Research Paper Asian Journal of Home Science December, 211 Volume 6 Issue 2 :11212 Protective clothing for pesticide applicators and other agricultural activities of farm families GEETA MAHALE, SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR See end of the paper for authors affiliations Correspondence to: GEETA MAHALE Department of Textile and Apparel Designing All India Coordinated Research Project on Clothing and Textiles, College of Rural Home Science, University of Agricultural Science DHARWAD (KARNATAKA) INDIA geetmahal@rediffmail.com ABSTRACT Clothing is a primary need of mankind throughout the world. Wearing proper clothes at work can help to prevent various injuries to the body. A variety of human problems have been attributed to occupational exposure to hazardous environments. Farm activities are one of the most vulnerable segments as the farm workers are constantly exposed to multiple hazards during pesticide application. The present study was undertaken to design protective clothing for pesticide applicators and other agricultural workers. The results revealed that the designed protective clothing was found to be highly suitable and comfortable. KEY WORDS : Protective clothing, Pesticide application, Agriculture workers. How to cite this paper: Mahale, Geeta, Byadgi, Shameembanu and Kotur, Rajashri (211). Protective clothing for pesticide applicators and other agricultural activities of farm families. Asian J. Home Sci., 6 (2) : 11212. Article chronicle: Received: 3..211; Revised: 2.9.211; Accepted: 8.1.211 Clothing is worn for various reasons. The reasons most often cited for the use of clothing are protection, modesty and selfadornment. The physical need for protection of the body from weather, animals and insects seem essential to man s survival in harsh and hostile environment. While modernization and technological advancements significantly contribute to the overall productivity, they have also created hazards to the workforce necessitating various functional, innovative protective clothing to protect them from various risks (Geetha and Jacob, 21). On going concern for worker safety, protection from life threatening and disabling injuries and illness and specific protection for personnel from chemical agents has resulted in continued improvement in protective clothing. The purpose of protective clothing is to isolate parts of the body from direct contact with hazardous chemicals used today. With new technologies adopted on economic grounds, the farmers are adopting the use of pesticides to a greater extent. The use of pesticides has brought substantial advantages to them and the population at large. However, the agricultural workers are commonly exposed to toxic pesticides that cause serious health problems due to lack of suitable protective clothing (Desai, 26). Pesticides are valuable post management tools and like any tool, this need to be used carefully and responsibly. Minimizing exposure is an important step toward reducing the risk of pesticide poisoning. The use of protective clothing provides benefits to the applicator and is a visual expression of appropriate and legal pesticide use. Due to failure, the person himself, his family and the environment may have to face a greater risk of exposure. The toxicity of any substance cannot be reduced but the risk can be managed (Tarafder and Manna, 2). Workers engaged in pesticide application are frequently exposed to substances which may cause considerable external and internal harm to body tissues. Hazardous chemicals exist in several forms like dust, liquids, mist and vapours and the injuries due to these may range from mild dermatitis and other skin trauma to pulmonary oedema or cancer. So while applying pesticides it is essential to wear suitable and safe clothing. Hence, the present study was conducted to design protective clothing for pesticide applicators and other agricultural activities of farm families. Further the cost of designed protective clothing/ accessories was also calculated. RESEARCH METHODS The present study was conducted at AICRPCT unit, College of Rural Home Science, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad during 2111. The methodology adopted is divided into following subheadings:
GEETA MAHALE, SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR Sample selection: Six protective clothes viz., beak mask, cap with mask, hood mask, hand gloves, jacket and pajama of 1 per cent cotton fabric lining were designed for farm men and women based on the agricultural activities. Totally sixty respondents, six respondents each (3 farm men and 3 farm women) from five adopted villages i.e. Nigadi, Hebballi, Kawalgeri, Uppin Betageri, and Kanvi Honnapur of Dharwad district were selected to assess the suitability and acceptability of the designed protective clothing. Weighted mean score was calculated to find out the opinion of respondents. Assessment of protective clothing/accessories: Suitability performa: To assess the suitability of protective clothing, a detailed performa was developed. The performa included all the protective constructional features incorporated in the garments/ accessories and their characteristics. Suitability of protective constructional features were measured on three point rating scale i.e. highly suitable, suitable and somewhat suitable with a score of 3, 2, 1. Performa varied for each article because they had different constructional features which were incorporated in accordance to the problems. Acceptability index: Acceptability has been operationalized as mental readiness of the respondents for adoption of functional garments after the trials. The acceptability of functional garments was measured through statements on three point scale as agree, some what agree and disagree, scoring 2, 1 and zero, respectively. For the present study, a list of 19 statements was formulated with reference to four attributes of protective garments i.e. ease in dressing/ undressing, comfortability and safety during wear, ease 1. Beak mask 2. Cap with mask 3. Hood mask (Farm woman) Pleats Flap Seam Mask Canvas Stud A shape Pleats 4. Hood mask (Farm man) 2. Jacket with pant 3. Hand gloves Polo collar Pleats Mask Pocket opening Pocket Fig. a: Designed protective Clothing/Accessories Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 113
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FOR PESTICIDE APPLICATORS & OTHER AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES OF FARM FAMILIES in construction and maintenance and economical factors. Wear trial of protective clothing/accessories: Protective clothing/accessories were given to the selected respondents for three trials. The respondents were asked to wear the garment for eight hours, except for jacket and pant (three hours) during their working period. Then garments were washed by the workers and used for two more days. Calculation of weighted mean score (WMS): WMS (X w fw ) = N 1 where, f = frequency, w = weightage, N 1 = No. of respondents X Mean WMS = N 2 w where, X w = WMS of article, N 2 = No. of characteristics of article RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION It is evident from Table 1 that beak mask was found to be highly suitable for both farm men and women, as it protects from pesticide inhalation (2.3 and 2.47) and easy to wear (2.43 and 2.27) and remove (2.27 and 2.1). Cotton fabric used in the mask was found to be highly comfortable for breathing (2.4 and 2.37) and comfortable during wear (2.3 and 2.2). Baby elastic at the sides of mask to hold it in position on ears was also found to be suitable for farm men and women (2.33 and 2.37), respectively. However, mean WMS (2.34) revealed that the beak mask was highly suitable for both farm men and women pesticide applicators. Suitability of cap with mask : Cap with mask was highly suitable for both respondents i.e. farm men and women as it protects head from pesticide vapours (2.43 and 2.63) and pesticide inhalation (2.7 and 2.37), elastic of mask at nose portion is also comfortable (each 2.2) during wear (Table 2). The height (2.23 and 2.) and width (2.33 and 2.43) of mask was found to be highly suitable, the mask was easy to wear (2.27 and 2.37) and easy to remove (2.4 and 2.23). Studs at sides of mask to attach it to the cap were found to be more comfortable (2.3 and 2.23) for farm men and women, respectively. Further, it was found from the mean WMS that cap with mask was highly suitable for both farm men and women (2.33) while performing farm activities. Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 114
GEETA MAHALE, SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR Suitability of hood mask: Hood mask for farm men and women was found to be highly suitable as head cover of hosiery fabric protected head from pesticide vapours (2.77 M and 2.43 F), easy to wear (each 2.3) and remove (2.3 M and 2.47 F) and comfortable (2.4 M and 2.27 F). It was noticed that the mask was highly appreciated due to protection it provided to the skin from pesticide vapours (2.7 M and 2.67 F). Height of mask (2.3 M and 2.3 F) and width of mask (2.13 M and 2.2 F) used at nose and mouth level was found to be highly suitable. at nose portion in the mask (2.7 M and 2.43 F) and shape at bottom of head cover (each 2.47) was also highly comfortable (Table 3). The mean WMS (2.44) depicted that the hood mask was highly suitable for respondents of both categories during pesticide application. Suitability of hand gloves: Table 4 indicates that the hand gloves are suitable for respondents of both the categories during pesticide application and performing farm activities. It was highly suitable as it protects hand from cuts and wounds (2.7 and 2.), gloves are easy to wear (2.77 and 2.43) and remove (2.3 and 2.77); they do not feel hot (2.1 and 2.) and do not sweat (2.23 and 2.3) during wear. The height (2.43 and 2.6) and width of the gloves (2.3 and 2.17) were more suitable and by wearing gloves they can easily perform work (2.6 and 2.47). The shape of the gloves at wrist level was found to be highly suitable (2.37 and 2.23) and comfortable (2.3 and 2.43). Overall the mean WMS (2.42) depicted that both farm men and women accepted the developed hand gloves. Suitability of jacket with 1 per cent cotton fabric lining: The developed jacket with 1 per cent cotton fabric lining was highly accepted by farm men as it protects the neck (2.47) and arms (2.67) from pesticide vapours, it is easy to operate (2.47) due to front opening with zip, polo collar (2.47) and also comfortable for wearing (2.7). Pockets provided on both sides of opening for keeping other farm accessories or medicines were highly suitable scoring (2.4). The jacket can be worn for less than one hour (2.7) and moderately comfortable for two hours (2.3) and three hours (2.3) while it was found to be not suitable for six and eight hours. Its mean WMS revealed that it was highly suitable (2.4) for farm men during pesticide application (Table ). Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 11
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FOR PESTICIDE APPLICATORS & OTHER AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES OF FARM FAMILIES Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 116
GEETA MAHALE, SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR Table 6 depicts that pant designed for pesticide application had 1 per cent cotton fabric lining from foot to knee level. It was found to be highly suitable as it was easy to wear and remove (2.7 and 2.33) and elastic at waist level was comfortable (2.47). It was observed that less than one hour was highly comfortable (2.7) during wear and more than three hours was moderately comfortable (2.3) during wear. Meanwhile pant was not comfortable to wear for six and eight hours. However, mean WMS (2.4) revealed that it was highly suitable for farm workers. Table 7 and Fig. 1 depicts the acceptability extent of protective clothing/ accessories and the factors which affect their acceptance. The statement, designs of garment are so simple that person good at stitching can follow the designs was found to be acceptable to maximum number of respondents (1.1), followed by one must wear protective clothing /accessories to protect Table : Suitability of jacket with 1 per cent cotton fabric lining (N 1 = 3) Functional features of garment/accessories Front opening with zip Polo collar Full sleeves with elastic at wrist level Two pockets on both sides of opening Size of pockets Comfortable during wear Characteristics of functional features (N 2 ) Easy to operate Protects neck from pesticide vapors Comfortable Protects arms from pesticide vapors To keep farm accessories or medicine etc Appropriate Less than one hour One hour Two hour Three hour Six hours Eight hours * HS Highly suitable, S Suitable, SWS Somewwhat suitable, NS Not suitable Suitability score: 1. 1.66 : Somewhat suitable* 1.67 2.33 : Suitable** 2.34 3. : Highly suitable*** HS (3) 17 19 17 2 12 11 17 12 9 Frequency S SWS (2) (1) 1 6 13 1 18 14 13 17 21 21 3 1 4 NS () 3 3 Weighted mean score 2.47*** 2.47*** 2.7*** 2.67*** 2.4*** 2.2** 2.7*** 2.37*** 2.3*** 2.3**.. Mean WMS 2.4 Table 6: Suitability of pant with 1 per cent cotton fabric lining (N 1 = 3) Functional features of garment/accessories Characteristics of functional features N 2 Frequency Weighted mean score at bottom Easy to wear Easy to remove Comfortable HS (3) 22 13 18 S (2) 7 14 12 SWS (1) 1 3 NS () 2.7*** 2.33** 2.6*** at waist level Comfortable 18 8 4 2.47*** Comfortable during wear Less than one hour One hour Two hours Three hours Six hours Eight hours 21 11 9 1 23 21 4 2 4 3 3 2.7*** 2.23** 2.1** 2.3** Mean WMS 2.4*** * HS Highly suitable, S Suitable, SWS Somewhat suitable, NS Not suitable Suitability score: 1. 1.66 : Somewhat suitable* 1.67 2.33 : Suitable** 2.34 3. : Highly suitable***.. Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 117
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FOR PESTICIDE APPLICATORS & OTHER AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES OF FARM FAMILIES Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 118
GEETA MAHALE, SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR Acceptability score (percentage) 1.2 1.8.6.4.2 1 3 7 9 11 13 1 17 19 Acceptability score Males Females Fig. 1 : Acceptibility assessment of protective clothing/ accessories against health problems (.99), protective clothes and accessories are easy to wear and remove and can be washed and maintained easily (each.98), and protective clothing do not have adverse effect on the work efficiency (.97). Other factors found to be moderately accepted by the respondents were functional features/fasteners used in garments do not cause pinching (.9), protective clothing look attractive (.93), it is worth spending extra money on protective clothing even if they are not provided by the employers/person concerned (.89), I will suggest other fellows to adopt protective clothing (.83), it takes more time while wearing and removing protective clothes (.7), and protective clothing/ accessories seams unattractive (.4). There were very few respondents who did not like protective clothing / accessories as they were off the view with the statements that the garments are not comfortable due to functional features (.), the modified garments are protective but no need to adopt these if one is managing with the existing dress (.39). Some of the respondents opined that the washing and maintenance of protective clothing is difficult (.32), protective clothing should not be worn as these might get entangled while working (.29), it will be difficult to get these stitched due to their complicated designs and why to spend money as it is the responsibility of the employer/person concerned to supply it (each.28) and these garments should not be recommended because they are not useful (.26). Table 8 depicts the cost of designed protective clothing/accessories. Looking into the cost, beak mask was found to be less (Rs. 2.) for farm workers followed by hood mask for farm men and farm women (Rs. 29. and Rs. 27.) and hand gloves (Rs. 4./ pair). The cost of cap with mask was found to be Rs. Table 8: Cost of designed protective clothing/ accessories Sr. No. Protective clothing/ accessories Amount (Rs.) 1. Beak mask 2. 2. Cap with mask 1. 3. Hood mask Farm men 29. Farm women 27. 4. Hand gloves 4./pair. Jacket and pant (1% cotton fabric lining) 3. 1. because of the use of studs and jacket and pant cost was Rs. 3.. Conclusion: Irrespective of agricultural activities such as weeding, chickpea and cotton harvesting and pesticide applications, the designed protective clothing/accessories were found to be highly suitable and comfortable. The respondents also opined that the protective clothing / accessories did not have any adverse effect on their work and can be maintained easily. Further, the cost of these protective clothing/accessories was also found to be lower and the respondents were ready to adopt them during pesticide application and for other agricultural activities. Acknowledgement: We acknowledge our sincere thanks to Directorate of Research on Women in Agriculture, Bhubaneswar for the encouragement and financial support extended by them for the project. Authors affiliations: SHAMEEMBANU BYADGI AND RAJASHRI KOTUR, All India Coordinated Research Project on Clothing and Textiles, College of Rural Home Science, Univeristy of Agricultural Science, DHARWAD (KARNATAKA) INDIA REFERENCES Desai, A. (26). Safety and protective clothing. Indian Tex. J., 117 (2): 3 6. Geetha, R. and Jacob, M. (21). Protective clothing. Tex. Ind. Trade J., 39(3 & 4): 3842. Makkar, P., Jeet singh, S. S., Pruthi, N. and Rose, N.M. (28). Development of protective clothing for male farm workers. Tex. Trends, 1(6): 29 33. Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 119
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FOR PESTICIDE APPLICATORS & OTHER AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES OF FARM FAMILIES Tarafder, N. and Manna, S. (2). Applications, applicators and care of personal protective clothing. Manmade Tex. India, 8 (6): 236238. *** *********** *** Asian J. Home Sci. Dec., 211 Vol. 6 Issue 2 12