Objective: To assess the health risks of welding fume jobs with five occupational health risk assessment methods, and to compare the advantages, disadvantages and applicability of these methods in the health risk assessment of welding fume. Methods: The International Commission for Mining and Metals (ICMM) occupational health risk assessment method, MES method, the qualitative method and comprehensive index method in GBZ/T 298-2017 "Technical Guidelines for Occupational Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Hazardous Factors in the Workplace" were used to assess the risk of welding fume exposure positions in four manufacturing enterprises in Tianjin in March, 2020. The assessment results of different methods were standardized by risk ratio (RR) . Results: After the results were standardized, the results of enterprises 1, 2 and 4 were negligible risks, enterprise 3 was medium risk in the ICMM matrix method and MES method, and the results of ICMM quantitative method for each enterprise were negligible risk, low risk, extremely high risk and low risk, respectively. The results of the qualitative assessment of the guidelines for all companies were negligible risks, and the comprehensive index method were medium risks. Conclusion: The five models are all suitable for occupational health risk assessment of welding fumes, but they all have certain shortcomings. They should be combined with qualitative and semi-quantitative assessment results for comprehensive analysis.
目的： 运用五种职业健康风险评估方法对电焊烟尘作业岗位健康风险进行评估，比较各种方法在对电焊烟尘健康风险评估中的优缺点及适用性。 方法： 于2020年3月，采用国际采矿和金属委员会（ICMM）职业健康风险评估方法、MES法和GBZ/T 298-2017《工作场所化学有害因素职业健康风险评估技术导则》中定性法与综合指数法对天津市四家生产企业电焊烟尘接触岗位进行风险评估。通过风险比值（RR）对不同方法评估结果进行标准化。 结果： 经过标准化后，ICMM风险矩阵法和MES法评估企业1、2、4为可忽略风险，企业3为中等风险，ICMM定量法评估各企业结果为可忽略风险、低风险、极高风险和低风险；导则定性法评估各企业结果均为可忽略风险，导则综合指数法评估各企业结果均为中风险。 结论： 五种方法均适用于对电焊烟尘接触岗位进行职业健康风险评估，但都存在一定的不足，应结合定性与半定量评估结果综合分析。.
Keywords: Occupational health; Risk assessment; Welding fume.