An investigation of ergonomics analysis tools used in industry in the identification of work-related musculoskeletal disorders

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 237-245

  Pascual, Silvia A ^a   Naqvi, Syed ^a,b  

^a Centres de sante des travailleurs ses de I'Ontario   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Ergonomics analysis tools; Joint health and safety committees; Surveys, certified ergonomists

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANADA; CUMULATIVE TRAUMA DISORDER; HUMAN; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SAFETY; TASK PERFORMANCE;

CANADA; CUMULATIVE TRAUMA DISORDERS; HUMANS; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES; QUESTIONNAIRES; SAFETY MANAGEMENT; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 54049138877     PISSN: 10803548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2008.11076755     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Andersson ER. Economic evaluation of ergonomic solutions: part I—guidelines for the practitioner. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992: (10):161-71.
2. Workers Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB). 2001 Annual Report. Toronto, ON, Canada: WSIB.
3. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board of Ontario. Statistical Supplement to the 2003 Annual Report. Retrieved January 29, 2008, from: http://www.wsib.on.ca/wsib/wsibsite.nsf/LookupFiles/DownloadableFile2003St atSupp/$File/StatSupp03.pdf
4. Chengalur SN, Rodgers SH, Bernard TE. Kodak’s ergonomic design for people at work. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley; 2004.
5. Snook SH, Ciriello VM. The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics. 1991;34(9):1197-213.
6. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Threshold limit values and biological exposure indicesfor 2001. Cincinnati, OH, USA: ACGIH; 2001.
7. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). 2004 threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents & biological exposure indices. Cincinnati, OH, USA: ACGIH; 2004.
8. Washington State Department of Labour Industries. Hazard zone jobs checklist. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://www.lni.wa.gov/wisha/ergo/evaltools/HazardZoneChecklist.PDF
9. Waters TR, Putz-Anderson, V, Garg A, Fine LJ. Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics. 1993;36(7):749-76.
10. Moore JS, Garg A. The strain index: a proposed method to analyze jobs for risk of distal upper extremity disorders. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1995;56(5):443-58.
11. Dempsey PG, McGorry RW, Maynard WS. A survey of tools and methods used by certified professional ergonomists. Appl Ergon. 2005;36:489-503.
12. Brodie D, Wells R. An evaluation of the utility of three ergonomics checklists for predicting health outcomes in a carmanufacturing environment. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Human Factors Association of Canada, Mississauga, ON, Canada: Human Factors Association of Canada; 1997. p. 45–52.
13. Waters TR, Baron SL, Kemmlert K. Accuracy of measurements for the revised NIOSH lifting equation. Appl Ergon. 1998;29(6):433-38.
14. Lavender SA, Oleske DM, Nicholson L, Andersson GBJ, Hahn J. 1999. Comparison of five methods used to determine low back disorders in a manufacturing environment. Spine. 1999;24(14):1441-8.
15. Marras WS, Fine LJ, Ferguson SA, Waters TR. The effectiveness of commonly used lifting assessment methods to identify industrial jobs associated with elevated risk of low-back disorders. Ergonomics. 1999; 41(1):229-45.
16. Government of Ontario (Canada). Occupational Health and Safety Act. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90o01_e.htm
17. Mital A, Nicholson A, Ayoub M. A guide to manual materials handling. 2nd ed. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1997.
18. McAtamney L, Corlett EN. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Appl Ergon. 1993;24(2):91-9.
19. Hignett S, McAtamney L. Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Appl Ergon. 2000;31(2):201-5.
20. Tampere University of Technology. Win OWAS. A computerized system for the analysis of work postures. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://turva1.me.tut.fi/owas/
21. Kilbom Å. Repetitive work of the upper extremities. Part I—guidelines for the practitioner. Int J Ind Ergon. 1994;14:51-7.
22. Kilbom Å. Repetitive work of the upper extremities. Part II—the scientific basis (knowledge base) for the guide. Int J Ind Ergon. 1994;14:59-86.
23. Buchholz B, Paquet V, Punnett L, Lee D, Moir S. PATH: a work sampling-based approach to ergonomic job analysis for construction and other non-repetitive work. Appl Ergon. 1996;27(3):177-87.
24. Ontario Ministry of Labour. Computer ergonomics: workstation layout and lighting. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/pdf/gl_comp_erg.pdf
25. Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. Calculator for analyzing lifting operations. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://www.lni.wa.gov/wisha/ergo/evaltools/ergocalc.pdf
26. Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation. Ergonomic risk factor measurement form. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from: http://www.ohiobwc.com/employer/programs/safety/ErgoTools.asp
27. Wells R, Norman R, Frazer M, Laing A. Research at work. Ergonomics program. Implementation blueprint. Waterloo, ON, Canada: University of Waterloo; 2000. Retrieved August 3, 2007, from: http://www.ergonomics.uwaterloo.ca/bprint.html