes of poor health and safety practices. Ahmad, Balkhyour
and Rehan (2018) noted that most PPE equipment are badly managed, poor and are inadequate
among workers. Williams, Razil and Mohd (2017) therefore noted that the non-compliance to
the use of PPEs has endangered construction workers to hazard and has effect on their safety.
However, Ismail, Doostdar, and Harum (2012) noted that knowledge of workers on how to use
the right equipment or tools of PPE would reduce risks on site.

407
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Okoye, Ezeokonkwo, and Ezeokoli (2016) opined that good compliance level of construction
workers to health and safety rules increases their performance in the construction companies
thereby reducing the accident on site on site. Hassan, Basha and Hanfi (2007) stated that
construction workers non compliance to health and safety measures increases the rate of accident
on construction sites and compliance to health and safety measures increses the productivity of
constuction industry. Unfortunately, many construction companies do not follow strict health
and safety measures. Thus, construction workers compliance to health and safety measures
should be addressed to reduce the rate of hazard on construction site. This problem therefore
calls for a self-examination on the reliability of our health and safety techniques. If these safety
precautions are effective, there would have been drastic reduction in the rate of hazard which
have claim the lives of many people. The focus of this study therefore is to assess various health
and safety tools used on construction projects in Lagos State, Nigeria with an objective to know
the level of usage of the various health and safety tools identified.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Health and Safety Measures in Construction Industry

According to Muiriru and Mulinge (20
the human body from chemical, physical, electrical, infections and biological hazards which
includes helmets, eyes goggles, hard hats, safety boots. Vitharana et al., (2015), identified some
of the health and safety tools such as gloves, hard hat, safety wears, safety boots. Laryea and
Mensah (2010), identified PPE equipment as helmet, safety wear, eye protection and earmuffs.
Akinradewo and Arijeloye, (2019) stated some of the health and safety tools includes first aid
box, dust mask, eyes protection, safety boots, safety gloves, clover rails. Although Slips, trips
and falls are an ever-present hazard within most workplaces and safety footwear can play its part
in preventing injury, particularly from slips, by featuring slip resistant. Kobayashia, Hashizumec,
Hobarac, Anzaia, Nakajimaa and Mishimab et al. (2019) defined safety boot as a tool designed
to protect the users from accident that might occur while caring out their special duties. Vitharana
et al. (2015) noted that wearing of safety boot on construction site reduce injuries that might
occur on site. Safety boot can be classified into pullover and shoe boot and consist steel sole,
steel toe cap, steel shanks to enable easy movement of workers on certain height. Also, Eyes and
face protective i.e. eyes google, face goggle and face shield are for protection against any
physical hazard such as flying objects, protection against ultraviolet during welding, chemical
hazards such as dust either from cutting of objects like asbestos, tiles etc. A face goggles should
be available and provided for construction workers. A face goggle and a face shield are not
recommended for use unless it is needed. Example of a case of grinding wind cuttings that
involves flying particles or corrosive materials.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

The construction environment is mostly noisy due to the use of industrial equipment around the
working stations some of these ear protections includes earmuffs, ear plugs. Tavakolizadeh,
Kianmehr, Yalmeh , and Bahalgardi, (2019) described earmuffs as one of the PPEs used for the
protection of the ear auricles and the prevention of sound waves entering the ear. These sound
waves can cause a mental or a physical complication to the human body. Muggleton, (2019)
stated that noise from these nearby machines and equipment cause damage permanently to the
workers if appropriate protection for the ear is not provided by the employer. Earmuffs protect
the ear from noise that can damage the ear in areas where there is high volume of grinding
408
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

machines, drilling machines, pilling, jack hammer, etc. Also, Protective clothing and wears
protect the body against for protection against chemical in either a solid or in a liquid state, a
protective wear must be durable and protect the human body against any form of hazard. Watson,
Troynikov and Lingard (2019) opined that protective wears should provide protection to the
workers and enhance easy access for kneeling, bending, stretching, and breathing which must
cover the whole body from the torso to neck, the leg to the ankles, the arms to the wrist and the
fabrics should be easy to wash. There are different designs and materials suitable for making of
protective wears depending on the nature of job been carried out, some of the materials are made
up of Tyvek or Nomex, butyl rubber, neoprene, and PVC to protect the body against toxic
materials like acid. All protective wears must be properly seamed and have a sealed zipper to
protect against vapors. But hard hat is aimed at protecting the hazard of hard object falling from
height which can cause damage or fracture to the human brain or skull and, can serve as a
protection against a corrosive or molten metal, electric shock and burns from hot splashes.
Hernandez (2015), further described had hat as a rigid plastic shell that prevent knocks and
electric shock on the head. It consists of a suspension system attached to the inside with different
connections that serve as absorber and enhance easy movement to the ear without damage to the
human head. According to Ogundipe (2017), safety helmet consists of a reinforce rips, a rain
gutter and a rare gutter. Helmet have a safety visor that can be easily pushed if required.

The PPE hand gloves protects workers from the risk of hazards from cuts chemical effects,
electric shocks. Asumeng, Asamani, Afful and Agyemang (2015) explained protective gloves as
an equipment that decrease the exposure of the skin to any form of microorganisms and prevent
exposure to biological hazards. A protective hand gloves must have ability to resist slippery and
be able to use and reuse. A protective hand gloves must not be hard on the skin that is why they
are made up of materials like cotton, nylon, latex or leather because of their touch to the human
skin. Although care must be taken while carrying out some construction works like fixing of
machines parts, cutting of tools do not allow the use of gloves. However, some of the
construction work challenges is working at height. There are many chances of falling at those
height if maximum care is not taken. Therefore, health and safety regulations therefore workers
should therefore adopt the use of safety belt while climbing height and there should be used with
an appropriate scaffold and guardrails for a suitable movement, breathing protective wear is used
to control the airborne and respiratory system of workers due to airborne contamination from
chemicals and dust. An escape pack should be used with an air purifying system while using a
protective wear.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This section explains the method of data collection for the study and the method used in
analysing the data obtained from field work. Questionnaires were administered to artisans on
construction site in order to assess various health and safety tools used on construction site within
the study area. The target population for the study includes 20 construction sites involved in
construction projects but located in Lagos State, Nigeria. The sample frame for the study includes
construction workers such as carpenters, plumbers, welders, painters, tiler, electricians, and
bricklayers involved in construction projects. Since there are no registered data for workers in
the construction industry, the sample were adapted from the study of Diugwu, Baba and Egila
(2012).

409
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

were distributed. Total number of 140 questionnaire was distributed among the 20 construction
sites. Table 1 shows the sample size of respondents.

Table 1: Research size of respondents

S/N Respondents Sample Frame Sample size
1 Carpenter 23 20
2 Plumber 21 20
3 Bricklayer 47 20
4 Painter 21 20
5 Welder 38 20
6 Electrician 20 20
7 Tiler 24 20
Total 194 140
Source: Researcher analysis (2018)

A well-structured questionnaire with close-ended questions was designed based on the health
and safety tools identified from reviewed literature with the aim of assessing the health and safety
tool used on construction projects. Two sections were provided with the first planned to elicit
information regarding personal data of the respondent and their organization. The second section
was constructed to obtain information regarding the opinion of the respondents on the level of
health and safety tools used on construction site. 5-point Likert scale was adopted in seeking
their opinion on the level of usage of each tool identified. Due to inability to reach some of the
listed contractors and professionals, convenience sampling was adopted as the sampling
technique for the study. A total of 140 questionnaires - representing the sample size - were
administered from which 90 questionnaire was retrieved and 80 was valid due to double ticking
and omission of some part of the questionnaire by the respondent. 80 questionnaires were used
for the analysis (representing 57.14% of the sample)
the reliability of the 5-point Likert. Results of the analysis indicates a value of 0.788. Since the
degree of reliability of the instrument is more perfect as the value tends towards 1.0 (Moser and
Kalton, 1999), it can be concluded that the instruments used for this research are significantly
consistent and reliable. For the analysis, mean item score (MIS), standard deviation and Factor
analysis was computed from the Likert scale and the values were employed to determine the
level of usage and rank of the identified variables.

DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION

Background Information
The first section of the questionnaire was designed to provide background information of the
respondents such as the gender, years of construction experience, age range, category of work,
level of education and the occupations of respondents while the other sections were designed to
collect data for the objectives of this research.
The sample size of 140 questionnaire was distributed among the artisans, 90 questionnaires was
retrieved and 80 was valid due to double ticking and omission of some part of the questionnaire
by the respondent. 80 questionnaires were used for the analysis (representing 57.14% of the
sample). The statistical analysis of the data obtained was analyse using statistical package for
social sciences (SPSS), Table 2 shows the characteristics of various respondents used for the
studies.
410
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Table 2: Characteristics of respondent

Factors Variables Frequency Percent %
Gender Male 80 100.0
Female 0 0
Total 80 100
Years of Construction Experience 0-5 18 22.5
6-10 30 37.5
11-15 16 20.0
16-20 6 7.5
20-24 6 7.5
25 And Above 4 5.0
Total 80 100.0
Age Range 20-25 18 22.5
26-30 19 23.8
31-35 17 21.3
36-40 10 12.5
41-45 5 6.3
46 And Above 11 13.8
Total 80 100.0
Categories of Work Skilled Labour 65 81.3
Semi- Skilled
15 18.8
Labour
Total 80 100.0
Highest Level of Education Primary School 14 17.5
Secondary
22 27.5
School
NCE 7 8.8
ND 21 26.3
No Formal
5 6.3
Education
Others 11 13.8
Total 80 100.0
Occupation Plumber 10 12.5
Bricklayer 18 22.5
Painter 8 10.0
Carpenter 10 12.5
Electrician 14 17.5
Welder 13 16.3
Tilers 7 8.8
Total 80 100.0
Authors field work (2018)

Table 2 revealed that 80 numbers of male filled the questionnaire while zero number of females

male rather than male and female. Table 2 also indicates the years of construction experience of
the respondent. 22.5% of the respondent have between 0-5years experience in the construction
411
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

industry, 37.5% have between 6-10 years in the construction industry, 20% of the respondent
have between 11-15years of experience, 7.5% of the respondent have between 16-20 years of
experience, 7.5% of the respondent have between 20-24 years of experience and 5% of the
respondent have more than 25years of experience in the construction industry. Table 2 reveals
the age range of the respondent. 22.5% of the respondent are within the age range of 20-25 years,
23.8% are within the age range of 26-30 years, 21.3% are within the age range of 31-35 years of
age, 12.5% are within the age range of 36-40 years of age, 6.3% are within the range of 41-45
years and 13.8% of the respondents are 46 years and above.

Table 2 also shows the category of work of the respondents. 81.3% of the respondent are skilled
workers and 18.8% of the respondent are unskilled worker. Table 2 also shows the level of
education of the respondents. The result depicts that 17.5% of the respondent attended primary
school, 27.5% are secondary school holder, 8.8% are NCE holder, 26.3% are ND holder, 6.3%
have no formal education and about 13.8% have various level of education not listed under this
such as; technical school. Finally. Table 2 represent the occupation of the respondent. The result
shows that 12.5% of the respondent are plumber, 22.5% are bricklayers, 10% are painter, 12.5%
are carpenters, 17.5% are electricians, 16.3% are welder and 8.8% of the respondent are tiler.

Level of usage of health and safety tools

Table 3 depicts the level of usage of health and safety tools. The tools with the highest level of
usage is safety boot with the mean score value of 3.90 followed by safety gloves and breathing
protective wears with the mean score of 3.79 and 3,79 respectively. While the tools with the
lowest level of usage are eyes cover, earmuffs and earplugs with the mean score of 2.75, 2.73
and 2.35. They are critically low due to their mean score that falls under a 2point.

Table 3: Usage of Health and Safety Tools

Tools Mean Rank
Safety boots 3.90 1
Safety gloves 3.79 2
Breathing protective wears 3.79 2
Ladders 3.78 4
First aid box 3.69 5
Protective wears 3.64 6
Hard hat 3.44 7
Eye googles 3.43 8
Scaffolds fall protection and guard rails 3.36 9
Safety belt 3.21 10
Safety and warning signs 2.91 11
First aid training 2.85 12
Fire safety training 2.83 13
Eye cover 2.75 14
Earmuffs 2.73 15
Ear plugs 2.35 16
Authors field work (2018)

412
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Factor Analysis for Level of usage of health and safety tools among Construction Workers
Table 4 represents Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO). A general rule
of thumb is that a KMO value should be greater than 0.5 for a satisfactory factor analysis to
proceed. By observing the above results, the KMO is 0.789, therefore factor analysis can be used.

Table 4: KMO Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .789
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 513.555
Sphericity Df 120
Sig. .000
Authors field work (2018)

was also carried out to show if there is a relationship between the

variables. A p value < 0.05 indicates that it makes sense to continue with the factor analysis.
Since the p < 0.001 it can be concluded that there are relationships between the variables.
Variance Table The principal component analysis shows that only four factors have eigenvalues
greater than 1 as shown in the Eigenvalue total column. Component 1 of the measures have the
highest eigenvalue value of 5.284 which accounts for 33.027 per cent of the cumulative variance,
followed by 2.319 loaded factor on 14.492, 1.221 loaded 7.630 The criteria for the measure
selection in Eigenvalues is greater than 1, therefore the fourth factor 1.048 explain a cumulative
load of 61.696 pe0r cent of the variance of the data. The degree of freedom DF of Kaiser-Meyer-
Olkin component for the level of usage of health and safety tools is 120.

Table 5: Rotated Component Matrix

Component
Factors
1 2 3 4 Extraction
First aid training .851 .540
Eye cover .770 .508
Safety and warning signs .734 .380
Fire safety training .721 .583
Safety boots .410 .708
Ear plugs .819 .703
Earmuffs .753 .807
Scaffolds fall protection and guard rails .731 .703
Eye googles .632 .755
Protective wears .728 .454
Safety belt .664 .602
First aid box .566 .689
Ladders .507 .593
Breathing protective wears .494 .688
Safety gloves .673 .365
Hard hat .584 .792
Extraction method: principal component analysis
Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization.
Authors field work (2018)
413
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Table 5 above shows the rotation converged in 4 iterations. Rotation has shown that each of the
variables load onto four different factors. The name given to each of the factors is listed below;
Factor 1 is named safety and training tools. The factor accounts for 33.027 and consist of
variables such as first aid training with load factor of 0.851, eye cover with load factor of 0.770,
safety and warning loading 0.734, fire safety training with loading factor of 0.721 and safety
boots with load factor of 0.753.
Factor 2 is named ear and eye safety tools. The factor accounts for 14.492 and consist of
variables such as ear plugs which load heavily on the tools with a load factor of 0.819, earmuffs
with a load factor of 0.753, scaffolds fall protection and guard rails with a load factor of 0.732
and eye goggle with load factor of 0.632
Factor 3 is names safety wears and welfare tools. The total factor load account for 7.630 and
consist variable such as protective wears with the highest load factor of 0.728, safety belt to have
the second highest load factor with 0.664, first aid box with load factor of 0.566, ladders with
load factor of 0,507 and breathing protective wears with the lowest load factor which is 0.494
Factor 4 is named hand and head safety tools. The total factor load account for 6.547 which
consist of safety boot with its highest load factor of 0.673 and hard hat have a load factor of
0,584. Thus, for the analysis of regression these four factors were used based on a need to regress
the dependent variable against the independent variables.

Table 6: Reduced Component for level of usage of health and safety tools among
Construction workers
Factors Variables factor loading
Safety and Training tools First aid training 0.851
Eye cover 0.770
Safety and warning signs 0.734
Fire safety training 0.721
Safety boots 0.410
Ear and Eye safety tools Ear plugs 0.819
Earmuffs 0.753
Scaffolds fall protection and
0.731
guard rails
Eye goggles 0.632
safety wears and safety tools Protective wears 0.728
Safety belt 0.664
First aid box 0.566
Ladders 0.507
Breathing protective wears 0.494
Head and Hand safety tools Safety gloves 0.673
Hard Hat 0.584
Authors field work (2018)

414
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
Considering the level of usage of health and safety tools by the construction workers during the
stages of construction, information retrieved shows there is a wide difference from the level of
usage of some safety tools to others having higher score than the other. Use of safety boots,
safety gloves, and breathing protective wears, have moderate mean score of 3.90, 3.79 and 3.79
respectively and usage of safety tools such as Ear plugs, Earmuffs, Eye cover and fire safety
training have the lowest mean score of 2.35, 2.73, 2.75, and 2.83 respectively. Akinradewo and
Arijeloye (2019) findings revealed that eye protection has a low usage among construction
workers. Agreeing with the work of (Al-Kilani, 2011), injuries are sustained by construction
workers as a result of not using their equipment rightly. This therefore shows that the level of
sage of health and safety tools among construction workers is moderate and low has less priority
is given to the usage of some of the tools. In support of this, Mamin et al. (2019) stated that
most construction workers do not comply to the use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs)
on construction sites. From the construction sites visited, some of the construction workers
attested their level of knowledge to the health and safety tools but do not comply to the use of
some tools due to the discomforts when using some of them but they are rather convenient to
the use of safety boot, and safety wears. The study of Waziri, Hamma, Adama and Kadai (2018)
agreed with this that the health and safety tools commonly used among construction workers
are reflective vest, hard hat and safety boots and this are due to the nature of their work.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The paper draw conclusion from the finding by identifying the level of usage of the following health
and safety tools among construction workers which are: safety boots, safety gloves, breathing
protective wears, ladders, protective wears, first aid box and protective wears have moderate
level of usage. Likewise, in a decline manner, this study found out that hard hat, eye goggles,
scaffolds fall protection and guard rails, safety belt, safety and warning signs, first aid training,
fire safety training, eye cover, earmuffs, and ear plugs have low level of usage among
construction workers. Also factor analysis was carried out and four factors were extracted
namely Safety and Training tools, Ear and Eye safety tools, safety wears and safety tools and
Head and Hand safety tools. The paper therefore recommends that construction workers should
be sensitized on the importance of safety on site. Also, trainings and workshop should be
organized by health and safety organization to orientate workers on the need and the benefits
attributed to complying with health and safety measures.

REFERENCE
Ahmad, I., Balkhyour, M. A., & Rehan, M. (2018). Assessment of Personal Protective
Equipment use and Occupational Exposures in Small Industries in Jeddah: Health
Implications for Workers. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 1-23.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2018.06.011
Akinradewo, O. & Arijeloye, B. (2019). Contracting Firms Compliance To Health And Safety
Measures On Construction Sites In Nigeria. Construction Industry Development Board
Postgraduate Research Conference (pp. 419-427). Akure: springer,cham.
doi:https//doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_42

415
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Al-Kilani, F. M. (2011). A Thesis On Improving Safety Performance In Construction Projects

In Libya (Case Study : In Tripoli City). Libya: Diponegoro University.
Asumeng, M., Asamani, L., Afful, J., & Agyemang, C. B. (2015). Occupational Safety and
Health Issues In Ghana: Strategies For Improving Employee Safety and Health at
Workplace. International Journal of Business and Management Review, 3(9), 60-79.
Eyiah, A. K., Kheni, N. A. & Quartey, P. D. (2019). An Assessment of Occupational Health and
Safety Regulations in Ghana: A Study of the Construction Industry. journal Of Building
Construction and Planning, 7, 11-31. doi:https://doi.org/10.4236/jbcpr.2019.72002
Fauzania , P. N., Aryanti, T., Dalil, N. H. & Putri, A. C. (2018). The Safety Awareness of
Construction Workers Regarding Workplace Health and Safety Standard. 5th UPI
International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and Training. 299, pp.
424-426. Indonesia: Atlantic Press.
Hassan, C., Basha, O. & Hanfi, W. (2007). Perception Of Building Construction Workers
Towards Safety, Health And Environment. Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology, 2, (3), 271 - 279.
Hernandez, J. G. (2015). Hard Hat Safety by California Contractors. Califonia: California
Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo.
Ismail , Z., Doostdar, S. & Harum, Z. (2012). Factors Influencing The Implementation Of A
Safety Management System For Construction Sites. safety science, 50, 418-423.
doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2011.10.001
Laryea, S. & Mensah, S. (2010). Health and Safety on Construction Sites in Ghana . RICS
COBRA Conference. Paris: Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Mamin , F., Dey, G. & Das, S. (2019). Health And Safety Issues Among Construction Workers
In Bangladesh. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Health, 9(1), 13-18.
doi:https://doi.org/10.3126/ijosh.v9i1.25162
Muggleton, N. (2019). Use Of Hearing Protection To Discriminate Between Different And
Identify Individual Noise Sources To Control And Reduce Risk Of Noise Induced Hearing
Noice. U.S.A: United States Patent Application Publication.
Muiruri, G. & Mulinge, C. (2014). Health and Safety Management on Construction Projects
Sites in Kenya. Engaging the Challenges Enhancing the Relevance. Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia: FIG Congress.
Ogundipe, E. K. (2017). A Thesis On Safety Practices And Workers Performsnce On
Construction Sites In Lagos State, Nigeria. Ota Lagos: Department Of Building
Technology, Convenant University.
Okoye, P., Ezeokonkwo, J. nd
Safety Knowledge and Compliance on Site Department of Building, Nnamdi Azikiwe
University, Awka, Nigeria. Journal of Safety Engineering 5(1):, 5(1), 17-26.
doi:10.5923/j.safety.20160501.03
Tavakolizadeh, J., Kianmehr, M., Yalmeh , T. J. & Bahalgardi, B. (2019). Effect of Hearing
Protection Devices on Anxiety and Depression of Stone Workers. Journal of Research
in Medical and Dental Science, 7(3), 21-25. Retrieved from www.jrmds.in

416
 Proceedings of the 5th Research conference of the NIQS (RECON 5)

Vitharana , V. H., Subashi , S. H. & Silva, S. D. (2015). Health Hazards, Risk and Safety
Practices in Construction Sites . XLVIII, 33-34.
Watson, C., Troynikov, O. & Lingard, H. (2019). Design Consideration For Low-Level Risk
Personal Protective Clothing. Australia: Industrial Health.
Waziri , S. B., Hamma-Adama, M. & Kadai, B. (2018). Exploring Health And Safety Practices
On Some Nigerian Construction Sites. Green Construction in Nigeria, 491- 502.
Williams , O. O., Razil, A. H. & Mohd , S. M. (2017). Analysis of Fatal Building Construction
Accidents: Cases and Causes. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and
Technology, 4(8), 8030-8040. Retrieved from www.jmest.org

417

View publication stats