Reliable exposure assessment strategies for physical ergonomics stressors in construction and other non-routinized work

The objective of this research was to provide guidelines for the reliable assessment of ergonomics exposures in non-routinized work. Using a discrete-interval observational sampling approach, two or three observers collected a total of 5852 observations on tasks performed by three construction trades (iron workers, carpenters and labourers) for periods of several weeks. For each observation, nine exposure variables associated with awkward body postures, tool use and load handling were recorded. The frequency of exposure to each variable was calculated for each worker during each of the tasks on each of the days. ANOVA was used to assess the importance of task in explaining between-worker and within-worker variability in exposures across days. A statistical re-sampling method (bootstrap) was used to evaluate the reliability of exposure estimates for groups of workers performing the same task for different sampling periods. Most exposures were found to vary significantly across construction tasks within trade, and between-worker exposure variability was generally smaller than within-worker exposure variability within task. Bootstrapping showed that the reliability of the group estimates exposure for the most variable exposures within task tended to improve as the assessment periods approached 5 – 6 d, with marginal improvements for longer assessment periods. Reliable group estimates of exposure for the least variable exposures within task were obtained with 1 or 2 d of observation. The results of this study demonstrate that an initial estimate of the important environmental or task sources of exposure variability can be used to develop an efficient sampling strategy that provides reliable estimates of ergonomics exposures during non-routinized work.     

Work routinization and implications for ergonomic exposure assessment

Jobs in many modern settings, including manufacturing, service, agriculture and construction, are variable in their content and timing. This prompts the need for exposure assessment methods that do not assume regular work cycles. A scheme is presented for classifying levels of routinization to inform development of an appropriate exposure assessment strategy for a given occupational setting. Five levels of routinization have been defined based on the tasks of which the job is composed: 1) a single scheduled task with a regular work cycle; 2) multiple cyclical tasks; 3) a mix of cyclical and non-cyclical tasks; 4) one non-cyclical task; 5) multiple non-cyclical tasks. This classification, based primarily on job observation, is illustrated through data from a study of automobile manufacturing workers (n = 1200), from which self-assessed exposures to physical and psychosocial stressors were also obtained. In this cohort, decision latitude was greater with higher routinization level (p < 0.0001), and the least routinized jobs showed the lowest self-reported exposure to physical ergonomic stressors. The job analysis checklist developed for non-routinized jobs is presented, and limitations of the task analysis method utilized in the study are discussed. A work sampling approach to job analysis is recommended as the most efficient way to obtain a comparable unbiased exposure estimate across all routinization levels.     

Reliability and validity of the Home Care STAT (Safety Task Assessment Tool)

Home care workers are a priority population for ergonomic assessment and intervention, but research on caregivers' exposures to hazards is limited. The current project evaluated the reliability and validity of an ergonomic self-assessment tool called Home Care STAT (Safety Task Assessment Tool). Participants (N = 23) completed a background survey followed by 10–14 days of self-monitoring with the STAT. Results showed that the most frequent task was house cleaning, and that participants regularly performed dangerous manual client moving and transferring tasks. Researcher in-home observations of 14 workers (duration ≤2 h) demonstrated that workers' self-assessments were moderately reliable. Correlational and multi-level analyses of daily self-assessment data revealed that several task exposures were significantly related to daily fatigue and/or pain. Other associations have implications for Total Worker Health™; for example, daily stress was positively associated with both pain and consumption of high calorie snacks. Findings support the STAT as a reliable and potentially valid tool for measuring home care workers' exposures to physically demanding tasks.     

Assessing the ergonomic exposures for drywall workers

Objective

The study was conducted to assess the ergonomic exposures to risk factors that may lead to the reported musculoskeletal injuries (especially back, neck and wrist injuries) of drywall workers.

Methods

A hierarchical taxonomy for construction of drywall panel hanging (drywall panel fitting and installation) was developed with activities defined within the interior wall systems tasks (drywall panel, studs and insulation). Exposures were characterized for the drywall panel work with the PATH (Posture, Activity, Tools, and Handling) work-sampling observation method. Data on working postures were collected for three main body parts: legs, arms and trunk. Activities performed for each task, tools used, and manually handled loads were also recorded for each observation.

Results

The study identified several ergonomic exposures in interior systems construction. Several risk factors were especially prevalent in the drywall panel installation task: awkward body postures such as overhead arm posture, trunk flexion, and handling of heavy drywall panels. Some tasks were observed to have combinations of these musculoskeletal risk factors, such as drywall panel installation, where the workers lifted heavy drywall panels in awkward body postures. In addition, a safety hazard frequently resulted when a worker's foot was poorly supported on a ladder while lifting heavy drywall panels to hang them on the ceiling or upper wall.

Conclusion

The drywall panel installation task poses a severe threat to the safety and musculoskeletal health of the drywall workers. Much of this could be eliminated by reducing the burden of handling heavy and bulky drywall panels.

Relevance to industry

The construction industry is well-documented to have high rates of injury and musculoskeletal disorders. Design of appropriate interventions requires specific knowledge of which tasks and activities involve the highest levels of exposure to relevant factors. Assessment of such factors in drywall panel hanging has provided data that will be useful to evaluate the ergonomics efficacy of future changes in task processes or tools. Feasible solutions appear to exist; effectiveness trials and worker input are needed in order to evaluate whether they could eliminate the observed exposures.     

Inter-rater reliability of an observation-based ergonomics assessment checklist for office workers

Objectives: To establish the inter-rater reliability of an observation-based ergonomics assessment checklist for computer workers. Methods: A 37-item (38-item if a laptop was part of the workstation) comprehensive observational ergonomics assessment checklist comparable to government guidelines and up to date with empirical evidence was developed. Two trained practitioners assessed full-time office workers performing their usual computer-based work and evaluated the suitability of workstations used. Practitioners assessed each participant consecutively. The order of assessors was randomised, and the second assessor was blinded to the findings of the first. Unadjusted kappa coefficients between the raters were obtained for the overall checklist and subsections that were formed from question-items relevant to specific workstation equipment. Results: Twenty-seven office workers were recruited. The inter-rater reliability between two trained practitioners achieved moderate to good reliability for all except one checklist component. Conclusions: This checklist has mostly moderate to good reliability between two trained practitioners.

Practitioner Summary: This reliable ergonomics assessment checklist for computer workers was designed using accessible government guidelines and supplemented with up-to-date evidence. Employers in Queensland (Australia) can fulfil legislative requirements by using this reliable checklist to identify and subsequently address potential risk factors for work-related injury to provide a safe working environment.     

Work-related musculoskeletal complaints: some ergonomics challenges upon the start of a new century

Three themes likely to be important within health-related ergonomics in the coming years are discussed. The first two themes concern methods for risk analysis of low-level biomechanical and psychosocial exposures. The third theme is approaches to successful implementation of ergonomics interventions. Evidence on the assessment of low-level biomechanical and psychosocial exposures by instrumented measurements is discussed. It is concluded that, despite recent advances in our understanding of exposure-effect associations under these exposure conditions, we must at present rely on more subjective methods, employed in a collaboration between expert and worker. This approach to risk analysis identifies in most cases critical exposures in a work situation. The focus should then be on the successful implementation of measures against those exposures, as identification alone does not solve problems. The aim of improved health for the workers further requires that the full complement of risk factors be considered, including work, leisure time and person-based risk factors. Finally, the need to put ergonomics intervention initiatives in an organisational context is emphasised, and examples of approaches used by Norwegian companies are presented.     

Equal task,equal exposure? Are men and women with the same tasks equally exposed to awkward working postures?

The aim of the study was to determine whether men and woman with equal tasks perform these tasks in the same way. Video recordings of 37 male and 43 female workers in six task groups were observed, from which data regarding frequency and duration of exposure to awkward postures were derived. These data were also compared to self-reported exposures. The results showed that when level, duration and frequency of exposure were analysed at the same time, men and women had slightly different exposure patterns. However, these differences were not found when duration and frequency were analysed separately. From the questionnaires it appeared that men and women generally report similar exposures, but they seemed to over-report their exposure compared to the observed exposures. It is concluded that gender differences in exposure to awkward postures within the same task were small at most and cannot explain the female excess in musculoskeletal symptoms.     

Medium- and long-term reproducibility of self-reported exposure to physical ergonomics factors at work

INTRODUCTION: The literature is sparse on reproducibility of self-reported exposure to physical ergonomics risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Aims of this study were to evaluate, in a cohort of workers interviewed up to three times: 1-year test-retest reliability; and 5- and 6-year recall of physical exposures. We also examined whether reproducibility was influenced by the presence of UE MSD or by technological changes introduced between the last two surveys. METHODS: A cohort of automobile manufacturing employees was interviewed at baseline, one and six years later about work history, physical and psychosocial exposures at work, upper limb symptoms, injury and medical history, and demographics. Agreement between interviews was evaluated by intraclass correlation and Spearman coefficients. Differences in exposure between 1- and 6-year follow-up were analyzed by Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test. RESULTS: Large and significant decreases in work pace and physical effort were observed from baseline, although an upper extremity composite index was quite stable in the total population. One-year test-retest reliability was fair to good for the composite exposure index (ICC=0.58), whole-body vibration, handling parts, and tool use, but poor for the other variables considered. Long-term reproducibility, from baseline or 1-year follow-up to 6-year follow-up, was poor for the composite index and almost all single items. UE MSD case status influenced 1-year test-retest reliability, with subjects who changed case status from baseline displaying higher reliability, but not reproducibility of recalled exposures. A strong regression to the mean effect was observed on exposures reported at follow-up surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Recalled ergonomics exposures could be employed in retrospective cohort studies as a somewhat reliable and unbiased estimate of the self-reported exposures that would have been obtained up to one year earlier, but not over a longer period (5-6 years). These longer-term results may have been limited by difficulty in matching jobs between interviews; also the regression to the mean effect likely contributed to reduce agreement. Changes in production technology and work organization produced a decrease in physical workload intensity and job pace, but did not have a substantial impact on an exposure index for the upper limb.     

Task exposures in an office environment: a comparison of methods

Task-related factors such as frequency and duration are associated with musculoskeletal disorders in office settings. The primary objective was to compare various task recording methods as measures of exposure in an office workplace. A total of 41 workers from different jobs were recruited from a large urban newspaper (71% female, mean age 41 years SD 9.6). Questionnaire, task diaries, direct observation and video methods were used to record tasks. A common set of task codes was used across methods. Different estimates of task duration, number of tasks and task transitions arose from the different methods. Self-report methods did not consistently result in longer task duration estimates. Methodological issues could explain some of the differences in estimates seen between methods observed. It was concluded that different task recording methods result in different estimates of exposure likely due to different exposure constructs. This work addresses issues of exposure measurement in office environments. It is of relevance to ergonomists/researchers interested in how to best assess the risk of injury among office workers. The paper discusses the trade-offs between precision, accuracy and burden in the collection of computer task-based exposure measures and different underlying constructs captures in each method.     

The benefits of an additional worker are task-dependent: assessing low-back injury risks during prefabricated (panelized) wall construction

Team manual material handling is a common practice in residential construction where prefabricated building components (e.g., wall panels) are increasingly used. As part of a larger effort to enable proactive control of ergonomic exposures among workers handling panels, this study explored the effects of additional workers on injury risks during team-based panel erection tasks, specifically by quantifying how injury risks are affected by increasing the number of workers (by one, above the nominal or most common number). Twenty-four participants completed panel erection tasks with and without an additional worker under different panel mass and size conditions. Four risk assessment methods were employed that emphasized the low back. Though including an additional worker generally reduced injury risk across several panel masses and sizes, the magnitude of these benefits varied depending on the specific task and exhibited somewhat high variability within a given task. These results suggest that a simple, generalizable recommendation regarding team-based panel erection tasks is not warranted. Rather, a more systems-level approach accounting for both injury risk and productivity (a strength of panelized wall systems) should be undertaken.     

Quantifying tasks,ergonomic exposures and injury rates among school custodial workers

A job exposure matrix of ergonomics risk factors was constructed for school custodial workers in one large school district in the province of British Columbia using 100 h of 1-min fixed-interval observations, participatory worker consensus on task durations and existing employment and school characteristic data. Significant differences in ergonomics risk factors were found by tasks and occupations. Cleaning and moving furniture, handling garbage, cleaning washrooms and cleaning floors were associated with the most physical risks and the exposure was often higher during the summer vs. the school year. Injury rates over a 4-year period showed the custodian injury rate was four times higher than the overall injury rate across all occupations in the school district. Injury rates were significantly higher in the school year compared with summer (12.2 vs. 7.0 per 100 full-time equivalents per year, p < 0.05). Custodial workers represent a considerable proportion of the labour force and have high injury rates, yet ergonomic studies are disproportionately few. Previous studies that quantified risk factors in custodial workers tended to focus on a few tasks or specific risk factors. This study, using participatory ergonomics and observational methods, systematically quantifies the broad range of musculoskeletal risk factors across multiple tasks performed by custodial workers in schools, adding considerably to the methodological literature.     

Exploring physical exposures and identifying high-risk work tasks within the floor layer trade

Introduction

Floor layers have high rates of musculoskeletal disorders yet few studies have examined their work exposures. This study used observational methods to describe physical exposures within floor laying tasks.

Methods

We analyzed 45 videos from 32 floor layers using Multimedia-Video Task Analysis software to determine the time in task, forces, postures, and repetitive hand movements for installation of four common flooring materials. We used the WISHA checklists to define exposure thresholds.

Results

Most workers (91%) met the caution threshold for one or more exposures. Workers showed high exposures in multiple body parts with variability in exposures across tasks and for different materials. Prolonged exposures were seen for kneeling, poor neck and low back postures, and intermittent but frequent hand grip forces.

Conclusions

Floor layers experience prolonged awkward postures and high force physical exposures in multiple body parts, which probably contribute to their high rates of musculoskeletal disorders.     

Reliability of physiological and subjective responses to physical and psychosocial exposures during a simulated manufacturing task

Responses to physical and psychosocial exposures can be measured using diverse methods, but their reliability, particularly under multiple exposures, is largely unknown. Five classes of methods were used to assess physiological and subjective responses among 24 participants to four combinations of physical and psychosocial exposures while performing two identical sessions of a simulated overhead manufacturing task. As an exploratory analysis, test–retest reliability was quantified using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and coefficients of variation (CV). Discomfort ratings were reliable under less favorable exposures, and ratings of the psychosocial environment were most reliable under favorable social support. Workload ratings were most reliable with high physical exposure and favorable social support, and task performance was reliable overall. EMG and heart rate had relatively low reliability. Slightly less than half of the variables were considered reliable, but reliability depended on exposure conditions.Relevance to industry: The study provides information on the reliability of commonly used exposure measurement methods. The results can guide the selection of physiological and psychological work outcome measurements in future studies and work evaluations.     

Pilot task-based assessment of noise levels among firefighters

Purpose

Over one million American firefighters are routinely exposed to various occupational hazards. While efforts have been made to identify and reduce some causes of injuries and illnesses among firefighters, relatively little has been done to evaluate and understand occupational noise exposures in this group. The purpose of this pilot study was to apply a task-based noise exposure assessment methodology to firefighting operations to evaluate potential noise exposure sources, and to use collected task-based noise levels to create noise exposure estimates for evaluation of risk of noise-induced hearing loss by comparison to the 8-hr and 24-hr recommended exposure limits (RELs) for noise of 85 and 80.3 dBA, respectively.

Methods

Task-based noise exposures (n = 100 measurements) were measured in three different fire departments (a rural department in Southeast Michigan and suburban and urban departments in Northern California). These levels were then combined with time-at-task information collected from firefighters to estimate 8-hr noise exposures for the rural and suburban fire departments (n = 6 estimates for each department). Data from 24-hr dosimetry measurements and crude self-reported activity categories from the urban fire department (n = 4 measurements) were used to create 24-hr exposure estimates to evaluate the bias associated with the task-based estimates.

Results

Task-based noise levels were found to range from 82 to 109 dBA, with the highest levels resulting from use of saws and pneumatic chisels. Some short (e.g., 30 min) sequences of common tasks were found to result in nearly an entire allowable daily exposure. The majority of estimated 8-hr and 24-hr exposures exceeded the relevant recommended exposure limit. Predicted 24-hr exposures showed substantial imprecision in some cases, suggesting the need for increased task specificity and highlighting the variability of firefighting noise exposures.

Conclusions

The results indicate potential for overexposure to noise from a variety of firefighting tasks and equipment, and suggest a need for further exposure characterization and additional hearing loss prevention efforts.

Relevance to industry

Firefighters may be at risk of noise-induced hearing loss, which can affect their fitness for duty and ability to respond effectively to emergencies. The results of this study suggest that additional efforts at hearing loss prevention among firefighters are warranted.     

A preliminary assessment of physical work exposures among electronic waste workers at Agbogbloshie,Accra Ghana

Occupational exposure associated with unstructured, informal e-waste recycling has received very limited attention. This study aimed to quantify the occupational physical exposures among informal e-waste workers at the largest e-waste site in Africa.A cross-sectional field survey of 163 male e-waste workers was conducted using a self-report occupational physical activity questionnaire, along with direct work observations, and pedometer estimates of walking activity for a subset of workers (n = 42).Results indicated significant differences in self-reported 7-day work exposures among the three main e-waste job categories, namely, collectors (n = 70), dismantlers (n = 73) and burners (n = 20). Prolonged walking, sitting and standing on five or more days in the workweek was frequently reported by collectors (87%), dismantlers (82%) and burners (60%), respectively. Nearly 90% of collectors and burners and 60% of dismantlers reported lifting and carrying on five or more days in the workweek.The exposure combinations identified suggest a risk for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Findings call attention to the need for research examining potential associations between physical exposures and MSDs affecting e-waste workers in Agbogbloshie. The high exposure variability both between and within workers has implications for future exposure assessments conducted in unregulated, informal work settings.     

The ability of non-computer tasks to increase biomechanical exposure variability in computer-intensive office work

Postures and muscle activity in the upper body were recorded from 50 academics office workers during 2 hours of normal work, categorised by observation into computer work (CW) and three non-computer (NC) tasks (NC seated work, NC standing/walking work and breaks). NC tasks differed significantly in exposures from CW, with standing/walking NC tasks representing the largest contrasts for most of the exposure variables. For the majority of workers, exposure variability was larger in their present job than in CW alone, as measured by the job variance ratio (JVR), i.e. the ratio between min–min variabilities in the job and in CW. Calculations of JVRs for simulated jobs containing different proportions of CW showed that variability could, indeed, be increased by redistributing available tasks, but that substantial increases could only be achieved by introducing more vigorous tasks in the job, in casu illustrated by cleaning.     

A randomized and controlled trial of a participative ergonomics intervention to reduce injuries associated with manual tasks: physical risk and legislative compliance

A participative ergonomics approach to reducing injuries associated with manual tasks is widely promoted; however only limited evidence from uncontrolled trials has been available to support the efficacy of such an approach. This paper reports on a randomized and controlled trial of PErforM, a participative ergonomics intervention designed to reduce the risks of injury associated with manual tasks. One hundred and seventeen small to medium sized food, construction, and health workplaces were audited by government inspectors using a manual tasks risk assessment tool (ManTRA). Forty-eight volunteer workplaces were then randomly assigned to Experimental and Control groups with the Experimental group receiving the PErforM program. Inspectors audited the workplaces again, 9 months following the intervention. The results showed a significant decrease in estimates of manual task risk and suggested better legal compliance in the Experimental group.     

Validity of self-assessed reports of occurrence and duration of occupational tasks

To obtain quantitative estimates of the physical workload in epidemiological and intervention studies of musculoskeletal disorders, there is a need to extend task based exposure data to job exposure profiles. For this purpose a work task diary was developed and evaluated. This was validated against direct observations of a day's work for twenty-two female office workers and twenty female hospital cleaners. There was a good agreement regarding the occurrence of the main tasks. However, the less time-consuming tasks were under-reported. Moreover, about two thirds of the changes between tasks were not reported. The difficulties of defining tasks that function as occupational entities seems to be a major reason for the lack of agreement. The underestimation of the duration of breaks/pauses was most pronounced for the cleaners. Still, the diary would be useful for the calculation of job exposure, by time-weighting task exposure data, when the tasks and/or their duration vary between days.     

A randomized and controlled trial of a participative ergonomics intervention to reduce injuries associated with manual tasks: physical risk and legislative compliance

A participative ergonomics approach to reducing injuries associated with manual tasks is widely promoted; however only limited evidence from uncontrolled trials has been available to support the efficacy of such an approach. This paper reports on a randomized and controlled trial of PErforM, a participative ergonomics intervention designed to reduce the risks of injury associated with manual tasks. One hundred and seventeen small to medium sized food, construction, and health workplaces were audited by government inspectors using a manual tasks risk assessment tool (ManTRA). Forty-eight volunteer workplaces were then randomly assigned to Experimental and Control groups with the Experimental group receiving the PErforM program. Inspectors audited the workplaces again, 9 months following the intervention. The results showed a significant decrease in estimates of manual task risk and suggested better legal compliance in the Experimental group.