Penelitian ini membahas efektivitas program PT. X dalam perlindungan kesehatan saluran pernapasan pegawainya akibat pajanan PM2,5 di ruangan kantor ketika periode kabut asap kebakaran hutan dan lahan (karhutla). Dengan pendekatan kuantitatif deskriptif, efektivitas program dievaluasi dengan membandingkan tingkat konsentrasi PM2,5 dalam gedung kantor, dan jumlah keluhan saluran pernapasan akut subyektif okupan ketika Periode Asap dan Periode Nonasap. Uji statistik menunjukkan terdapat perbedaan median konsentrasi PM2,5 di area kerja antara Periode Asap dan Nonasap. Disimpulkan program pengendalian area kerja yang mencakup isolasi dan penggunaan penjernih udara tidak efektif dalam mengendalikan PM2,5 di Kantor Z Riau ketika periode kabut asap. Tidak efektifnya pengendalian area kerja memberi risiko kesehatan atas pajanan PM2,5 terhadap pegawai di Kantor Z Riau. Hal ini terkonfirmasi dengan hasil uji statistik bahwa terdapat perbedaan keluhan pernapasan akut okupan yang signifikan antara ketika Periode Asap dan Nonasap. Disimpulkan bahwa program perlindungan kesehatan pegawai PT. X ketika kabut asap tidak berjalan efektif. Penelitian ini menyarankan PT. X menetapkan dan melakukan pemantauan target indikator keberhasilan program, dan fokus pada pembentukan perilaku selamat pegawai ketika periode asap. Penelitian ini juga menyarankan pemerintah mempertegas intervensi pencegahan dan tanggap karhutla, serta memutakhirkan BMUA PM2,5 agar selaras dengan Panduan Kualitas Udara dari WHO (2006).
The focus of this study is to evaluate effectiveness of PT. X’s employees health protection program during haze period due to PM 2.5 exposure at office. Quantitative-descriptive approach is used to evaluate the program effectiveness by comparing each variable of PM 2.5 concentration at work area, and office worker’s (occupant) acute respiratory complaints between Haze and Nonhaze Periods. Statistic test result shows significant difference for PM 2.5 median, and acute respiratory complaints between both periods. It concludes PT. X’s program to control PM 2.5 indoor concentration through isolation and air purifier is ineffective. It impacts to occupant’s health risk for exposed with PM 2.5 at office work area, which confirmed with statistic difference for acute respiratory complaints between Haze and Nonhaze Periods. It concludes PT. X’s Program in Z Office Riau is not effective to prevent acute respiratory complaints. This research suggests PT. X to set and monitor performance indicator target of each program, and to focus to improve safe behavior of its workers as mitigation during haze. This research also suggest government to enforce forest fire prevention and response, and to update ambient air quality standard for PM 2.5 to be aligned with WHO Air Quality Guideline (2006).