The purpose of this study was to clarify the part difference of change of body fat in Japanese young women. Subjects were 142 healthy female university students who were living in a dormitory. In particular, 21 subjects who showed the remarkable increased percentage of total body fat were grouped as the increase group. 24 subjects who showed the remarkable decreased percentage of total body fat were grouped as the decrease group. Body weight, total and regional body fat and muscle volume were measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis method. Each item was measured for two times in June and December. The difference of change in the percentage of body fat of a trunk showed the highest value in parts of the body. The difference of change in the percentage of body fat of an arm was higher than that of a leg. From these results, the part difference existed to a change of the body fat. It was suggested that the part in which body fat tends to increase is the part in which it tends to decreases.
Aims Workplace safety climate has garnered attention as a factor encouraging organizational error management. We aimed to devise an instrument to measure this climate and examine the instrument’s reliability and validity for hospital nurses. We also examined the association between this instrument and work environment, behavior, mental health, and nurses’ attributes. Methods The participants were hospital nurses in a public hospital in Japan. We conducted a survey involving a self-administered questionnaire. The survey items were about the workplace safety climate and various other parameters of the work environment, behavior, and mental health. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed for instrument validation ; internal consistency and item-total (I-T) correlation analyses were also performed. The factors relating to the workplace safety climate were examined by Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients, one-way ANOVA, and t-test. Results The workplace safety climate scale was supported by a five-factor structure. Confirmatory factor analysis of a partially revised model resulted in a 0.917 CFI and a 0.067 RMSEA, indicating a good fit. The workplace safety climate scale was negatively correlated with experiences of incidents not being reported and mental health. Conclusion The workplace safety climate scale was shown to be a valid and reliable instrument. This study suggested that a healthy workplace safety climate may reduce deleterious behaviors and help improve mental health.