Previous Article in Journal
Ergonomic Risks for Ice Production Employees and Assessment of Their Occupational Health and Safety: A Case Study in Surat Thani, Thailand
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Biological Risk Knowledge and Occupational Safety Training: Testing the Threat Appraisal Pathway of Protection Motivation Theory in Healthcare

1
Department of Psychology, G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
2
Department of Occupational Medicine/Occupational Psychology, G. d’Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Safety 2026, 12(4), 89; https://doi.org/10.3390/safety12040089
Submission received: 5 May 2026 / Revised: 12 June 2026 / Accepted: 26 June 2026 / Published: 2 July 2026

Abstract

Sharps injuries and biological exposures remain a leading occupational safety risk in healthcare training environments. Preventing such injuries requires not only trainees’ declarative knowledge of biological hazards, but their threat appraisal—the cognitive process through which individuals evaluate personal risk and that motivates consistent adherence to standard precautions in practice. This cross-sectional study (N = 581) examined whether biological risk knowledge predicts cognitive threat appraisal in Italian health professions students surveyed prior to their first supervised clinical internship, and whether this relationship varies by gender. Drawing on Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), a multiple linear regression showed that biological risk knowledge significantly predicted personalized threat appraisal (β = 0.214, p < 0.001). Gender was also associated with threat appraisal, with female students reporting higher levels than male peers at equivalent knowledge levels (β = 0.184, p = 0.035). The overall model explained 16% of variance in threat appraisal (adjusted R2 = 0.150), indicating that mandatory pre-placement occupational safety training is associated with risk appraisal activation, but only partially, and that a causal interpretation requires longitudinal confirmation. These findings suggest that knowledge transmission alone is insufficient to reduce biological risk exposure in clinical settings: appraisal-activating components—including scenario-based learning and near-miss incident review—should be integrated into occupational safety curricula for health professions students, with attention to gender differences in risk perception.
Keywords: occupational safety training; biological risk; threat appraisal; risk perception; injury prevention; gender differences; occupational health occupational safety training; biological risk; threat appraisal; risk perception; injury prevention; gender differences; occupational health

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Galanti, T.; Santoriello, M.; Cortini, M.; Di Giampaolo, L. Biological Risk Knowledge and Occupational Safety Training: Testing the Threat Appraisal Pathway of Protection Motivation Theory in Healthcare. Safety 2026, 12, 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety12040089

AMA Style

Galanti T, Santoriello M, Cortini M, Di Giampaolo L. Biological Risk Knowledge and Occupational Safety Training: Testing the Threat Appraisal Pathway of Protection Motivation Theory in Healthcare. Safety. 2026; 12(4):89. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety12040089

Chicago/Turabian Style

Galanti, Teresa, Morena Santoriello, Michela Cortini, and Luca Di Giampaolo. 2026. "Biological Risk Knowledge and Occupational Safety Training: Testing the Threat Appraisal Pathway of Protection Motivation Theory in Healthcare" Safety 12, no. 4: 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety12040089

APA Style

Galanti, T., Santoriello, M., Cortini, M., & Di Giampaolo, L. (2026). Biological Risk Knowledge and Occupational Safety Training: Testing the Threat Appraisal Pathway of Protection Motivation Theory in Healthcare. Safety, 12(4), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety12040089

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop