1
ConferenceProceedings
ACE-CROSH2018
49thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists
(ACE)
6thConferenceoftheCentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth(CROSH)
Sudbury,ON
October15-18,2018
2
ConferenceOrganizingCommittee ConferenceScientificCommitteeNatalieCarscaddenRonCarscaddenDr.SandraDormanDr.TammyEgerDr.AlisonGodwinPatriciaHopeCalebLeducPegScherzingerBrandonVance
NatalieCarscaddenDr.SandraDormanDr.JanessaDrakeDr.TammyEgerDr.DominiqueGagnonDr.AlisonGodwinKatieGogginsDr.MikeHolmesPatriciaHopeHeatherJohnstonCalebLeducDr.MallorieLeducDr.BrentLieversTrevorSchellPegScherzingerDr.KathrynSindenBrandonVance
ReferenceforConferenceProceedingsAuthor(s).TitleofPaper.In:Proceedingsofthe49thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(ACE)and6thConferenceoftheCentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth(CROSH);2018Oct15-18;Sudbury,Ontario.
3
TableofContents
KEYNOTEPAPERS....................................................................................................................6Humanfactorsforthefutureworkforce-NeilMansfield....................................................................................7Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifiéesparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsd’apprentissage-MarieLaberge.........11WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?-RichardGasaway..........................................15Reapingwhatwesow:Engagingworkersandstakeholdersinagriculturalhealthresearch-CatherineTrask...................................................................................................................................................................16
WORKSHOPS...........................................................................................................................21Howtointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocess-JudyVillage&PatrickNeumann................................................................................................................................................................................22ApplyingforCertificationwithCCCPEandMaintainingCertification-TanyaMorose.......................24ApplyingAdultlearningPrinciples:EnsuringsuccesstoyourH&Seducationandtrainingsessions-NatalieCarscadden&VanceMcPherson..............................................................................................25OfficeErgonomics2018:UnpackingtheNewCSAZ412Standard-LucyHart......................................26DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario-RichardWells.............................................27MovingfromLabtoIndustry:Howtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptability-AllisonStephens.................................................................................................................................................................................28Canergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?-Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients-TrevorSchell.........................................................................................................................................................................29
PAPERSESSION1:PHYSIOLOGY......................................................................................30Évaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelative-IgorZovilé.................................................................31Contraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempératureambiante-DenisMarchand...............................................................................................................................................................................33TheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry-AlexieDennie..........................................................................................35
INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION..........................................................................................37Theevolutionofwearableassessmentdevicesinergonomics-MicheleOliver.....................................37
PAPERSESSION2:MANUALMATERIALSHANDLING................................................39Balancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategy-HarrisonKloke....................................................40Theeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasks-AlisonMcDonald................................................................................................................................................................................42Physiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitude-TiannaBeharriell...............................................................................................................................................................................44
PAPERSESSION3:OFFICEERGONOMICS......................................................................46ChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealOfficeenvironments:Impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariations-NancyBlack...................................................................................................................................47
4
Automatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensors-DanielViggiani....................................................................................................................................................................49MatchingPosturalStateSequenceswithFatigueandPainExperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandSit-StandWorkstations-NancyBlack.......................................................................51Anevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemands-KaylaFewster.........................53
PAPERSESSION4:APPLIEDCASESTUDIES..................................................................55DoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?-AllisonStephens....................................56Oneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers–isachairtheanswer?-KristinaZucchiatti.58DevelopingPhysicalDemandsDescriptionsFromJobSimulations-NicholasPatrick.......................60
INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION..........................................................................................62AppliedFieldResearchUsingField-Lab-Field(F2L2F)Approach-SandraDorman...........................62
PAPERSESSION5:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE....................................................63Estimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudy-CarolynnKallitsis......................................................................................................................64Caregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices-JimPotvin...............................................................................................................................................................................66
PAPERSESSION6:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–UNDERGRADUATEANDMASTERS..................................................................................................................................68Theimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstroller-JacquelineToner...................................................................................................................................69Designandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandling-ErikaZiraldo................................................................71Eliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearch-CourtneyNickel..................................73CanSeatPanDesignMitigateLowerLimbSwellingandBackPain?-MatthewBarrett....................75CareerFirefighters’real-timephysiologicalResponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:Implicationsforinjuryprevention-SaraSayed...................................................................................................77
INTERACTIVELECTURE......................................................................................................79Flawedsituationalawareness:astealthkillerintheworkplace-RichardGasaway...........................79
PAPERSESSION7:MOBILEEQUIPMENT.......................................................................80ForensicErgonomics:LineofSightandVisibilityAssessmentinCriticalInjuryandFatality‘Struck-by’Investigations;ACaseStudy-KevinGillespie.................................................................................81Efficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perception&safety-HeatherKahle..................................................83Documentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies-AlyssaBrunton.................................................................................................................................................85InvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod-AmandeepSingh..................................................................................................................................................................87
PAPERSESSION8:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–PHDANDPOST-DOCTORALFELLOWS..................................................................................................................................89Chairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstanding-MikeGlinka............................................................................................................................................................................90
5
Anatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudediffferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposure-KatieGoggins.................................................................................................................................................92Theinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks-ColinMcKinnon.............................................................................................................94
PAPERSESSION9:GENERALERGONOMICS..................................................................96Egresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffalls-BehzadBashiri...............................97Vibrationtoolkit:developmentandevaluationofanoccupationalhealtheducationinterventionfocusedonvibrationexposureinmining-MallorieLeduc..............................................................................99TheEffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort-CoreyBouwmeester........................................................................................................................................................101
PAPERSESSION10:GENERALERGONOMICS............................................................103Ergonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladders-PegScherzinger......................................................................................104‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustry-HeatherKahle.....................................106Field-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchards-OrnwipaThamsuwan.....................................................................................................................................108Evaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones-CyrusLee.................................................................................................110
PAPERSESSION11:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE..............................................112Medicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorperceptions-AmyDoan..............................................113Quantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresduringmanualpillcrushing-NicholasLaDelfa............................115Thefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)-JosieBlake...........................................................................................................................................................................117Casestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation-RyanSmiley................................119
INDEXOFAUTHORS..........................................................................................................121
6
KEYNOTEPAPERSDay2–Oct16th
09:00-10:15
KeynoteLecture:“HumanFactorsfortheFutureWorkforce”**Prof.NeilMansfield,PhDHeadofEngineering,NottinghamTrentUniversityPresident,CharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactors
13:00-14:15
KeynoteLecture:“Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifié.esparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsd’apprentissage”**Dr.MarieLaberge,PhDProfesseureagrégée,Écolederéadaptationdel’UniversitédeMontréalChercheuserégulièreCINBIOSE|CHUSte-Justine
Day3–Oct17th
08:45-10:00
KeynoteLecture:“WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?”Dr.RichardGasaway,PhDPresident&PrincipalConsultant,GasawayConsultingGroup,LLCChiefScientist,SituationalAwarenessMattersResidentInstructor,ExecutiveFireOfficerProgram,NationalFireAcademy
Day4–Oct18
09:00-10:15
KeynoteLecture:“Reapingwhatwesow-EngagingWorkersandStakeholdersinAgriculturalHealthResearch”Dr.CatherineTrask,PhDCanadaResearchChairinErgonomicsandMusculoskeletalHealthAssociateProfessor,CanadianCentreforHealthandSafetyinAgricultureUniversityofSaskatchewan
7
Humanfactorsforthefutureworkforce
NeilMansfield1,21HeadofEngineering,NottinghamTrentUniversity,UK
2President,CharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactors
IntroductionTheUK-basedCharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactorswillcelebrateits70thyearin2019.Throughthose7decadestheorganizationhasrebrandeditself(TheErgonomicsResearchSociety,toErgonomicsSociety,toInstitute)andbeenattheforefrontofdevelopingthedisciplineofErgonomicsandHumanFactors.Despitethelong-establishedlegacy,thereisnoindicationthattheworkofergonomistsisfinished.
TheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(1)definesergonomicsas: ‘…thescientificdisciplineconcernedwiththeinteractionsbetweenhumansandotherelementsofasystem(environment,peopleandobjects)withthegoalofoptimizinghumanwellbeingandoverallsystemperformance.’Thismeansthatinordertoachievethegoalofoptimization,anunderstandingoftheenvironment,thepeopleandtheobjectsarerequired.Oneofthereasonswhytherewillremainanongoingneedforprofessionalergonomistsisthatenvironmentsdevelop,peoplechange,andnewobjectsareinventedrelentlessly.Thesecharacteristicsareattheverycoreofmodernsociety.
Projectingforwardsthereisaneedtoconsiderfutureusersoffutureproducts.Thereisanincreasingdemandforconsiderationofproductconsequencesfarfurtherintothefuturethatoncewasthecase.Forexample,manycountriesarefacedwithlegacycostsofdecommissioningnuclearplantsthatexceedinitialbuildcosts,havedurationslongerthantheservicelife,arenotdesignedfordeconstructionandhavenaturallydeterioratedovertheyears(2).Theseissuesarenotuniquetonuclear(3),andarebecomingincreasinglychallengedattheconceptphase.Couldsuchlegacyissuesoccurforproducts,largeandsmall,beingconceivedtoday?
LegacyofHistoricalTechnologies
Throughouthistorynewtechnologieshavebeendrivenbyuserneeds,userdesires,andnewpossibilities.Behindthesewerepeoplegeneratingideasandwiththedriveandknowledgetotakethemtomarket.Oneexampleisinthepocketwatchofthe16thcentury(4).TheearliestknowndepictionofthepocketwatchappearsinaportraitofCosimoIdeMedici,DukeofFlorence,c.1560.Theobjectwasdevelopedontheuserneedforatimepiece,butthedesirabilitywassuchthattheinfluentialDukechosetobedepictedwithitinasignificantportrait.Itcouldonlybemanufacturedduetonewtechnologiesinmaterials,miniaturization,andademandfromthemarketforthedevelopmentofcomplexengineering.Theinaccuracywassuchthatitdidnotneedaminutehand.
Watchmakerswereanearlyexampleofergonomicadaptationfortheworkplace,providingmagnifyinglenses,adjustableworkstations,precisiontoolsandsupportforwristsandhands(Figure1).Theserepresentedsomeofthehighestlevelsofcomplexityandprecisionoftheirdayandrequirednewworkplaceconceptsinordertoachievetherequiredlevelsofperformance.
8
Modern‘smart’watcheshavebeendrivenbyuserneeds(e.g.informationconnection),userdesires(e.g.fashionandself-identificationasa‘smart’person),andnewpossibilities(e.g.battery,screen,electronics).However,likethe16thcenturypocketwatch,someelementsarenotparticularlyaccurate.Heartrateandenergyexpenditurefeaturesinparticularcanproveunreliable,particularlyforshorthigh-intensityboutsofexercise(5).Thereisanacceptancethatthefeatureisa‘workinprogress’butisusefulnonetheless.
Commonsystemscanallowuserstodevelopastereotypewhichcanoftenbeuseful.Forexample,modernacceptediconographyfordigitalsystemsrefertoextinctorrareobjectsrangingfromfoldersandfloppydiscs,throughtotelephonehandsetsorclipboards.However,theprocessesrepresentedarestillrelevantandtheiconstapintothecoreuserneedsanduserdesires,butexploitnewtechnologicalpossibilities.
Industry4.0/Cyber-PhysicalSystems
Thereisacurrentmovetowardsindustrialdigitization,wheredigitalsystemswillbecomeubiquitousacrossallindustrialapplications.Thishasbeenexpressedintermsofthe‘4thIndustrialRevolution’,orIndustry4.0.Industrialdevelopmenthasbeenclassifiedthus:
• 1stIndustrialRevolution Mechanization,waterpower,steampower• 2ndIndustrialRevolution Massproduction,assemblylines,electricity• 3rdIndustrialRevolution Computercontrolandautomation• 4thIndustrialRevolution Cyber-physicalsystems,AI,InternetofIndustrialThings
Themovetowardscyber-physicalsystemsintheworkplacemeansthatrobotswillbecomemoreintelligentandpotentiallyadaptableusingAI/deeplearning.Theywillbemorecapableofcarryingoutmorecomplextasksforsmallervolumeprocessestherebyincreasingtheirversatility.Bybeingcloudnetworked,datastreamscanbeaccessedfromanywhereandproductioncontrolmanipulatedremotely.Maier(CEO,SiemensUK)stated:EmergingtechnologybreakthroughsinfieldssuchasAI,robotics,andtheInternetofThingsaresignificantintheirownright.However,itistheconvergenceoftheseIndustrialDigitalTechnologiesthatreallyturbo-chargestheirimpact(6).Hence,Industry4.0isabouttheintegrationofothertechnologiesincludingtheinternet,computing,robotics,bigdata,neuralnetworks,andergonomics/humanfactors.
Thefearthatjobswillbe‘takenaway’fromthefutureindustrialworkerisnaïve,althoughitistruethatsomeexistingmanualtaskswill,infuture,becompletedbymachinesandindividualcasesofhumanredundancywillinevitablyprovecontroversial.Futurejobswillcontinuetoevolve,astheyhavethroughoutthecenturies.Futureworkerswillbeemployedinanenvironmentwhereallbusinesseswillbecomeincreasinglydigitized.Coboticswillbecomethenormwherebyhumanswillworkalongsiderobots.Cobotshavealreadybeenintroducedinsomewarehousestoassistwithpickingandtransport(e.g.Nextclothing;Arlamilk)andthereisamovetowardsincludingrobotsinmanufacturing.ThispresentsachallengeofsituationawarenessbothforthehumanandfortheAIoftherobot.
Figure1Watchmakerusingtraditionaltools(image:1949,ElginNationalWatchCompany,GFDLlicense)
9
SituationAwarenessconcernstheabilityofthehumantohaveacoherentcognitivemodeloftheworldaroundthemnow,andprojectthatmodelintothefuture(7).Undernormaloperationthebehaviorsofrobotsareusuallyeasytopredictforanexperiencedobserver,butthiswillbecomeincreasinglydifficultasAImakesthemachinesmoreadaptableandresponsive(8).Experimentalcobots,suchasthe‘Baxter’(Figure2)havemethodsofprovidingcuestoauser,suchasascreenshowing‘eyes’thatcantracktothenexttarget,andsafetysystemstoensurethatitcanfeedbackobstacle(i.e.human)collision.WithAIanddeeplearning,itispossibleforindividualrobotstodeveloptheirownbehavioralpersonalitytraitsinresponsetotheindividualbehaviorsofthoseinteractingwiththem.Infuture,notonlywillthehumansneedtobetrainedtoworkwiththerobotsbuttherobotAIwillneedtobetrainedtoworkwiththehumans.
Wearablesarebecomingmoreacceptedintheworkplace.Althoughlocationandbasicphysiologicalmonitoringaregrowinginpopularity,thelongertermcouldseeanormalizationof‘bodyhacking’whereimplantsareplacedinthebodyorundertheskinforconvenience,ratherthanmedicaluses.Thisopensupnewpossibilitiesininterfacedesignaswellastrustandsecurity.
Futuresociety,valuesandneeds
Ergonomistshavebeenadaptingworkspacestoaccommodateaworkforcethatisgettingolderandhavingtoadaptdesigntoolstobeappropriateforthischangingpopulation(9).Thereisanincreasingneedforthrough-lifetraininginordertokeepupwithtechnologicaladvancesandtobuildtheskillsbase.TheshapeofeducationandCPDwillneedtoadapttomeetthisskillscrisis(10).Takingextremesofageandexperiencestereotypes/personae,a‘digitalnative’serviceengineercouldbeadeptatoperatingatablet-typeinterfacebutwithlittleunderstandingofunderlyingmechanics,whereasanexperiencedserviceengineerapproachingretirementcouldhaveafarclearerunderstandingoftheitembeingservicedbutlessadeptwiththeinterface.HumanFactorsprincipleswillbevitalinensuringthat‘DigitalTwin’modelsandaugmentedrealitysystemsareusablebythosewiththevaluablefieldexperience.
Formajorprojectswithlongdesign/implementation/reuse/removalcyclespresentasignificantchallengetohumanfactors.Thereareinfrastructureprojectswithalegacythatwillextendbeyondthelifeofthosewhodesignthemandmayrunintohundredsorthousandsofyears.Dodesignershavearesponsibilitytoconsidertheworkersusingtheobjectin1,10,100,1000,10000years’time?Thereareimmediateissuesrelatingtore-useofcomponentsinawashingmachine,butissuesincreaseincomplexityinconsideringdesignfordeconstructionthroughmobilephones,aircraftcarriers,powerstations,dams,cathedrals,andnuclearwastestores.
Whilstitisspeculationtopredictthedetailsoffuturetechnologiesandtheshapeoffuturesocieties1000yearsintothefuture,itispossibletoprojectsomeaspectsoffuturevalueandfutureneeds.Theoldestinstitutionsintheworldincludeeducationalandreligiousestablishments,andthese
Figure2Theauthorwitha'Baxter'robotdesignedtoworkcloselywithhumans.
10
continuetohaverelevanceasjudgedbynumberofmembers.Prehistoricartdepictshumansstrivingformeaningandsurvival,andlivingincommunities.Theoldesttextsrefertofamilyandcommunitygroups.Today’ssocialnetworking,foundedonhumaninteraction,attractsasignificantminorityoftheworldpopulationwith2.2,1.5,and1.0billionmonthlyusersofFacebook,WhatsApp,andWeChatrespectively.Socialvalues,relationships,dealingwithbirthanddeath,andthedriveforknowledgeandnoveltyarethereforelikelytoremainapriorityforhumans.Humanphysiologywilladaptslowly,althoughdifferencesinnutritionandhealthcarecouldalterhowthatphysiologyismanifested.
Waystocommunicate10,000yearsintothefuturehavebeenconsideredinthecontextofsignageforburiedhazardouswastethatcouldbeforgotten,lostandthenrediscoveredbyafuturesociety(11).Howcouldthisfutureculturebewarnedofhazards?Amongstsuggestionswerethecreationofamythorareligionthatcouldportraytheriskoverthegenerations,asthesecanhavemorelongevitythanculture,languageorpoliticalframeworks(12).Thehumanfactorsofsignageforworkersfromunknownculturesisafascinatingchallenge.
ConclusionHumanfactorsexpertsandergonomistshavearesponsibilitytoconsiderthebreadthofpopulationforwhomtheydesign.Theyneedtoconsiderchangesintheworkplaceandtheworkingpopulationthatarepredictable;thereisadebatetobehadoverhowmanygenerationsintothefuturetheyshouldbedesigningfor.
References1. https://ace-ergocanada.ca/about/about_ergonomics/ergonomics.html(accessed150718)2. Walker,G.,Cooper,M.,Thompson,P.andJenkins,D.,Practitionerversusanalystmethods:a
nucleardecommissioningcasestudy.AppliedErgonomics.2014;45:1622-1633.3. AbdoH,MangenaM,NeedhamG,HuntD.Provisionsforoilandgasdecommissioningcosts:
compliancewithdisclosurerequirementsbyoilandgascompanieslistedintheUK.ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonAccountingStudies(ICAS)2017,Putrajaya,Malaysia,18-20September2017.ISBN9789670910482
4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8313893.stm(accessed06/18)5. BunnJA,NavaltaJW,FountaineCJ,ReeceJD.CurrentStateofCommercialWearableTechnology
inPhysicalActivityMonitoring2015–2017.Int.JournalofExerciseScience.2018;11(7):503.6. MaierJ.MadeSmarterReview.2017.UKDeptforBusiness,Energy&IndustrialStrategy.7. KeyCE,MorrisAP,MansfieldNJ.Situationawareness:itsproficiencyamongstolderand
youngerdrivers,anditsusefulnessforperceivinghazards.TransportationResearchpartF:TrafficPsychologyandBehaviour.2016Jul1;40:156-68.
8. RakicevicN,KormushevP.Efficientrobottasklearningandtransferviainformedsearchinmovementparameterspace.InNIPS2017WorkshoponActingandInteractingintheRealWorld:ChallengesinRobotLearning,31stConferenceonNeuralInformationProcessingSystems(NIPS),California,USA2017Dec.
9. CaseK,HussainA,MarshallR,SummerskillS,GyiDE.Digitalhumanmodellingandtheageingworkforce.ProcediaManufacturing,3,pp.36943701
10. WhysallZ,OwtramM,BrittainS.Transformingengineeringtalentpipelines.2017.KiddyandPartners.
11. PosnerR.MitteilungenandieferneZukunft.Hintergrund,Anlaß,ProblemstellungundResultateeinerUmfrage.1984.ZeitschriftfürSemiotik.
12. SebeokT.DieBüchsederPandoraundihreSicherung:EinRelaissysteminderObhuteinerAtompriesterschaft.1984.ZeitschriftfürSemiotik.
11
Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifiéesparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitants
d’apprentissage
MarieLaberge,PhD.ProfesseureagrégéeÉcolederéadaptationdel’UniversitédeMontréalChercheuserégulièreCINBIOSE|CHUSte-Justine
Ilestplusdifficilepourlesadolescentesetlesadolescentsquiéprouventdesdifficultésd’apprentissagedeterminerleursétudesavecundiplôme(RousseauetBergeron,2017).Ilestégalementreconnuquelesjeunesadultessansdiplômeseretrouventplussouventsansemploiqueleurspairsdiplômés(EPA,2015).Cetécartdutauxd’emploientrelesdiplômésetlesnondiplômésestplusélevépourlesfemmes(tauxd’emploi2,6foissupérieurpourleshommesdiplôméset4foissupérieurpourlesfemmes).Orlapossibilitédetravailleràl’âgeadulteestunemesureimportantederéductiondesécartsdepauvretéetd’inclusionsociale(Carcilloetal.,2017).Parailleurs,lesjeunesfaiblementqualifiéssontplusàrisquedesubirunelésionprofessionnelle,cequiajouteunfacteurdecomorbiditéquantauxpossibilitésd’insertionprofessionnelledurablepourcettepopulation(Saundersetal.,2017;Layetal.,2017,Breslinetal.,2017).Lanaturedel’emploietlesconditionsdetravaildanslesmétierspeuspécialisésexpliquentlesrisquesaccrusdeseblesser(emploimanuel,cumuldecontraintesphysiquesetorganisationnelles).Letypedelésionsprofessionnellesauxquellescesjeunessontexposésestdifférenteentrelesjeuneshommesetfemmes(Labergeetal.,2010;Labergeetal.,2012).DanslaprovincedeQuébec,unParcoursdeFormationAxéesurl’Emploi(PFAE)aétémissurpieden2008pouraiderlesélèveshandicapésouquiéprouventdesdifficultésd’apprentissageetd’adaptation(HDAA)àdévelopperleuremployabilité.Ceparcourss’adresseauxélèvesde15à21ansquisontenéchecscolaireetquinepeuventpoursuivreleurcheminementrégulieraudeuxièmecycledusecondaire(MELS,programmedeformationàl’écolequébécoise,2008).L’offreduPFAErépondàunedemandedediversificationdesparcourspoursoutenirlaréussitedesélèvesHDAA(Québec,politiquedel’adaptationscolaire,1999),enpermettantàcesélèvesderéussirautrementetdedévelopperdescompétencesquileurpermettrad’accéderaumarchédutravail.Dansceparcours,lesmodalitéspédagogiquesprivilégiéessontbaséessurl’alternanceétudes–travailetsurladifférenciationpédagogique(plandeformationadaptéauxbesoinsindividualisésdechaquepersonne).Àcesujet,ilexisteunelittératureabondanterecenséeparMlynaryketal.(2017)quidémontreque,pourlespersonnesavecincapacité,lapossibilitéderéaliserdesstagesdepré-emploiestunemesurefavorisantl’intégrationaumarchédutravail.LeministèreproposeunplandeformationauxjeunesquiempruntentlePFAEpourplusde130métierssemi-spécialisés.Entre10,000et15,000jeunessontinscritschaqueannéedanslePFAE.Lapopulationestmajoritairementmasculine,avecenvironlesdeuxtiersd’élèvesinscritsquisontdeshommes.Toutefois,leprogrammeproposeuneapprochededifférenciationetdanscetteoptique,ilnousapparaîtopportundefavoriserdesinterventionssensiblesaugenre.L’objectifdelaconférenceestdeprésenterquelquesrésultatsdécoulantd’uneprogrammationderecherchequisedéploiedepuis10ansquiportesurlapréventiondel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesélèvesduPFAE.Laprogrammationtientcomptedusexeetdugenredesélèvesetdesacteursdusystèmedeformation.Elles’estamorcéeaumomentdelamiseenplaceduPFAEen2007.Elles’estcentréedèsledépartsurlaconduitederecherches-interventionvisantlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsadaptésàcetteclientèle,selondeuxgrandsvolets:1)lapréventiondeslésionsprofessionnelleset2)ledéveloppementdescompétencesprofessionnellesenvued’accroitrelespossibilitésd’emploi.Lesinterventionsdéveloppéesvisentlesjeunes,toutautant
12
quelesacteursquilesaccompagnentdansleurdémarched’insertionprofessionnelle,soitlesenseignantsresponsablesdesstagesetlesmilieuxdetravailquilesaccueillent.Lesthématiquesderechercheetledéveloppementd’interventionss’estfaitencollaborationavecdesacteursclés,réunisencomitédesuividepuisledémarragedelaprogrammation(ministèredel’Éducation,FédérationdescommissionsscolairesduQuébec,Fédérationdessyndicatsdel’enseignement,Institutdestroublesd’apprentissage).Ladémarchemisedel’avants’inspiredel’ergonomieconstructive.Ils’agitd’unefilièredel’ergonomiequis’intéresseaudéveloppementdespersonnesetdesorganisationsparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitants(Falzon,2013).Cettedisciplines’appuiesurleconceptde«capabilité»proposéparAmartyaSen(2001)quisoutientquepourqu’unepersonneréussisse,ilnesuffitpasqu’elleaitapprisunetâche,maisquel’activitémiseenœuvredanscettetâcheluipermettentdedéveloppersonpotentieletdepréserversasanté.Unenvironnementcapacitantpermetaussiauxorganisationsdesedévelopperetd’êtreperformante.Danscecourant,l’ergonomenes’intéressedoncpasseulementauxsituationsdetravailactuelles,maisaucheminementdespersonnesetauxparcoursprofessionnels,toutautantqu’auxprospectionsdel’étatdesantéquiévolueraenfonctiondecesparcours.Pourqu’unenvironnementsoitcapacitant,ildoit1)prendreencomptelesdifférencesentrelespersonnes,hommesetfemmeset2)compenserpourlesdéficiencesindividuelles(parexempleliéesauxincapacités).Lesméthodesderecherchequiontétémisesdel’avantpourréaliserlaprogrammationderecherchesontissuesdudomainedel’ergonomiedel’activité.Ellesmisentsurlacollectededonnéesdesourcesmultiplesvisantàcaractériserl’activitédetravailetsesdéterminants.Ellessontdenaturetantqualitativequequantitative,avecunepréférencepourlesdonnéesdeterrain(observationsdutravailensituationréelle,mesuresdesparamètresdel’activité,verbalisationssurletravail,entretiensd’autoconfrontation).Laconférenceaborderalesdifférentsdéfisquiontétésoulevésaucoursdes10dernièresannéesderecherche,enmettantenlumièrelespréoccupationsdespartenaires,lesrecherchesréalisées,ainsiquelesrecommandationsquienontdécoulé.Parmilesrésultatsprésentés,desexemplesd’outilspédagogiquesquipermettentladifférenciationpédagogiqueenmilieudetravailserontprésentés.Cesoutilsontétédéveloppésenprenantenconsidérationuncadreconceptueld’analysedel’activitédetravailutiliséenergonomie:lemodèlederégulationd’unepersonneenactivité(Vézina,2001;St-Vincentetal.,2011).Lorsdelaconférence,troisciblesd’actionpourmieuxtenircomptedesparcoursd’insertiondeshommesetdesfemmesauPFAEserontdiscutés.Eneffet,malgréqu’ellessoientmoinsnombreusesauPFAE,desdéfisd’insertionprofessionnellespécifiquesseposentpourlesjeunesfemmes.DéfairelespréconceptionsliéesauxfacteursderisquedelésionselonlegenreAuPFAE,lamajoritédesmétiersproposésparleministèresontplutôtassociésàdesintérêtstypiquesmasculins(ex:installateurdepneus,ouvrierdansunatelierdebois,manutentionnaire,etc.)(Labergeetal.,2010,ERA,2015).Enoutre,lesdifférentespersonnesimpliquéesdanslasupervisiondestagesentretiennentdespréjugésquantauxmécanismesdelésionpréférentiellementattribuésauxhommes,commelescaractéristiquescomportementalesliéesàlatéméritéoulaprisederisquevolontaire(Labergeetal.2012).Celasemanifestepardesdemandesrépétéesdelapartdespartenairesdeprioriserlapréventiondesaccidentsimminentsquipourraientsurvenirenstage,avecdesexemplestirésd’emploismasculins,etunintérêtpourledéveloppementd’interventionsdesensibilisationvisantsurtoutlesattitudesdesjeuneshommes.Pourmontrerl’importancedeconsidéreraussilesrisquesassociésauxmétiersplusféminins,nous
13
avonsréalisédesanalysesdifférenciéesselonlegenreetmontrél’existencedecertainesexigencesetconditionsdetravailpropresauxfemmes.Cesanalysesontpermisdefaireévoluerlaperceptiondesrisquespourlesmétierschoisisparlesjeunesfemmesetd’offrirdesactivitésd’apprentissageetdepréventionéquitables.Différencierlesactivitésd’apprentissageselonlegenredesélèvesDesenjeuxdifférenciésd’expositionauxfacteursderisquedelésionseposententrelesmétierschoisisparleshommes(ex.accidentsliésàlamanipulationd’outilsetmachinerie)etlesmétierschoisisparlesfemmes(ex.troublesmusculosquelettiquesetrisquespsychosociauxassociésautravailstatiqueourépétitifettravailaveclaclientèle)(Labergeetal.,2012).Enmontrantquelesjeuneshommesétaientmajoritairementexposésàdesrisquesd’accidentàcourttermeetquelesjeunesfemmesétaientplutôtexposéesàdesrisquesdetroublesmusculosquelettiques(TMS)àpluslongterme,notreéquipederechercheaproposéunedémarchedepréventioncomprenantledéveloppementd’uneculturedurabledeprévention.Desidéesdesituationsd’apprentissageliésàdescatégoriesvariéesdemétieretdefacteursderisqueontétéintégréesàauxrecommandationsetoutilsdéveloppés.Tenircomptedesrôlesetrapportssociauxliésàlasupervisiondestage:Genrescroisésdesenseignant.essuperviseursdestageetdesinterlocuteur.tricesenmilieudestageDansuneétudeportantsurlapriseenchargedelaSSTparlesenseignantesetenseignantsduPFAE,ilaétémontréquelesrôlessociauxdegenresemanifestaientaussilorsdelarelationtriangulairedesupervisionauPFAE(élève,enseignant.e,superviseurenentreprise).Eneffet,lesdynamiquessocialesdesupervisionsontmoduléesparlefaitquelamajoritédesinterlocuteursenentrepriseestunhomme,alorsquelamajoritédupersonnelenseignantaffectéàlasupervisiondesstagesestunefemme.Enoutre,ledomainedelapréventionenSSTaététraditionnellementplussouventportépardeshommes.Parconséquent,ilestfréquentquelacrédibilitédesenseignantesàcesujetsoitremiseenquestionparlesentreprises(Labergeetal.,2017).Plusieursaspectsliésaugenreontpuêtredécritsdansladynamiquedesupervision,dontlefaitquelesfemmesenseignantesontsouventl’impressiond’êtreimposteurlorsqu’ellesabordentlesujetdelaSSTaveclessuperviseursmasculinsauxquelsellesseréfèrentenentreprise.Cesrésultatsontmenéàdesrecommandationspourfavoriserlepouvoird’agiretlesentimentdecompétencedesenseignantessuperviseurdestagelorsqu’ellessouhaitentétablirundialoguesurlaSSTaveclesentreprisesdestage.Enrésumé,laconférenceseral’occasiondediscuterdesapportsdel’ergonomieaudéveloppementd’environnementscapacitantspourfavoriserunemeilleureintégrationprofessionnelleensantédesjeunesfaiblementqualifiés,avecunsoucipourl’équitéentreleshommesetlesfemmes.Lesproblématiquesderechercheetlesrésultatsobtenuspourronttrouveréchodansd’autrestypesdesituationquiconcernentlapréventiondeslésionsprofessionnelleschezlesjeunes,lesrelationstriangulairesd’emploi(ex.agencesdeplacement),ledéveloppementdel’employabilitéauprèsdespersonnesprésentantdesincapacitésetmême,ledéveloppementvocationnellorsdesituationsderéadaptationprofessionnellecomplexeavecpertedeliend’emploi.Bibliographie1. Breslin,F.C.etPole,J.D.(2009).«Workinjuryriskamongyoungpeoplewithlearningdisabilities
andattention-deficit/hyperactivitydisorderincanada».AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,99(8),p.1423-1430.
14
2. Breslin,F.C.,Lay,A.M.,Jetha,A.,Smith,P.(2017).“ExaminingoccupationalhealthandsafetyvulnerabilityamongCanadianworkerswithdisabilities.”DisabilityandRehabilitation,onlinefirst.Doi:10.1080/09638288.2017.1327985.
3. Carcillo,S.,Huillery,E.,L’Horty,Y.(2017).«Prévenirlapauvretéparl’emploi,l’éducationetlamobilité».Notesduconseild’analyseéconomique2017/4(n°40),p.1-12.Doi:10.3917/ncae.040.0001
4. Enquêtesurlapopulationactive(EPA)(2015).StatistiqueCanada.Tableau282-0004-estimationsselonleniveaudescolaritéatteint,lesexeetlegrouped'âge,annuel,CANSIM(basededonnées).Rapportproduitle20juin2016.Miseàjourdel’indicateurle8janvier2016.
5. Falzon,P.(2013).Ergonomieconstructive.Paris:PressesUniversitairesdeFrance.doi:10.3917/puf.falzo.2013.01.
6. Laberge,M.,Vézina,N.,Calvet,B.etLedoux,E.(2010).«LePFAE.QuellessontlesimplicationspourlaSST?».Travailetsanté,26(2),p.S7-13.
7. Laberge,M.,Vézina,N.,Saint-Charles,J.(2012).«Safeandhealthyintegrationintosemiskilledjobs:doesgendermatter?”Work41(Suppl.1),p.4642-4649.Doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-0102-4642
8. Laberge,M.,Tondoux,A.,CamiréTremblay,F.,MacEachen,E.(2017).“OccupationalHealthandSafetyinaVocationalTrainingProgram:HowGenderImpactsTeachers'StrategiesandPowerRelationships”.NEWSOLUTIONS:AJournalofEnvironmentalandOccupationalHealthPolicy,27(3),pp.382–402.
9. Lay,A.M.,Saunders,R.,Lifshen,M.,Breslin,F.C.,LaMontagne,A.D.,Tompa,E.,Smith,P.M.(2017).Therelationshipbetweenoccupationalhealthandsafetyvulnerabilityandworkplaceinjury.SafetyScience,94,p.85-93.
10. Mlynaryk,C.,Laberge,M.,Martin,M.(2017).“School-to-worktransitionforyouthwithseverephysicaldisabilities:Stakeholderperspectives”.Work58(4),p.427-438.Doi:10.3233/WOR-172645.
11. Québec,ministèredel’Éducation,duLoisiretduSport.(1999).Uneécoleadaptéeàtoussesélèves.Politiquedel’adaptationscolaire.Québec:LespublicationsduQuébec,37p.
12. Québec,ministèredel’Éducation,duLoisiretduSport.(2008).Programmedeformationdel’écolequébécoise.Enseignementsecondaire,deuxièmecycle.Formationpréparatoireautravailetformationmenantàl’exerciced’unmétiersemi-spécialisé.Québec:LespublicationsduQuébec,chap.1à5et10.
13. Rousseau,N.,Bergeron,L.(2017).«Leparcoursdeformationaxéesurl’emploi:laparoleauxjeunes».McGillJournalofEducation,52(1),135–148.Doi:10.7202/1040808ar.
14. Saunders,R.,Cardoso,S.,LePéousard,M.(2017).“AddressingessentialskillsgapsinanOHStrainingprogram:apilotstudy”.OpenPlenary,InstituteforWork&Health,November,28th2017
Sen,A.(2010).Theideaofjustice.London:Penguin.
15
WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?RichardGasaway,PhD,EFO,CFO
Mostworkersknow,intuitively,thatstrongsituationalawarenessisanimportantaspectofworksitesafety.However,manydonotunderstandwhatsituationalawarenessis,howitisdevelopedandhowitcanerodewhileworkinginahighrisk,highconsequenceenvironment.Thistalkwilldiscusssituationalawarenessandexplainhowitisdeveloped.Specificexamplesofbarriersthatcanerodeawarenesswillbeshared.
16
Reapingwhatwesow:Engagingworkersandstakeholdersinagriculturalhealthresearch
CatherineTrask1*1UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada
Introduction
Musculoskeletaldisordersinagriculture:Scopeoftheissue
AccordingtotheILO’sProgrammeonOccupationalSafetyandHealth,agriculture“…isoneofthemosthazardousoccupationsworldwide”(1).AccordingtotheCanadianAgriculturalcensus,thereareover230,000farmsinCanadaand44,329oftheseresideinSaskatchewan,producingcommoditieslikegrain,oilseeds,andpulses,aswellaspoultry,dairy,beef,andpork(2).Operatingthesefarmsrequiresavarietyofworktasks:animalcare;operationofplantingandharvestingmachinery;equipmentandbuildingmaintenance.Thephysicalexposuresoffarmworkcombinewithauniqueemploymentcontextthatcandeliveralargecumulativelifetimedose.Farmworkoftenstartsataveryyoungageandcontinuesbeyondtypicalretirementage(3,4);morethanhalfofCanadianfarmoperatorsworkmorethan40hoursperweekontheirfarm,and48%alsoworkoffthefarm(2).
Unsurprisingly,theseworkexposuresareassociatedwithelevatedratesofmusculoskeletaldisorders(MSD).AsystematicreviewfoundprevalenceMSDisconsistentlyhigherinfarmersthannon-farmerpopulations,with12monthprevalenceashighas90%.Themajorityofsurveillancestudieshavefocusedonlowbackdisorders(LBD),which,asinotherindustries,representthebulkofMSDinfarming(3,5,6).Acrossstudiesofmanytypesoffarming,theaveragelifetimeprevalenceoflowbackpainwas75%(95%CI=67-82)andaverageone-yearprevalencewas48%(95%CI=42-55)(3).AmorerecentpublicationshowsSaskatchewanhasslightlyhigherestimatesbackpain:57%for12-monthprevalence(7).Theresultcanbemeasurednotonlyinhumansufferingandhealthcarecosts,butalsoineconomicproductivity;inastudyofworkersonintensiveCanadianswinefarms,58%ofrespondentsreportedhavingtheiractivitiesinterruptedbyMSDsymptoms(8).MSDarethemostcommoncauseofworkabsenceinself-employedfarmers,(9)andfarmincomehasbeenshowntobelowerwhenoperatorshaveMSD-relateddisability(10).AsurveyofIowafarmersshowedtheywere8timesmorelikelytomakemajorchangesintheirworkactivitiesasaresultoflowbackpainthanthegeneralworkingpopulation(11).
Challengesinagriculturalhealthresearch
Despitethedemonstratedneedforeffectiveintervention,researchinagricultureremainschallenging,withthegreatestchallengeslikelyaligningwiththemostunderstudiedpopulations(12).Theneedforpreventionresearchinagriculturehasbeenwidelyacknowledged(13,14),butfewergonomicinterventionshavebeensystematicallyevaluatedinagriculturalcontextsrelativetootherindustries.Partofthechallengeisthatthereisabroadvarietyofcommodities,farmpractices,topography,climate,tools,machinery,andworkenvironments(12)thatdefiesgeneralizingfindingsattheindustryorevenoccupationlevel.
InCanada,mostsmall-scale‘family’farmsdonotreachtheemploymentthresholdtorequireworkerscompensationboardinsurance,andsotheyelectnottopurchaseit.Thisleadstoalackofindustry-leveladministrativedataoninjuryrateandlimitsresearchsurveillance.EffortstoaddressthishaveresultedintheCanadianAgriculturalInjuryReport(CAIR)(15),aswellascohortstudiesusingpostalsurveystoinvestigatefarminjuryrates{McMillan,2015#1445}.
17
Despitetheseefforts,theadditionalchallengeofgeographicallydispersedfarmsmakeson-farmergonomicassessmentrare.Theaveragefarmsizeis1135acresinManitobaand1784acresinSaskatchewan,whichtranslatesintomanykilometersoftravelbetweenfarms.Thesefarmsalsotypicallyhavefewemployees,sotargetingtypicalresearchsamplesizesinvolvescommunication,trust-building,andrecruitmentwithmultipleworksites,followedbyextensivetravel.Thisisincontrasttothemoretypicaloccupationalresearchsamplingframeachievedbyapproachingasingleemployerorunionandaccessingalargegroupofpotentialparticipants.Lastly,therecanbeconsiderablechallengesforresearcherstogaincredibilitywithanoccupationalgroupwhoidentifiesstronglywiththehistoryandcultureoftheirvocation.Farmersoftenrefertotheirworkas‘morethanajob’and‘wayoflife’thatpermeatesallaspectsoffamilyandworklife,ofteninaninter-generationalway(16).Iffarmersconsiderexpertisetobeacquiredthroughexperience,the‘outsider’statusofresearchersmaynotbeseentooffermuchinthewayofunderstandingtheworkcontextordevelopingrealisticsolutions.
PhilosophyandApproachClearlytherearemultiplediversechallengesinaddressinghealthandsafetyinagriculture,andovercomingthesechallengesrequiresauniquesetofapproaches.Engagingpartnersinergonomicsresearchcantakemanyforms,andthese‘collaboration’strategiescomebymanynames:participatoryactionresearch,community-engagedresearch,andparticipatoryergonomics.TheprojectsundertakenbytheUniversityofSaskatchewanErgonomicsLabhaveusedCIHR’sintegratedknowledgetranslation(iKT)approach(17).Aswiththeotherapproachesabove,iKTcharacterizedbyengagingstakeholdersthroughouttheresearchprocess/project;thereiscollaborationofresearchersandknowledgeuserstoshapetheresearchprocessstartingwithresearchquestionsandmethodologythroughtointerpretinganddisseminatingresults.Formingsuccessfulpartnershipswithkeystakeholderstoconductthisresearchproducesresultsthataremorerelevantandmorelikelytobeputintopractice–animportantoutcomeinergonomicsresearchorprofessionalconsulting.ThemainmechanismforiKTEattheUniversityofSaskatchewanErgonomicsLabistheStakeholderAdvisoryGroup(SAG).EachindustryareaorresearchtopichasitsownSAGcomprisedofmemberswhowillhelpdirecttheresearchandinterpretfindings:inter-disciplinaryresearchers(usuallyco-investigatorsontheproject);OSHprofessionalsandNGOssuchasWorkSafeSaskatchewanandthePrairieAgriculturalMachineryInstitute(anon-profitappliedresearchinstitutewhosemandatetodetermineandpromotebestpracticesinagriculture);policymakerssuchasMinistriesofAgricultureandDepartmentofLabourRelationsandWorkplaceSafety;andindustrystakeholdersincludingrepresentativesfromtheUniversityofSaskatchewanResearchFarmsandproducersfromthesurroundingcommunity.Whilemanyofthesestakeholdersparticipateinthecourseoftheirusualwork,forfarmowners,agriculturalworkers,andotherproducerstheSAGinvolvestravel,reading,andmeetingactivitiesoutsideoftheirregularwork.Cultivatingrelationshipswithproducersrequiresbuildingtrustandmakingtheresearchrelevantandresponsivetotheirneedssothatthedemandsofparticipationareoutweighedbythebenefits.Italsorequiresconsiderationofsomeofthepotentialbarrierstoproducers’participation:avoidingschedulingduringbusygrowingseason,travelandparkingcosts,andthelesstangibleaspectoffeelingcomfortable,welcomed,valued,andincludedinresearchdiscussions.TheSAGsareengagedatkeystagesintheresearchprocess.Inadditiontosolicitingspecificinputfromspecificmembersduringdevelopmentofresearchquestionsandgrantproposals,wetypicallyplanatleasttwoin-personmeetingswithaSAG:1)apreliminarymeetingtodiscussandrefinedatacollectionprotocolsandspecificresearchquestions,2)aninterpretationmeetingoncedatahas
18
beencollected,processed,andsummarizedtodiscussthefindingsandbrainstormhowbesttodisseminateit.Throughoutthisprocess,workersandproducersshiftfrom‘subjects/participants’to‘researchpartners’;thiscaninvolveintellectualcontributionsthatsubstantiallyimpactthegoalsandmethodologyofthestudyandresultinco-authorship.
ResultsandDiscussionThissectiondescribessomeexamplesofergonomicsandoccupationalhealthprojectsthathaveusedanintegratedknowledgetranslationapproachtoconductresearch.
FarmersBackStudyLowerbackdisordersareanimportantpublichealthissueamongfarmers,andthisstudyaimedtomeasureexposuretobackpainriskfactorsonSaskatchewanfarms.Thisinvolvedvisiting54farmerson22farmsthroughoutthegrowingseasontomeasuremachineryvibration,manualhandling,andtrunkpostureduringregularworkdays.OntheadviceoftheSAG,wealsoconductedinterviewswithfarmerstolearnabouttheimpactofthepainanddisabilitythatlowerbackdisordershave,aswellasexaminingthepreventativemeasuresandsolutionsthatfarmersimplementtopreventlowerbackpain.TheSAGwasalsoinstrumentalinshapingthedisseminationplans,resultinginsummariesoftheinformationbeingsentoutto27,000SaskatchewanfarmsandpresentedatagriculturaleventsliketheFarmProgressShowandAgribition.Comprehensiveevaluationofneedle-lessinjectioninswinebarnsOverthepastseveralyears,theCanadianporkindustryhasrapidlydevelopedfromsmallfamilyfarmsintolarge-scale,modernizedproductionsystemsthatrequiredmajorprocesschangesandtechnologicaladvancements.Thesetechnologyandprocesschangesmayimpactworkerhealthandsafety,buttheseeffectscanbedifficulttoquantifyespeciallywhenneededtomakebusinessdecisionsonmitigationstrategies.Inordertoevaluateworkplacehealthandsafetyrelativetoimprovementsinproductivity,thisprojectconductedacomprehensiveevaluationofneedle-lessinjectiondevices;theneedle-lessdeviceswereevaluatedintermsofinjuryratespre-andpost-implementation,workerpreference,productivityandupperextremitybiomechanicscomparedtotraditionalneedles,andoverallcost.OntheadviceoftheSAG,theprojectgoalswereexpandedtodevelopasuiteofperformancemeasuresthatcanbegeneralizedtoanynewworkplacetechnology.
b)a) c)
Figure3:Theauthorconductingresearchatagriculturalworkplaces:a)intensiveswineproductionwithmeasurementteam(LtoR)CatherineTrask,LeeWhittington,OlugbengaAdebayo,XiaokeZeng,andBernardoPredicala;b)outdoorhempproductionatafamilyfarm;c)wholebodyvibrationassessmentonheavyagriculturalmachinery
19
Theresultisanonlinetoolthatestimatescost-benefitbasedonuserinputsregardingthemainconsiderationsforadoptinganewtool:equipmentpurchase,productivity,riskforinjury,maintenanceneeds,andlabourforceconsiderationsliketurnoverandtraining.OccupationalhealthandsafetyforindoormarijuanaproductionChangingregulatoryenvironmentmeansmarijuanaproductionwillmovefromanillegally-growncroptoapotentiallycommonindoorcrop.Becauseithashistoricallybeenillegal,thereisverylittleresearchontheoccupationalhazardsoreffectivepreventionstrategiesforthisindustry.Asaresult,occupationalhealthandsafetyprofessionalsareunlikelytobefamiliarwithindustryneeds.ThereisaneedtobetterunderstandtheOSHknowledgeofmarijuanaproductionworkersandtheirperceptionsofOSHregulations,OSHcontrols,andsourcesofOSHinformation.Thegoalsofthisstudyweretoconductinterviewsandfacilitytourswithmarijuanaproducersto1)describeproductiontasksandidentifypotentialhazardsrelatedtothesetasks;and2)determineproductionworkers’perceptionsof,andinformationsourcesfor,OSHhazardsandcontrolsintheirsector.Manyworkersinthissectorhavehistoricallybeensecretiveandreluctanttosharedetailsabouttheirworkandoccupationalhealthandsafetypractices.Therefore,buildingtrustingrelationshipswithstakeholderswasvitalandinthiscaseinvolvedcultivatingexistingcontactsintheindustry,workingwiththemonthestudyproposal,andenlistingthemtohelpwithadditionalrecruitment.Torecognizecontributionstothestudydesignandfindings,oneoftheseinitialcontactsandstudyparticipantsisalsoaco-authoronajournalmanuscript.
RelevancetoPractitionersThispaperpositsthatergonomicsprojects(andalloccupationalhealthresearch)aremorerelevantandapplicablewhenrelatedstakeholdersareengagedthroughouttheprocess,andgivesseveralexamplesfromthechallengingcontextoftheagriculturalindustry.Hereisasummaryofconsiderationsforincorporatingthisstrategyinanergonomicsproject:1) Donotunder-estimatethetimeorbudgetrequiredtodothiswell.Stakeholderswilltaketime
togetuptospeed,andifthattakestimeawayfromtheirworkanhonorariummaybeappropriate.
2) It’shelpfultocultivaterelationshipswithstakeholders,andnotjustwhenyouneedsomethingfromthem.Prioritizefrequentcommunicationtostakeholdersbyreportbackonfindings,providingupdatesonfundingapplicationsandprojectprogress,andcheck-injusttosayhiandtouchbaseonwhattheircurrentissuesare.
3) Considerformalizingpartnershipsandinvolvementwithstakeholders.Thismayinvolveincludingstakeholdersasco-authorsorco-presenters,deliveringfindingsinformatstheyselectandthatservetheirconstituency.
4) Gotothegroupyoutrustforideasanddirection;theywilltellyouwhatisimportanttothem,andwhentheprojectismeaningfultheywillwanttobeinvolvedinthework.
20
References1. ILO ILO. The ILO Programme on Occupational Safety and Health in Agriculture 1999 [cited 2011 October 31]. Available from: http://www.ilo.org/safework/areasofwork/lang--en/WCMS_117367/index.htm. 2. StatisticsCanada. Census of Agriculture counts 44,329 farms in Saskatchewan 2007 [cited 2011 December 16]. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ca-ra2006/analysis-analyses/sask-eng.htm. 3. Osborne A, Blake C, Fullen BM, Meredith D, Phelan J, McNamara J, et al. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among farmers: A systematic review. Am J Ind Med. 2011. 4. Voaklander DC, Dosman JA, Hagel LM, Warsh J, Pickett W. Farm work exposure of older male farmers in Saskatchewan. Am J Ind Med. 2010;53(7):706-15. 5. Rosecrance J, Rodgers G, Merlino L. Low back pain and musculoskeletal symptoms among Kansas farmers. Am J Ind Med. 2006;49(7):547-56. 6. Walker-Bone K, Palmer KT. Musculoskeletal disorders in farmers and farm workers. Occup Med (Lond). 2002;52(8):441-50. 7. McMillan M, Trask C, Dosman J, Hagel L, Pickett W, Team SFICS. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among Saskatchewan farmers. Journal of agromedicine. 2015;20(3):292-301. 8. Trask C. Preliminary ergonomic evaluation of barn tasks in intensive Swine production. J Agromedicine. 2013;18(4):368-78. 9. Hartman E, Oude Vrielink HH, Huirne RB, Metz JH. Risk factors for sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders among self-employed Dutch farmers: a case-control study. Am J Ind Med. 2006;49(3):204-14. 10. Whelan S, Ruane DJ, McNamara J, Kinsella A, McNamara A. Disability on Irish farms--a real concern. J Agromedicine. 2009;14(2):157-63. 11. Weir P, Holmes A, Andrews D, Albert W, Azar N, Callaghan J. Determination of the just noticeable difference (JND) in trunk posture perception. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2007;8(3):185-99. 12. Trask C, Khan MI, Adebayo O, Boden C, Bath B. Equity in whom gets studied: A systematic review examining geographical region, gender, commodity, and employment context in research of low back disorders in farmers. Journal of agromedicine. 2015;20(3):273-81. 13. Kirkhorn SR, Earle-Richardson G, Banks RJ. Ergonomic risks and musculoskeletal disorders in production agriculture: recommendations for effective research to practice. J Agromedicine. 2010;15(3):281-99. 14. Davis KG, Kotowski SE. Understanding the ergonomic risk for musculoskeletal disorders in the United States agricultural sector. Am J Ind Med. 2007;50(7):501-11. 15. CAIR CAIR. Agriculture-related Fatalities in Canada. Edmonton, Alberta: 2016. 16. Elliot V, Cammer A, Pickett W, Marlenga B, Lawson J, Dosman J, et al. Towards a deeper understanding of parenting on farms: A qualitative study. PloS one. 2018;13(6):e0198796. 17. CIHR CIfHR. Guide to Knowledge Translation Planning at CIHR: Integrated and End-of-Grant Approaches. Ottawa, Canada: 2012.
21
WORKSHOPSDay1–Oct15th
09:00-16:30
Facilitators:Dr.JudyVillageandDr.PatrickNeumannHowtoIntegrateErgonomicsintotheEngineeringDesignProcess
Day2–Oct16th
14:45-16:15
Facilitator:TanyaMoroseApplyingforcertificationwithCCCPEandmaintainingcertification
Day3–Oct17
10:15-12:00
Facilitator:VanceMcPhersonApplyingadultlearningprinciples:ensuringsuccesstoyourhealthandsafetyeducationandtrainingsessions
15:15-16:45
Facilitator:LucyHartOfficeergonomics2018:unpackingthenewCSAz412standard
Day4–Oct18th
10:30-12:0013:00-14:30
Facilitator:RichardWellsDevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario
13:00-14:30
Facilitator:AllisonStephensMovingfromLabtoIndustry:Howtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptability
13:00-14:30
Facilitator:TrevorSchellCanergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients.
22
Howtointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocess
Dr.JudyVillage1,Dr.PatrickNeumann2
1SchoolofPopulationandPublicHealthUBC,Vancouver,BC,Canada
2DepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineering,RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario
WorkshopOverview
Inthisone-dayworkshop,participantswilllearnabouthowhumanfactors/ergonomicscanbeeffectivelyintegratedintotheengineeringdesignprocesstoimprovenotonlyworkerhealth,butbusinessperformance.ParticipantswilllearnaboutHFandtheindustrializationprocessandvariousproductiondesignissuesandstrategies.TheywillalsolearnhowtolinkHFtocorporatestrategiestogainsupportfromseniormanagementforHF.Ergonomistswillbechallengedtothinkaboutgapsintheirunderstandingofengineeringdesignlanguage,toolsandtechniquesandstrategizetofindwaystogainthisinformationinordertoworkmoreeffectivelyonateamwithengineers.Commonbusinessimprovementstrategiessuchas“Lean”and“SixSigma”willbediscussedhighlightingwaysthatHFcanenhancethesestrategies.SeveralengineeringdesigntoolsthathavebeenadaptedforHFwillbepresented(suchasthefailuremodeeffectsanalysis,anddesignforassembly).ParticipantswilllearnwaystoworkwithengineeringgroupstoadaptotherengineeringdesigntoolsandtechniquestoincludeHF.ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:Attheendofthisworkshop,participantswillbeableto:
• Explainwhyergonomicsistypicallyleftoutoftheengineeringdesignprocess• Describetypicaldesignprocessesforhowworkisorganized• Describewaystointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocessbasedonthe
designforhumanfactors(HF)theory• ExplainkeyprinciplesofleanmanufacturingandhowHFcanbeintegratedintolean• Usetoolstonavigatethecorporatestrategy(cognitivemapping)andthedesignprocess
(processmapping)• Showhowotherengineeringtoolscanbeadaptedtoincludeergonomics(suchasfailure
modeeffectsanalysis,anddesignforassembly)• Provideergonomicdesignguidelinesandotherinformationtoengineersinaformatthatis
mosteffectivefortheiruseDurationoftheWorkshop:FullDayBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:JudyVillageisanAdjunctProfessorintheSchoolofPopulationandPublicHealthattheUniversityofBritishColumbiaandaCertifiedProfessionalErgonomistinCanadaandtheUS.Shehasmorethan25yearsofexperienceconductingresearch,consultingandteachinginmusculoskeletalinjury
23
prevention.SheearnedherPh.D.intheDepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineeringatRyersonUniversity.Thegoalofherresearch,workingwithalargeelectronicscompany,wastoworkwithengineersandhumanfactorsspecialiststofindwaystointegratehumanfactorsintodesignoftheirassemblyproductionsystems.HerpublicationintheErgonomicsJournaldescribingthethree-yearactionresearchcollaborationrecentlywonthe2015LibertyMutualAwardforthepapermostadvancingthefieldofergonomics..PatrickNeumannisanAssociateProfessorintheDepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineeringofRyersonUniversity.HeholdsalimitedengineeringlicenseinOntario,theEuropeanErgonomistdesignationandadoctoraldegreeindesignsciencefromLundUniversityinSweden.Hisresearchfocusesonintegratinghumanfactorsintothedesignandmanagementofoperationsforsustainablecompetitiveadvantagethroughimprovementsinproductivity,qualityandemployeecompetencedevelopment.
24
ApplyingforCertificationwithCCCPEandMaintainingCertification
TanyaMorose,MSc,CCPE,CRSP1,21PublicServicesHealthandSafetyAssociation,Toronto,Ontario,Canada
2CanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists,Renfrew,Ontario,Canada
WorkshopOverviewInthisinteractiveworkshop,representativesoftheBoardoftheCanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists(CCCPE)willprovideanoverviewoftheapplicationrequirementsandtheapplicationprocessforAssociateErgonomist(AE)andCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)designations.Tipstoimprovethechancesofasuccessfulapplicationwillbeprovided.
OncetheCCPEdesignationisawardeditistheresponsibilityofthecertificanttoparticipateincontinuingeducationandmaintainanactiveprofessionalpracticeasanergonomistinordertomaintaintheircertification.TheContinuanceofCertificationrequirementsandprocesswillbereviewed.TipstomaximizeaccumulationofpointsduringtheCCPE’s5yearCoCperiodandtrackprogressforsuccessfulCoCsubmissionswillbeproved.
ParticipantsareencouragedtoreviewtheContinuanceofCertificationand/orCCCPEApplicationkitpriortoattendingthesessioninordertoengageinadiscussionandquestion/answerperiodwithboardmembers.
ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:• ParticipantswillgainanunderstandingoftheapplicationrequirementsfortheAEand
CCPEdesignations• Participantswillgainanunderstandingoftheapplicationprocess,importantdeadlinesand
timelinesfortheCCCPEBoard’sdecisionontheapplicationstatus.• ReceivetipsfromseasonedboardmemberstoincreasethechancesofasuccessfulAE,CCPE
orCoCsubmission
DurationoftheWorkshop:90minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:TanyaisaCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)andCanadianRegisteredSafetyProfessional(CRSP).Shehasworkedinawiderangeofindustriesandbringsover18yearsofconsultingexperiencetoPSHSA.PriortojoiningPSHSA,Tanyawasinvolvedinclients'ergonomicsprogramsincludingreviewsofnewproductionlinesinthedesignphase,workstationassessments,andjobsuitabilityevaluationsforreturn-to-work.InhercurrentroleasthePoliceServicesSpecialistatPSHSA,Tanyaprovidessupporttopoliceservicesintheirinjuryandillnesspreventionefforts.
TanyaearnedherMastersofScienceinKinesiologyfromtheUniversityofWaterlooandOccupationalHealthandSafetycertificatefromRyersonUniversity.SheisontheExecutiveoftheGoldenTriangleCanadianSocietyofSafetyEngineers(CSSE)chapterandisacurrentboardmemberandpastpresidentoftheCanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists(CCCPE).
25
ApplyingAdultlearningPrinciples:EnsuringsuccesstoyourH&Seducationandtrainingsessions
NatalieCarscadden,BSC,CCPE,CRSP1,VanceMcPherson,MEd1
1VanceMcPhersonMEd,HSN,SudburyOntarioCanada
WorkshopOverviewWhatarethemosteffective,efficientwaystoteachhealthandsafetytopicstoadults?Howcantraininggobeyondknowledgetransferandhelpcreateacultureofsafety?Whattechniqueswillmoveyoupastcompliancetowardslastingchange?Thisworkshopwillprovideyouwithsomebasicprinciplesandtoolstofacilitatesuccessfultrainingsessionsforadultlearners.Participantswillwalkawayfromthishalf-dayworkshopwithavarietyofready-to-usetoolsandtemplates,anddesigndocumentsforatrainingprogramthattheycanimplementimmediately.
ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:Bytheendofthisworkshop,participantswill: SectionFocusQuestion1) Assesstheneedforeffectivehealthandsafetytraining Doyouwantcompliance,orculture?2) Distinguishoutcomes,objectives,andcompetencies Outcomes/objectives…whocares?3) Developanoperationaldefinitionoflearning Canlearninglast?4) Reviewtechniquesthatpromotememoryretentionin
adultsWhatcanbedonetopromotelearningandretention?
5) Distinguishcognitive,affective,andpsychomotor(knowledge/attitude/skill)outcomes
Whatabouthardskillsandsoftskills?
6) Reviewpsychomotordomain(hands-on)techniques Whatcanbedonetopromotespecificactions?
7) Recognizeaffectivedomaintechniquesasthekeytoculturechange
Howcanyouingrainnewattitudes?
8) Assesstheefficacyofonlinelearningforavarietyofworkplacetrainingscenarios
Whatcan/shouldgoonline?
9) Performanoutcomeanalysisforatrainingproblem Puttingittogether:Establishinganeffectivetrainingplanin30minutes
10) Designanauthenticevaluationforatrainingproblem11) BlueprintatrainingplanforatrainingproblemDurationoftheWorkshop:1hour45minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitators:NatalieCarscaddenistheManagerofOccupationalHealthandSafetyatHealthSciencesNorth.Shehasover25yearsofworkexperiencerelatedtohealthandsafetymanagement,ergonomicsandauditing.VanceMcPhersonisCoordinatorofLeadershipandLearningatHealthSciencesNorth.Hehasbeendesigningandcoordinatinglearningexperiencesforadultlearnersinavarietyofcontextsforeightyears.
26
OfficeErgonomics2018:UnpackingtheNewCSAZ412StandardLucyHart,MSc,CCPE
1GlobalFurnitureGroup,Toronto,Ontario,Canada
WorkshopOverview
CSAZ412-17OfficeErgonomics–Anapplicationstandardforworkplaceergonomicshasundergoneamajoroverhaulsincethelasteditionwaspublishedin2000.Z412-17istheapplicationpartofZ1004-12asitappliestooffices.Asastandard(previouslyaguideline),itisintendedtobesuitableforadoptionintojurisdictionalregulations.CSAZ412-17containshighlevelrequirementsaswellasdetailedrequirementsfortheapplicationofergonomicsinofficeworksystemsincludingfurniture,accessories,equipment,layoutanduse,environmentalconditions,manualmaterialshandling,psychosocialworkplacefactorsandpsychologicalhealth.Thestandardappliestoallofficeusersinofficeworkspacesinnewandexistingbuildings.CSAZ412-17isanewstapleforcorporateduediligencewithrespecttoenhancingoccupanthealth,safetyandwell-beingandoptimizingsystemperformance.
ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:1. RecognizethepositioningofZ412-17withinCSAOHSManagementSystemstandards2. DescribeZ412-17highlights3. Summarizekeyhighlevelanddetailedrequirementsfortheofficeworkspace4. RecognizetheusefulnessofZ412-17inthedesignandredesignofofficeworkspacesDurationoftheWorkshop:1hourBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:LucyHartisacertifiedergonomistwithover25years’experienceguidingpublicandprivateorganizationsintheapplicationofergonomicstoenhanceemployeehealth,well-beingandproductivity.SheactivelycontributestothedevelopmentandmaintenanceofstandardsandguidelinesincludingtheCanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA)applicationstandardforofficeergonomicsandtheBusinessandInstitutionalFurnitureManufacturer’sAssociation(BIFMA)ErgonomicsGuideline.SheistheChairofCSATechnicalCommitteeonZ412OfficeErgonomics,ChairofBIFMAErgonomicsSubcommitteeandmemberoftheLEEDPilotCredit44ErgonomicsWorkGroup.Lucyisapeer-electedEducationallyInfluentialErgonomistasrecognizedbytheInstituteforWorkandHealth.
27
DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario
RichardWells,PhD1.21ProfessorEmeritus,DepartmentofKinesiology,UniversityofWaterloo
2Director,CentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)
DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario:Amulti-stakeholderinitiativeledbytheCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)BuildingonpreviousworkbytheOntarioHealthandSafetysystem,theCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)hasbeenleadingatwo-yearprojecttodevelopanewOntarioMSDPreventionGuide.Wehaveusedacollaborativeapproachtoengageandworkwithawiderangeofworkplacestakeholders.ThenewGuidelinesarebeingreleasedduringGlobalergonomicsmonthinOctober2018.Thehalf-dayworkshopwillleadtheparticipantsthroughtheprocessofcreatingtheGuidelinesandtherationaleforthecontentandstructure.Durationoftheworkshop:3hoursBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:Dr.RichardWellsisaprofessorintheDepartmentofKinesiology,FacultyofAppliedHealthSciences,UniversityofWaterloo.HewaseducatedasaMechanicalengineerattheUniversityofManchester,EnglandandMcMasterUniversity,wherehespecializedinAppliedMechanicswithapplicationtohumanfunctionandinjury;headinjuryinboxinganddescriptionofhumangaitusingassistivedevices.Heistheassociatedirector,stakeholderrelationsfortheCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD),amulti-universityCentrehostedattheUniversityofWaterloo.HeisalsoanadjunctscientistattheInstituteforWork&Health(IWH).HeisapastmemberoftheBoardofDirectorsofOccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkers(OHCOW).HehasbeeninvolvedinergonomicsstandardsandregulationswithACGIHandtheOccupationalSafetyandHealthAdministration(OSHA)intheUSAandintheOntarioStrategyforthePreventionofMSDandtheCanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA).Healsoactsasaconsultantandspeakeronergonomicissues.
28
MovingfromLabtoIndustry:HowtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptabilityAllisonStephens,MSc,CCPE,CPE1
1FanshaweCollege,LondonOntario,CanadaLearningobjectivesinclude:
� Criticalthinkingtodetermineapproachtoforcemeasurement� Measureforcestodemonstratepartvariation.� ReviewanddemonstrateexternalinfluencesonForcemeasurement� Analysisofacceptabilityrelativetostrengthcapability
TheworkshopwouldbeusingtheMark10forcegauge.Workshopwillincludemanyhandsonmeasurements,oflego,jars,clips,andtriggers.Topicsofdiscussionwouldincludeabriefreviewofforcegauges,tipsandtrick,variabilityofpartsandhowtodealwiththisstatistically.Fromthemeasurementstaken,participantswillevaluatetheacceptabilityoftheeffortusingtheHandpaksoftware,DreyfusandPeebles&Norrisreferences.Toconcludetheworkshoptherewillbeademonstrationofanewtechnology,theForcePuck.Anintroductiontowhyitwasdeveloped,it’sreliabilityandrepeatabilitywillbediscussed.ParticipantscanperformhandsonmeasurementwiththeForcePuck,andreviewtheforceprofiles.Thiswillbeahands-onworkshopforbothbeginnersandpractitionerstoreview,discussanddemonstrateforcemeasurementinthefieldofergonomics.Durationofworkshop:90minutes
29
Canergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?-Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients
TrevorSchellBSc.MSc,CCPE11OccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkers(OHCOW),Sudbury,ON,Canada
WorkshopOverviewWhileofficeergonomicscanbethemostcommonareaofinvestigationforanErgonomist,theprocessofevaluationandstructuringofrecommendationscanoftenbecomeveryconfusingandcostlyforworkplaceswithoutsufficientknowledge.Nothingcanbemorefrustratingforacompanythanpurchasingnewequipmentonlytofindoutitisnotcompatiblewiththeworkers.Thisinturn,canhavemanyworkplacesrejectthenotionofergonomicsasabenefittothem.Ergonomistsneedtobeconsciousofequipmenttheyarerecommendingtotheirclientstoensuretheproducttheyaresuggestingwillperformaspromisedandnotplacetheworkeratanincreasedriskofinjury.Howrecommendationsarepresentedisimportanttoworkplacepartiestoensuretheyarepurchasingthecorrectequipment.Forexample,issaying“purchaseaheightadjustablekeyboardtray”thecorrectapproach?Byutilizingcasestudiesandtoolslearnhowtoavoidcostlymistakesandimproveemployeewell-being.
ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:• Toincreaseawarenessoftheimportanceofknowingtheproductyouarerecommending• Implicationsofrecommendingequipmentwithlittletonoresearchbehindit• Thecoststoworkplacesbasedonunsoundrecommendations• Recognitionoftheimportanceofknowingtheproductbeingsuggested• Isaproducttrulyergonomicorbeneficialtotheworker
DurationoftheWorkshop:90minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:TrevorSchellgraduatedfromtheUniversityofGuelphin1994withanHonorsBachelorofSciencedegreeinHumanKineticswithspecializationinthefieldofBiomechanicsandErgonomics.In1997,TrevorgraduatedfromtheUniversityofMassachusetts-LowellwithaMaster’sdegreeinthefieldofErgonomicsandaminorinEpidemiology.TrevorisalsorecognizedasaCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)andafullmemberoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(ACE).TrevorhasbeenanErgonomistwiththeOccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkersfor20yearsworkingwithjointhealthandsafetycommitteesonavarietyofergonomicissuesoverawiderangeofindustries.HeisalsothecoordinatoroftheannualInternationalRSIDaywebinarseries.Trevorhasalsopresentedatconferences,testifiedbeforeaUSSenateCommissionontheneedforergonomicregulationsandhasbeenfeaturedininterviewswithCNN,AssociatedPress,CTVandCBCRadio.
30
PAPERSESSION1:PHYSIOLOGY
Day2-Oct16th
10:30-11:30
PaperSession1Physiology
IgorZoviléÉvaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelativeSamuelCharbonneauContraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempératureambianteAlexieDennieTheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry
31
Évaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelative.
Zovilé,I.1*,Charbonneau,S.1,Marchand,D.1,Gauvin,C.2,Tuduri,L.21UQAM,Montréal,Québec, Canada2IRSST,Montréal,Québec,Canada
Introduction
Leportdesappareilsdeprotectionrespiratoires(APR)detypeP100causeuninconfortquiincitelestravailleursànepasseprotégeradéquatementetàs’exposeràdescontaminantsquipeuventfavoriserledéveloppementdeplusieursmaladiesprofessionnelles(1).Parmilesfacteursenvironnementauxsusceptiblesd’influencerleurconfort,l’humiditérelativeinterfèreaveclesmécanismesdethermorégulation,augmenteraitlarésistancerespiratoire(2),etinciteraitlestravailleursànepasporterleurAPR.Ceprojetàcommeobjectifd’identifierlesconditionsenvironnementaleslesplusinconfortablesetquantifierl’effetdecesconditionssurplusieursparamètresphysiologiques.
MethodsHuithommesentre20et30ansontmarchépendant30minutesàuneinclinaisonaugmentantprogressivementde30%à80%ducoutcardiaquerelatif.Lestestsontétéréalisésdans3conditionsd’humiditérelativedifférentes(30%,50%,80%)àunetempératurede29°C.Chaqueconditionaétéeffectuéeavecetsansleportd’unAPR.Lesvariablessuivantesontétémesurées:saturationenoxyhémoglobine,fréquencecardiaque,températureinterne,températuredansl’APR,%O2,%CO2,fréquencerespiratoire,perceptiondel’effort,tempsderéaction,tempsdemouvement.
FindingsDanslesconditionsd’humiditérelativeplusélevéesonobservedesfréquencescardiaques(Figure1),l’EtCO2,lafréquencerespiratoireetuneperceptionsubjectivedel’effortsignificativementplusélevéspourunmêmeeffortpourlesconditionseffectuéesavecleportd’unAPR.Cesdifférencessontplusapparenteslorsdeseffortsphysiqueslesplusintenses.
32
RelevancetoPractitionersLesrésultatsdeceprojetdevraientpermettred’émettredenouvellesrecommandationspourlimiterlespériodesdetravailtroplongueschezlestravailleursportantunAPRdanscertainesconditionsenvironnementales.
References1. RamirezJA.EvaluationofparticlepenetrationandbreathingresistanceofN95filteringface---piecerespiratorsanduncertifieddustmasks.2015.2. BeaudryC,DionC,GérinM,PerraultG,BéginD,LavouéJ.Expositiondestravailleursdelaconstructionàlasilicecristalline.Bilanetanalysedelalittérature(versioncorrigée)Montréal:InstitutderechercheRobert---Sauvéensantéetensécuritédutravail(IRSST).2011.3. CheMuhamedAM,AtkinsK,StannardSR,MundelT,ThompsonMW.Theeffectsofasystematicincreaseinrelativehumidityonthermoregulatoryandcirculatoryresponsesduringprolongedrunningexerciseintheheat.Temperature(Austin,Tex).2016;3(3):455---64.4. MoyenNE,EllisCL,CicconeAB,ThurstonTS,CochraneKC,BrownLE,etal.Increasingrelativehumidityimpactslow---intensityexerciseintheheat.Aviation,space,andenvironmentalmedicine.2014;85(2):112---9.5. RobergeRJ,KimJ---H,CocaA.Protectivefacemaskimpactonhumanthermoregulation:anoverview.Annalsofoccupationalhygiene.2011:mer069.
33
Contraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempérature
ambiante
DenisMarchand1*,ChantalGauvin2,LudovicTuduri2,SamuelCharbonneau1,IgorZovilé1
1UQAM,Montréal,Québec,Canada2IRSST,Montréal,Québec,Canada
Introduction
Dans le secteur de la construction, l’exposition professionnelle à divers contaminants tels quel’amiante, lasilicecristallineet lesmoisissures,estfréquentedansplusieursmétiers.Leportd’unappareil de protection respiratoire (APR) est reconnu commeun outil essentiel pour réduire lesrisques d’exposition par voie respiratoire dans les milieux où le contrôle à la source s’avèreinsuffisant.Unedesraisonslesplusfréquemmentcitéespourl'intoléranceetl'inutilisationdesAPRdetypefiltrantseraitl'inconfortliéàl'accumulationdechaleurauniveauduvisage(Radonovichetcoll., 2009; Baig et coll., 2010). Selon Roberge et coll. (2010), d’autres facteurs tels quel’augmentationdelatempératuredel'airrespirableetdelaconcentrationdedioxydedecarbone(CO2)àl’intérieurdel’APR,oudescontraintesphysiologiquestelsquelafréquencecardiaqueetlasaturation en oxygène peuvent aussi expliquer le manque de motivation à porter ce type deprotection respiratoire. L’objectif de ce projet de recherche consiste àmesurer l’impact du portd’unAPRàépurationd'airsur différentesvariablesphysiologiquesselon l’importancede l’effortphysique et de la température ambiante. Le typed’APR sélectionnépour l’étude est celui le plusfréquemment utilisé par les travailleurs du milieu de la construction et suggéré par l’ASPconstruction, soit undemi-masqueà filtreP100 réutilisable (3Msérie6000avec filtreparticules2091).
MéthodologieDesconditionsavecetsansAPRontétéévaluéeslorsd’untestd’effortprogressif(30%à80%ducoût cardiaque relatif) sur un tapis roulant dans une chambre à environnement contrôlé.Différentes conditions de température ambiante (23°, 29° et 35°C dans un environnement oùl’Humidité relative HR est constante à 50%) ont été évaluées afin de mesurer l’importance descontraintes physiologiques associées au port de l’APR selon l’effort demandé et la températureambiante.Lorsdesévaluations,destâchesperceptivo-motricesontétéréaliséesavant,pendantetaprèslestestssurletapisroulant.Plusieursvariablesphysiologiquesontétémesurées:lacapacitécardio-respiratoiremaximale(VO2max),laconcentrationdeCO2àl’intérieurdel’APR,lasaturationenoxygènecérébrale,ainsiquelafréquencecardiaqueetrespiratoire.Deséchellesdeperceptionpsychophysique(Borg)ontétéutiliséespourévaluerlaperceptiondel’effort.
Résultats
Lafigure1présentelafréquencerespiratoiredessujetsselonlesdifférentesconditionsévaluéesetl’intensitéde l’effort.L’analyse statistiqueAnovaàdeux facteursàmesures répétéesapermisdedéceler une différence significative seulement pour le facteurAPR (p=0,0028) et une interactionentre les facteurs APR*intensité (p=0,0003). L’analyse par comparaisonmultiple pour le facteurAPR semble indiquer que la condition avecAPR engendreune fréquence respiratoire supérieureparrapportàlaconditionsansAPRpourlesintensitésde70et80%ducoûtcardiaquerelatif.Lafigure 2 présente la perception de l’effort des sujets selon les différentes conditions évaluées etl’intensitédel’effort.L’analyseAnovaàdeuxfacteursàmesuresrépétéesapermisdedécelerunedifférence significative pour les facteursAPR (p=0,0001), intensité (p<0,0001) et une interactionentre les facteurs APR*intensité (p=0,0054). L’analyse par comparaisonmultiple pour le facteur
34
APRsembleindiquerquelaconditionavecAPRengendreuneperceptiondel’effortsupérieureparrapportàlaconditionsansAPRpourlesintensitésde70et80%ducoûtcardiaquerelatif.
Leportd’unAPRaégalementeudeseffetssignificatifssurlesconcentrationsenO2etenCO2respirées(p<0,0001).LesconcentrationsenO2àl’intérieurdel’APRetdansl’airambiantétaientrespectivementde17,51et20,52%,alorsquelesconcentrationsenCO2étaientde2,82et0,11%.
DiscussionLa variable physiologique la plus affectée par le port d’un APR semble être la fréquencerespiratoire.CommelesconcentrationsenO2etenCO2à l’intérieurdel’APRsontrespectivementinférieures et supérieures aux concentrations que l’on retrouve dans l’air ambiant, uneaugmentation de la fréquence respiratoire permet d’augmenter la ventilation afin de renouvelerl’airà l’intérieurde l’APR.Nosrésultatssontenaccordavec l’étudedeLouhevaaraetcoll. (1984)qui avait également observé une augmentation de la fréquence respiratoire avec le port d’unmasquedeprotectionà l’effort.Les recommandationsde l’OSHA(OccupationalSafetyandHealthAdministration) envers les concentrations en O2 dans l’air ambiant sont fixées à 19,5% et plus.PourlesconcentrationsenCO2,onrecommandedesvaleurs<0,5%pourunquartdetravailde8h,alorsquedesconcentrations>3%sontassociéesàdesmauxdetête,del’anxiétéetdelaconfusion.Lesrésultatsobtenuslorsdecetteétudenerespectentpascesrecommandations.L’augmentationdelafréquencerespiratoiresembleégalementexpliquerl’augmentationdelaperceptiondel’effortlorsdel’utilisationd’unAPR.
PertinencedelarecherchepourlespraticiensLesrésultatsobtenuspermettrontd’émettredesrecommandations lorsque lesAPRde typeP100sont utilisés dans des conditions ambiantes contraignantes et lors d’efforts physiques important.Des recommandations seront proposées pour identifier le début des situations à risque pour lasantédesutilisateursd’APR.
Références1. Radonovich,L.,Cheng,J.,Hodgson,M.,Shenal,B.,Bender,B.(2009).RespiratorTolerancein
HealthcareWorkersandImplicationsforPandemicInfluenza.JAMA.January(301).2. Baig,A.S,Knapp,C.,Eagan,A.E.(2010).Healthcareworkers’viewsaboutrespiratoruseand
featuresthatshouldbeincludedinthenextgenerationofrespirators.AmJInfectControl,38:18–25.
3. Louhevaara,V.,etal.(1984)."Cardiorespiratoryeffectsofrespiratoryprotectivedevicesduringexerciseinwell-trainedmen."EuropeanJournalofAppliedPhysiologyandOccupationalPhysiology52(3):340-345.
4. Roberge, R.J., Coca, A., Williams, W.J., Powell, J.B. et Palmiero, A.J. (2010b). Physiologicalimpact of the N95 filtering facepiece respirator on healthcare workers. Respir. Care May,55(5):569-577.
35
TheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry
AlexieDennie1,3*,CélineLarivière1,3,,ZsuzsannaKerekes2,3,TammyEger1,3,MonikaTiszberger2,CarolineDignard3,4,BehdinNowrouzi-Kia3,AlyssaSmith3,LisaSchutt3,4,
CourtneyLessel3,MichelLarivière1,31SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
2UniversityofPécs,Hungary,Europe3CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealthatLaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,
Canada4SchoolofRuralandNorthernHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
Introduction
Poorsleepqualitycanalteraworker’sattention,vigilanceandalertness1.Thesecanbefurtherimpactedinoccupationscharacterizedbychallengingworkingenvironmentstherebyincreasingaworker’svulnerabilitytoanoccupationalinjury2.Workintheminingindustrycanbeaphysicallydemandingoccupationconductedinsuboptimalworkingenvironments.Althoughevolutionsintechnology,includingequipmentmodernization,haveimprovedworkingconditions,theminingindustryremainsanoccupationcharacterizedbyextremesoftemperaturesandhumidity,suboptimallighting,poorairquality,elevatednoiseandphysicallydemandingwork,allofwhichcanimpactaworker’swellbeing.Inthecurrentstudy,thelinkbetweenthephysicalworkingenvironment,theworkingconditionsandsleepqualityintheminingindustrywereinvestigatedastheirassociationsarenotfullyunderstood.
MethodsDatawerecollectedfrom2,224workersfromaCanadianminingcompanyusingacomprehensivequestionnairethatincludedvariousvalidatedquestionnaires.Forthepurposeofthisstudy,amodifiedversionofthePittsburghSleepQualityIndex(PSQI)wasusedtocollectinformationonself-reportsofoverallsleepqualityoverthepastmonth.ThePSQIgeneratesanoverallGlobalComponentScorethatrangesfrom0to18.Scoresbetween0and4aredeemedasgoodsleepquality,andindividualsscoringbetween>4areclassifiedashavingpoorsleepquality.Furthermore,datawerecollectedfromtheNationalInstituteofOccupationalSafetyandHealth(NIOSH)GenericJobStressQuestionnaire.Usinganindependentsamplet-test,themeansoftheGlobalPSQIScoresfromtheparticipantsthatcompletedtheNIOSHGenericJobsStressQuestionnaire,morespecificallythephysicalenvironmentcomponent(i.e.noise,lighting,temperature,humidityaircirculation,airquality,dangeroussubstances,andoverallphysicalenvironment,)werecompared.
FindingsTheaverageGlobalPSQIScoreforindividualsthatareclassifiedashavinggoodsleepquality(N=345,16%ofsample)was2.34(±0.79).AsfortheindividualsthathadaGlobalPSQIscoreabove4(N=1781,84%ofsample),theaveragescorewas7.22(±2.69).TheoverallaverageoftheGlobalPSQIScorefortheentiresamplewas6.43(±3.07),whichqualifiesaspoorsleepquality.ThePSQIscoresforeachofthephysicalenvironmentsubcomponentsoftheNIOSHGenericJobStressQuestionnairearedisplayedinTable1.
DiscussionWhilepoorsleepqualityisknowntoimpactworkersonthejob,lessisknownabouthowtheworkingenvironmentintheminingsectorcancontributetosleepquality3.Resultsfromthecurrentstudysuggestthatover80%oftheworkersself-reportedpoorsleepqualitydefinedasscoresgreaterthan4onthePQSI.Thet-testsrevealedsignificantdifferencesbetweenthemeansoftheGlobalPSQIScoresaccordingtothesubcomponentsofthephysicalenvironment.Inparticular,sleepqualitywasworstforindividualsthatreportedworkinginnoisyconditions,poorlylitareas,
36
inuncomfortablesummertemperatures,incomfortablewintertemperatures,incomfortablehumidity,inenvironmentswithpooraircirculationandairquality,feelingunprotectedfromdangeroussubstances,andworkingincrowdedworkareas.Itisworthnotingthatthephysicalworkingenvironmentisconsideredacomponentofpsychosocialworkstress,whichinturnisakeydeterminantofsleepquality4.Althoughthereisarelationshipbetweenthephysicalworkingenvironmentandsleepquality,thesephysicalcomponentsmayimpactoverallsleepqualityindirectlyviapsychosocialworkstress.Accordingly,regressionmodelswillbedevelopedtoidentifythekeydeterminantsofsleepquality,includingthephysicalworkingenvironmentcomponentsthatcanexplainthegreatestvarianceofoverallsleepqualityscores.
RelevancetoPractitioners
Theworkplacephysicalenvironmentislinkedtooverallsleepqualityinthesampleofworkersinthecurrentstudy.Physicalfactorsmayinfluencesleepqualityviatheirimpactsonpsychosocialwellbeing,whichisknowntoaffectsleepquality.Table1.T-testanalysisforGlobalPSQIScoresandsubcomponentsfromtheNIOSHGenericJobStressQuestionnaireVariable Condition N M SD df pvalueNoise Toohigh 1412 6.64 3.11 1465 0.000
Fine 699 6.00 2.94Lighting Poor 983 6.67 3.15 2102 0.001
Fine 1121 6.21 2.98Temp.Summer Comfortable 904 6.05 3.00 2109 0.000
Uncomfortable 1207 6.71 3.09Temp.Winter Comfortable 827 6.69 3.08 2106 0.001
Uncomfortable 1281 6.26 3.04Humidity Toohighortoolow 873 6.07 2.89 1973 0.000
Fine 1231 6.68 3.17AirCirculation Good 1123 6.05 2.85 1969 0.000
Poor 982 6.88 3.23AirQuality Good 672 5.95 2.95 2096 0.000
Poor 1426 6.65 3.10DangerousSubstances
Protected 1201 6.09 2.96 1858 0.000Unprotected 894 6.91 3.15
OverallPhysicalEnvironment
Good 911 6.80 2.95 1878 0.000Poor 1189 6.14 3.18
CrowdedWorkArea
Crowded 331 7.04 3.38 432 0.000NotCrowded 1768 6.32 2.99
References[1]DrakeCL,RoehrsTA,BurduvaliE,BonahoomA,RosekindM,RothT.Effectsofrapidversusslowaccumulationofeighthoursofsleeploss.Psychophysiology.2001Nov;38(6):979-87.[2]SwaenGM,VanAmelsvoortLG,BültmannU,KantIJ.Fatigueasariskfactorforbeinginjuredinanoccupationalaccident:resultsfromtheMaastrichtCohortStudy.OccupationalandEnvironmentalMedicine.2003Jun1;60(suppl1):i88-92.[3]LintonSJ,KecklundG,FranklinKA,LeissnerLC,SivertsenB,LindbergE,SvenssonAC,HanssonSO,SundinÖ,HettaJ,BjörkelundC.Theeffectoftheworkenvironmentonfuturesleepdisturbances:asystematicreview.SleepMedicineReviews.2015Oct1;23:10-9.[4]ÂkerstedtT.Psychosocialstressandimpairedsleep.ScandinavianJournalofWork,Environment&Health.2006Dec1:493-501
37
INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION
Theevolutionofwearableassessmentdevicesinergonomics
PanelFacilitator:MicheleOliver,Ph.D.,P.Eng.1SchoolofEngineering,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,Canada
PanelOverviewWearablesarearecentadditiontooureverydayvocabularybutinrealitythey’vebeenavailableforuseinergonomicsforthebetterpartofthelastthreedecades.Thepurposeofthispanelwillbetohighlightwherewe’vebeen,wherewearerightnowandwhereweseethefuturegoingintermsofwearablesavailableforuseinergonomicassessments.Alongthewaywe’lltalkaboutproductdevelopmentusingarecentUniversityofGuelphengineeringcapstonedesignproject.
Panelists
Panelist1 MicheleOliver,Ph.D.,P.Eng.SchoolofEngineeringUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaWhatisawearable?ThePast-Abriefhistoryofwearablesinergonomics.Panelist2 KarenGordon,Ph.D.,P.Eng.ThePresentWhatproductsarecurrentlyavailable?Arethemeasurementsprovidedvalid(i.e.,dotheymeasurewhattheysaytomeasure)andreliable(andhowwouldyouknowiftheyweren’t)Panelist3 ErikaZiraldo,B.Eng.SchoolofEngineeringUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaBriefdiscussionofwhyandhowarecentwearableergonomicassessmentdevicewasdeveloped.Panelist4 AndrewHamilton-Wright,Ph.D.,P.Eng.SchoolofComputerScienceUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaTheFutureArtificialIntelligence–TheGood,theBadandtheUglyWhiledataloggersandotherwearablecollectiondeviceshavebeeninusefordecades,short-rangebroadcastdevicessuchastheFitbit™haverecentlybecomepopularasalocalarearemotesensorbroadcastingtocomputersandcellphones.Byusingtheavailablecomputationalpoweronacellphoneorsimilardevice,machinelearningalgorithms,reasoningsystemsandothertechnologies
38
identifiedasArtificialIntelligence(AI)comeintoplay.ThepositiveaswellasthenegativeaspectsofAIwillbediscussedaswellassomeinsightsintowhatthefuturemayhold.ConcludingRemarksfromAllPanelists-Dowearableshavethepotentialtoultimatelyreplaceergonomistsandothersafetyprofessionals?
39
PAPERSESSION2:MANUALMATERIALSHANDLING
Day2–Oct16th
10:30-11:30
PaperSession2ManualMaterialsHandling
HarrisonKlokeBalancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategyAlisonMcDonaldTheeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasksTiannaBeharriellPhysiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitude
40
Balancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategy
HarrisonKloke1,GulerArasan1,EricPoon1,AndrewTao-AnWong1,MohammadAbdoli-Eramaki1
1RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionTrainingforsafeliftingtechniquesisusedbyemployerstolowerexposuretoriskofworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuries.Inourpreviousstudies,266attendeesattwoprofessionalconferenceswereaskedtoidentifyanddemonstratetheirpreferredlifttechniquewithdemonstrationbeinganidealfloor-to-waistheightliftofa10-kgweightedcrate(1).TheresultsshowedthatthetrainedgroupexperiencelessloadingatL5/S1,buthigherloadingatthekneesandankles(1).
ObjectiveTheobjectiveofthisstudywastocomparethekinematics(joint)ofposturesofsymmetricalandasymmetricalliftingtechniquesinordertodeterminetheoptimalliftingmethodwithanequivalentloadingdistributiononalltheinvolvedjoints.
Methodology3DStaticStrengthPosturePredictionsoftware[3DSSPP]wasusedtomodel6912symmetricalconditionsrepresentingallthepossibleliftingposturesfromthefloorwithdifferentpositionsfortheupperextremities,trunkandthelowerextremities(4leganglesx6thighanglesx2reachingdistancesx4trunkanglesx3footpositionsx2footanglesx3loadsx2:95th%ilemaleand5th%ilefemale).Theforceincrementstobothhandswere0,11.5,and23Kgrespectively.Female5thandmale95thpercentilewerechosenfortheanalysis.3DSSPPisawidelyusedtoolthatisknownforsimulationofstaticposturesforkinematicevaluation(2).
ResultsJointmoments,spinalcompressionforces,andpopulationstrengthcapabilitieswereanalyzedfromthedatacollected.Theprimaryevaluationsshowedthatlowestaveragejointmomentsforthekneeandhipwereobservedinthe150-60(Figure1.),and30-80(Figure2.)postures.Lowestanklejointmomentsvariedbypopulation.Thesewereseeninthe80-60postureforMale95thpercentilepopulationandthe80-50postureforFemale5thpercentilepopulation.Whenaverageanklejointmomentswereexamined,the80-60postureproducedthelowestmoment(Figure3.).AllpopulationsshowedthelowestL5/S1compressionforcesinthe30-80posture(Figure4.).Hipandanklepopulationstrengthcapabilitieswerewithinsaferangeswithmorethan80%ofallpopulationscapableofreproducingtherequiredjointangles(Figure5.).Kneepopulationstrengthcapabilitiesshowedsomeareasofconcernthoughwithonly29.97%oftheMale50thpercentilepopulationand55.93%oftheFemale5thpercentilepopulationhavingthestrengthrequiredtoreproducethe30-80posture.Postureswithkneeangles
41
of80and150degreeswereobservedtohavethegreatestproportionofthepopulationabletoreproducetheposture(Figure5.).
ConclusionOptimalliftingposturesareoftenthoughtofasasquatliftsimilartothe30degreekneeangleposturesmodelledwhilespineisthemainfocusoftraining.However,thisanalysispresentsfindingsthatshowsomepopulationsmaynothavethestrengthcapabletoproducethesepostures,andhavehighertotaljointmomentswhentheloadisliftedsymmetricallyinfrontofthebody.Basedontheposturesmodelled,150degreekneeangleareoptimalforthistaskwhenthefeetareparallelandkeptsymmetricalclosetooneanother.Thisissupportedbylowertotaljointmomentscomparedtoallotherposturesandthegreaterproportionofthepopulationscapableofproducingit.
References1. Abdoli-EramakiM,AgababovaM,JanabiJ,PaskoE,DamecourC.EvaluationandComparisonof
LiftingTechniquesAmongIndividualswithDifferentLevelsofLiftingTraining.Toronto,Canada;RyersonUniversity;2017
2. BudnickP.AretheRevisedNIOSHLiftingEquationand3DSSPPModelsValidRiskPredictorsforWork-RelatedLowBackPain?[Internet].;[citedMay29th,2018].Availablefrom:https://ergoweb.com/are-the-revised-niosh-lifting-equation-and-3dsspp-models-valid-risk-predictors-for-work-related-low-back-pain-2/
42
Theeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasks
AlisonC.McDonald*,AlanC.Cudlip,EmmaTung,JackP.Callaghan,ClarkR.Dickerson
1UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionWorkplaceupperextremitybackandshouldermusculoskeletalinjuriesareverycommoninOntario1.Awkwardpostures,constrainedworkplaces,repetitiveexertionsandhighloadsareriskfactorsfordevelopingtheseinjuriesintheworkplace2.Thepurposeofthisinvestigationwastoevaluatetaskdemandsduringcommontasksperformedbytelecommunicationpoleworkerswhileusing3different
laddersandproviderecommendationsforwhichladdershouldbeusedtominimizeawkwardposturesandhighshoulderandlowbackloading.
Methods
Twenty-threeyoung,healthy,noviceparticipantswereincludedinthisstudy(23males,2females;27±4yearsold,1.8±0.2mtall,87.2±14.3kgbodyweight).Participantswereinstrumentedwithreflectivemotioncapturemarkers(20individualmarkers,7markerclusters)and10VICONMX20cameras(VICON,Oxford,UK).Theywereprovidedwithpersonalprotectiveequipment(fallarrestharness,ahardhat,steeltoeboots)andhands-ontrainingonhowtoperformtheladdertasks.Participantswereaskedtocomplete4ladderhandlingtasks([1]Removingladderfromsimulatedvehicle;[2]Liftingladderfromgroundtocarryposition;[3]Carryladdertoraiselocation;[4a]Raiseladdersupportedagainstwall,[4b]freeraiseladder),eachwith3differentladders([1]2-piecewoodladder(8.5m,29.6kg),2P-W;[2]2-piecefiberglassladder(8.5m,29.6kg),2P-F;[3]3-piecewoodladder(9.2m,30.1kg),3P-W.Eachtask/laddercombinationwascompleted3times.Theorderthatthetasks/laddercombinationswereperformedwereblockrandomizedbetweenparticipantstomitigateordereffects.Followingeachtask,participantsratedtheirperceivedexertion(RPE)andperceivedhand,shoulderandbackdiscomfort(RPD).Attheendofthedatacollectionparticipantscompletedasurveyexpressingtheirfavoriteandleastfavoriteladderandtask.Inclusivehumeralelevationanglesrelativetothetrunkwerecalculatedusingalgebraicdotproductsbetweentheupperarmandtrunkvectors.TorsoanglesrelativetotheglobalaxissystemwerecalculatedwithanXYZEulersequence.Tocalculatejointloading,externalhandforceswereestimatedwithahandhelddynamometerplacedbetweentheladderandoneoftheresearchersduringthetasksandusedinakineticmodelthatwascreatedinMatlabwithindividualparticipantsegmentmassesandpostures.Theraisetaskswereevaluatedatthetopandbottomoftheraise.Resultantjointmomentswerecalculatedandcomparisonsweremadetopopulationstrengthestimatesfora50thpercentilemalefrom3DSSPP(v6.0.1,UniversityofMichigan).Theanalysisportionofthisinvestigationisongoing,thereforeonlytheresultsforthecarryandraisetasksareincluded.Repeatedmeasuresanalysisofvarianceexaminedtheinfluencesoftask(5)andladder(3)forjointangles,forces,moments,andperceptualvariables(RPE,RPD)(IBMSPSSStatisticv.23IBM,NY,USA).LeastSquaredDifferences(LSD)testswithSidakcorrectionswereusedtoevaluateposthocsignificantmaineffects.
Findings
Thebiomechanicalvariables(posture,jointforces,jointmoments)wereaffectedbythebothladderusedandthetaskcompleted.Armandtrunkposturewereinfluencedbytask(p<0.05)andwerethesameacrossladders.Dominantarmelevationwasgreatestatthetopsoftheraisestasksthanthecarryandthebottomoftheraises(p<0.05)andwasloweratthebottomoftheraisesthanthecarry
43
task(p<0.05).Shoulderandlowbackjointforceswereinfluencedbybothtaskandladder(p<0.05).Inthedominantshoulderandthelowback,jointforceswerelowestwhentaskswereperformedwiththe3-piecewoodladder.Acrossthetasks,dominantshoulderandthelowbackjointforcesweregreatestduringthecarrytask.Jointmomentsinthedominantandnon-dominantshoulderandtrunkwereinfluencebyladderusedandtask(p<0.05).Whencomparedtoestimatesofpopulationjointstrengthsfor50thpercentilemales,resultantdominantshoulderjointmomentswere27-81%ofstrength(Figure1)andresultanttrunkmomentswere61-123%ofstrength.Inthesurvey,52%ofrespondentsindicatedapreferenceforthe2-piecefiberglassladder,comparedto24%forboththe2-pieceand3-piecewoodladders.
DominantShoulderMoments
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
LadderandTask
Figure1:Resultantshouldermoments(Nm)forthe5tasksand3laddersplottedinbars.Resultantpopulationstrengthvalues,fora50thpercentilemale,calculatedwith3DSSPP(v6.0.1)areplottedwithredlinesforeachtask.
DiscussionTherewasnopreciseladderchoicethatuniversallymitigatedthephysicaldemandswhilealsoloweringperceptualdifficulty.However,trendsemergedthatfavoredthe3-piecewoodladderforminimizingthebiomechanicalvariables.The3-piecewoodenladderwasassociatedwiththelowestjointloadsatboththeshouldersandlowback,whilethesurveysuggeststhatthe2-piecefiberglassladdergenerallyledtopreferredbodyposture.Severaltaskandladdercombinationsrequiredclosetoorevengreaterresultanttrunkmomentsthanthestrengthestimates. Inalargestudyofoccupationallowbackpaindevelopment,lowbackpaincaseswereexposedtogreaterpeaktrunkmomentsandhandforces3,suggestingthatcautionshouldbetakenwhenperformingthesetasks.
RelevancetoPractitionersAlthoughthisinvestigationwasspecificallyfocusedanddesignedfortheevaluationofladderhandlingtasksperformedbytelecommunicationpoleworkers,thesetasksandsimilaronesarecommonacrossmanyindustries.Spaceconstraintsmakelaboratorybasedevaluationsofladderhandlingtaskschallenging.Thefindingsfromthisinvestigationshowtheimportanceofequipmentevaluationandselectionandcanbeappliedacrossindustriesthatuseladders.
References1. http://www.wsibstatistics.ca/2. McDonaldAC,KeirPJ.TheResponseoftheShoulderComplextoRepetitiveWork:ImplicationsforWorkplace
Design.CritRevBiomedEng.201543(1):21-32.3. NormanR,WellsR,NeumannPetal.Acomparisonofpeakvscumulativephysicalworkexposurerisk
factorsforthereportingoflowbackpainintheautomotiveindustry.ClinicalBiomechanics.199813:561-573.
2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W
Carry Free Raise - Free Raise - Top Raise - bottom Bottom
Raise - top
44
PhysiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitudeTiannaBeharriell1,WantuirJunior1,Jean-FrancoisMauger1,PascalImbeault1,
RyanGraham11SchoolofHumanKinetics,FacultyofHealthSciences,UniversityofOttawa,Ottawa,
Canada
IntroductionCurrently,musculoskeletaldisorderresearchfocusesprimarilyonmechanicalvariablestoassesswhetheracuteorcumulativetaskdemandsexceedthecapacityofthetissue;however,itisimportanttoassesshowothernon-mechanicalvariablesaffecttissuecapacityinatime-dependentmanner1,2.Thecurrentresearchsoughttoanswerthequestionofwhetherliftingaheavierloadinalowfrequencymannerinducedcomparablesystemicinflammatoryresponsestoliftingalighterloadinahighfrequencymanner.Placedinanoccupationalcontext,ifaworkerhastomove10boxesweighing50kgintotalfromthefloortoashelfatwaistheight,theoreticallytheycouldchoosetolift50kgatonce,orperform5liftsof10kg,10liftsof5kg,andsoon.
PurposeTosupplementthetraditionalmechanicalapproachtoMSDresearchbyconsideringsystemicinflammatoryresponsesandrelatedfactors(i.e.bodycompositionandpsychology)underdifferentialmagnitudesandfrequenciesduringaliftingtasktoidentifytheirimpactoninjuryriskwhilecontrollingforexternalbiomechanicalwork.
MethodsIninitialpilotwork,fourparticipants(2M/2F)completedtwosessionsseparatedbyaperiodofoneweek.Eachsessionincludedaliftingtask(2hrs)fromfloortoknuckleheightundertworepetitiveloadingprotocolsdesignedwithequivalentcumulativeexternalbiomechanicalwork(5%and25%ofmaximumbackstrengthatarateoffiveandonelift(s)/minute,respectively).Baselineblooddrawswereperformedat8amoneachdayandat0,2,4,6and24hoursfollowingcompletionoftheliftingtask.Sampleswereanalyzedforinflammatorymarkers(TumourNecrosisFactorAlpha(TNF-α),Cortisol,Interleukin-6(IL-6),Interleukin-8(IL-8),andCreatineKinase(CK)).EachparticipantalsounderwentaDualX-RayAbsorptiometryscanandcompletedPainCatastrophizing/KinesiophobiaScalesandVisualAnalogueScalesofdiscomfort.CaloricintakewasstandardizedforallparticipantsaccordingtotheHarris-Benedictequation.Apreliminary2-wayrepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasrunforeachinflammatorymarkertodetermineeffectsofloadcondition(5%vs.25%)andtime(Baseline,0,2,4,6and24hours).Thesedatawereutilizedtodecidewhichmarkersandtime-pointswouldbeusedinpart2ofthestudy(N=12).
45
Figure1:IL-6andIL-8concentrationlevelsat0,2,4,6and24hours
ResultsThemaineffectsoftimeandload,aswellastheload*timeinteractionwerenon-significantforCK,cortisolandTNF-α.MeanconcentrationlevelsforIL-6andIL-8inparticipants1-4areshowninFigure1.Overall,IL-8andIL-6exhibitedthegreatestchangefrombaselineconcentrationsat24hourspost-lifting,remainingelevatedonaverageby5.13and2.5pg/mL,respectively,forthe25%condition,and4.4and5.51pg/mLforthe5%condition.Il-6exhibitedastatisticallysignificanteffectoftimeonconcentration(p=0.024,η2=0.683)andwhilenotstatisticallysignificant,therewasamoderateeffect(η²=0.455)forload*timeinteraction.
DiscussionThepreliminaryresultsdemonstratesystemicinflammationthatisnotresolved24hoursfollowingaliftingtask,andthatIL-6andIL-8werethemostsensitivetothetask.Inpart2,wewillcollectdatafrom8moreparticipantsatBaseline,0,4and24hours,andwilltestforIL-6andIL-8.Correlationaldatabetweenpsychologicalscales/adipositydistributionandsystemicinflammationwillbepresentedattheconference.
References:1.Yangetal.2011.ClinBiomech26(5),431-437.2.Klyneetal.2016.BrainBehav.Immun.60,84-92.
46
PAPERSESSION3:OFFICEERGONOMICS
Day2–Oct16th
14:45-16:15
PaperSession3OfficeErgonomics
NancyBlackChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealofficeenvironments:impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariationsDanielViggianiAutomatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensorsNancyBlackMatchingposturalstatesequenceswithfatigueandpainexperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandsit-standworkstationsKaylaFewsterAnevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemands
47
ChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealOfficeenvironments:Impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariations
NancyL.Black1,MathieuTremblay,2,3,GiberingMougnol1,MaximeMcGrath2and
PamelaKengne11MechanicalEngineeringDepartment,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,N.-B.,Canada2SchoolofKinesiology&Recreation,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,N.-B.,Canada
3FacultyofKinesiology,UniversityofNewBrunswick,Fredericton,N.-B.,Canada
IntroductionSedentarybehavioursobservedinofficeenvironmentsandcomputerintensiveworkareassociatedwithmultiplehealthissues[1].Onesolutionsuggestedisregularlyalternatingbetweenstandingandsitting[2].Differentcontrolledperiodshavebeenstudied:15or30-minuteextendedstandingperiodsperhour(25%and50%standing,respectively)[3]and5-minutestandingfor10-minutesitting(33%standing)[4].Typically,atmost50%oftheworkdayshouldbestanding,thisbeinginterspersedregularly,respectingmicrobreaksevery20to40minutes[5].Adatacollectioniscurrentlyunderwaytodeterminethe“best”durationnon-sitting(standingormoving)withina30-minutecycleduringtypicalwork.Thispaperdescribes:1)theprotocolusingaheight-adjustabletableandcontrollertocomparesixstandingperiods’impactonobjectiveandsubjectivevariablesrelatingtomusculoskeletaldisorder(MSD)development,and2)thechallengesofthisprotocol.
Methods
Studydesign:Twenty-fourofficeworkersarecurrentlyparticipatinginthisnaturalexperimentalstudydesign,withatmostsixatatime.Thisprotocoloccursinparticipants’workingenvironmentwithexperimentalandcontrolconditions.Eachparticipantusesallsixstand-sitdurationratiosinrandomisedordering.Atleast3days’exposuretoeachconditionprovidesrequiredacclimatisationbeforeanhour-longcontinuousrecordingofparticipantandcondition,workingnormally.Conditions:Anhour-longbaselinerecordingwithworker’susualofficedeskprecedesinstallationoftheheight-varyingdynamicdeskandagainfollowsthecompletionofthesixcontrolleddynamicconditions.Forthedurationofdynamicconditions,theparticipant’susualdeskisreplacedbyoneofsixmodifiedelectricallyheightadjustabletable(motorizedDL5systembyLinak;Nordborg,Denmark)fromErgotables.com(Thetfordmines,QC,Canada),withsurfacedimensions1.40mx0.76mwithheightfrom0.68mto1.35m.Casters(0.05mheight)facilitateinstallation.Anin-housedesignedcontrolsystemcommunicatesstandingandsittingconditionstothetableforeachparticipant(i.e.thestandingandseatedelbowheightfromthefloorwhenwearingregularshoes),includingstandingduration(0%,10%,20%,30%,40%,or50%)withina30-minutecycle.Datacollection:Bothsubjectiveandobjectivedataseriesarecollected.Firstly,participantsansweredtwoquestionnairesdaily(atstartandendofeachworkday),signallingtheirperceivedagreementalonga10-pointLikert-typescaleforeachofelevensubjectivedimensions(stiff,tired,neckpain,backpain,happy,uncomfortable,productive,abilitytoconcentrate,alert,headache,eyepain).Secondly,objectivedatawererecordedoverone-hourattheendofeachcondition’sexposure.Objectivemeasurementsquantify:1)posturalvariationsandgroupthemintohealthyandunhealthycategoriesusinginertialsensors,inclinometersandvideocamera;2)muscularactivityusingsurfacewirelessEMGofsternocleidomastoid,superiortrapezius,anteriordeltoidandgastrocnemiuslateralis(onthedominantside);and3)autonomicnervoussystem(ANS)activityusingheartratevariability(HRV).Videosupportstaskanalysisandprovidescontextfordatarecordedbytheotherequipment.Overall,theeightdatacollectionsoccuroveratleastfiveweeks.
48
ChallengesencounteredThenaturalisticstudysettingcreatedchallengesrelatedtothetableanditsinstallation,studydesignandparticipantavailability.Dynamictable:Addingcasterstotablesfacilitatedtheirmovement,butincreasedtheminimumtablesurfaceheighttofrom0.62mto0.68m.Whilelowerthanstandardofficedeskheight,thiswassometimeshigherthanseatedelbowheightwiththeusers’properlyadjustedofficechair.Thenseatheightmustbeincreasedandafootrestaddedtorespectergonomicsguidelines.Installation:Eachphysicalofficeenvironmentdiffered.Installationmustallowvideotrackingwithoutencumberingwork.Officeswithbuilt-indesksurfaces,attachedtodividerswereparticularlychallenging.Inonecase,theworksurfacewasdetachedfromthedividersforthedurationofthestudyandreplacedbythetable.Inanother,participationwasimpossiblebecauseexistingworksurfaceswerenotremovable,andweresmallerthanthesuppliedtable.Studydesign:Researcherstriedtominimiseparticipantandworkdisruption,howeverequipmentinstallationtook30minutesforeachcontinuousrecordingsession.CalibrationofEMGusingmaximumvoluntarycontractionswerelongerandlessrelevant;task-relevantmaximawerequicker.Earlyparticipantsfrequentlyforgottofillindailyquestionnaires;dailyelectronicremindersandimmediatequestionnairesubmissionimprovedresponserates.Participants:Todate,fourteenparticipantsstartedtheprotocol,fourcompleteditandsixareinprogress.Ofthefourthatdroppedout,twowereduetovacationandtimecommitments,andoneeachdueemploymentchangeandhealth.Delaysinequipmentavailabilityexacerbatedconstraints.
Conclusionsanddiscussion
WhilestudyingrealworkactivitiesintheirnaturalenvironmentbetterreflectstrueMSDrisks,implementingusualandnecessaryscientificcontrolswasparticularlychallenging.Researchersandpractitionersmustbecreativetoovercomespatialconstraintsandminimiseinconveniencetoparticipants.Sharingthisstudy’schallengescanhelpotherstudiesinnaturalworkenvironmentsanticipatelikelyproblems.Participantsusingthedynamictablewiththisprotocolappreciatedimposedpositionvariationsandthechancetosit-standchangesduringtheirwork,buttheexperimentalcontrolsimplementedinthisstudylimitedparticipation.
AcknowledgementOfficeErgonomicsResearchCommittee(OERC),theNaturalSciencesandEngineeringResearchCouncil(NSERC)ofCanadaDDG2017-00014andUniversitédeMonctonprovidedfunding.
References1. Owen,N.,Healy,G.N.,Matthews,C.E.,Dunstan,D.W.Toomuchsitting:Thepopulationhealthscienceofsedentarybehavior.ExercSportSciRev.2010;38(3):105-113.
2. Davis,K.G.Kotowski,S.E.StandUpandMove:YourMusculoskeletalHealthDependsonIt.ErgonDes.2015;23(3):9-13.
3. EbaraT,KuboT,InoueT,MurasakiGI,TakeyamaH,SatoT,SuzumuraH,NiwaS,TakanishiT,TachiN,ItaniT.Effectsofadjustablesit-standVDTworkstationsonworkers'musculoskeletaldiscomfort,alertnessandperformance.IndHealth.2008;46(5):497-505.
4. Karakolis,T.&Callaghan,J.P.Theimpactofsit-standofficeworkstationsonworkerdiscomfortandproductivity:Areview.AppErgon.2014;45(3):799-806.
5.McLeanL,TingleyM,ScottRN,RickardsJ.Computerterminalworkandthebenefitofmicrobreaks.ApplErgon.2001;32(3):225-237.
49
Figure1:Sittingandstandingdistributionsofdeskheights,separatedbygender.
Automatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensors
DanielViggiani*,EricWill,JeffM.Barrett,andJackP.Callaghan.DepartmentofKinesiology,UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada
Introduction
Sit-standworkstationshavebeenshowntoreducemusculoskeletal(1)andcardiovasculardisorders(2)relatedtoprolongedsittingorstandingatwork.However,thesehealthbenefitsarereliantontheusertransitioningbetweenseatedandstandingconfigurations(1).Measuringtheeffectivenessofasit-standworkstationinprovidingtheintendedhealthbenefitsrequiresaccurateandreliablemeasurementofitsusage.Therefore,thepurposeofthisprojectwastoconstructandtestalow-costsensormadefromreadilyaccessiblecomponentsthatwascapableofautomaticallydetectingwhetherauserisstanding,seatedorabsentfromasit-standworkstation.
MethodsSensorConstructionThesensorconsistedofthreesensingcomponentsandanintegrator,connectedtoalaptopthroughUSB.Thesensingcomponentsincludedanultrasonicdistancesensor(HC-SR04,ElegooIndustries,Shenzhen,China),aninfrareddistancesensor(GP2Y0A02YK0F,SharpElectronics,OsakaJapan),andaninfraredtemperaturesensor(IRTemp54,Freetronics,PtyLtd,Maroondah,Australia).ThethreesensingcomponentsinterfacedwithanArduinoUnoR3(ArduinoLLC,Turin,Italy)whichwasprovidedwithashortcustomscriptthatconvertedrawsensoroutputsintodistancesandtemperatures.Allcomponentsweremountedinarectangularfoam-corehousingthatcouldbeeasilyaffixedtotheundersideofmostcommerciallyavailablesit-standdesks.Theultrasonicdistancesensorwaspointedatthegroundandservedtomeasurethecurrentdeskheight.Theinfrareddistanceandtemperaturesensorswereaimedattheusertomeasurethedistancebetweentheuserandthesensorhousingaswellasthetemperatureofareaaroundtheuser’sworkingposition.Aneight-hourdrifttestwasperformedoneachsensorcomponenttoensurestability.
PredictingSit-StandDeskUseApilotstudywasconductedon72participants(38female)todeterminethedistributionofpreferredstandingandsittingdeskheights.Thesedistributionscarriedforwardintoalaboratorystudywiththesensorpreviouslydescribedmountedtothesamedeskasusedinthepilotstudy.Thirtysamplesweretakenfromboththestandingandsittingdistributionsofdeskheights,ensuringthe1stand99thpercentileofeachdistributionwereincludedinsampling.Deskheightsweresetusingreal-timefeedbackfromanoptoelectronicmotioncapturesystem(OptotrakCertus,NDI,Waterloo,Canada).Two-thirdsofthetrialsinvolvedasinglemaleparticipant(26years,175cm,90kg)simulatingofficeworkatthedesk.Thiswasdonesothatthereweretwentytrialswithauserpresentandstandingatthedesk,twentytrialswiththeuserpresentandsittingatthedesk,andtwentytrialswiththeusernotatthedeskateitherastandingorsittingdeskheight.Amultinomiallogisticregressionwasperformedtodetermineifthesensorcouldaccuratelyclassifyeachofthesixtytrialsaseithera)standingandpresent
50
(Stand),b)sittingandpresent(Sit),orc)awayfromthedesk(Away).Cross-validationwasperformedusingabootstrappingprocedurewhere80%ofthedatasetwasselectedatrandomandusedasatrainingdataset;theremaining20%ofthedatawasusedasatestdatasettoassesstheregression’saccuracy.Thisprocedurewasrepeated1000times.
FindingsTherewereminimaldriftobservedintheinfraredtemperaturesensor(0.2°C/hour);theothercomponentsdidnotdrift.Therewasacleardichotomybetweenstandingdeskheightsandsittingdeskheightsregardlessofgender(Figure1).Theminimumheightofthedeskwas70cm;someparticipantspreferredadeskheightbelowthisminimum.Allthreesensors(ultrasonicdistance,infrareddistanceandinfraredtemperature)werefoundtobesignificantpredictorsofconditionsbyalikelihoodratiotest(Table1).Cross-validationdeterminedthatthemodelwas94.1%accurate(95%CI:93.9–94.3%)atpredictingnovelconditions,with99.8%ofallmisclassificationsfalselypredicteduserpresenceratherthandeskheight.Figure2showssensorinputsforeachofthe60trials.
Discussion
Alow-cost,automatedsensorwasconstructedthatallowsfordetectingthesit-standdeskconfigurationwithanestimated94%accuracy.Adistributionofpreferredsittingandstandingdeskheightswerealsopresented.Oneofthereasonsforthehighpredictionratesisthatthestandingandsittingdeskheightdistributionsdonotoverlap;thisallowsthedistinctionbetweensittingandstandingtorelysolelyontheultrasonicsensordirectedattheground.Thepresenceofauserwasbasedoninfrareddistanceandtemperaturesensors,whichwerefoundtobelessaccuratethantheultrasonicsensorduetovariabilityinclothinganduserpositioning.
RelevancetoPractitionersPractitionerscandesignandimplementsensorsbasedonthismodeltoautomaticallytrackusersatsit-standdeskswithhighaccuracy.
References1. KarakolisT,CallaghanJP.Theimpactofsit-standofficeworkstationsonworkerdiscomfort
andproductivity:Areview.ApplErgon.2014;45(3):799–806.2. GravesLEF,MurphyRC,ShepherdSO,CabotJ,HopkinsND.Evaluationofsit-stand
workstationsinanofficesetting:Arandomisedcontrolledtrial.BMCPublicHealth;2015;15(1):1–14.
DeskHeight(Ultrasonic)
User-DeskDistance(InfraredDistance)
TemperatureatDesk(InfraredTemperature)
LikelihoodRatio 39.381 8.771 32.689
P-Value <0.001 0.012 <0.001
Figure2:Sensoroutputsforthe60trialscollectedinthelaboratorystudy.
Table1:Likelihoodratiosforthelogisticmodelusedtopredictsit-standdeskcondition.
51
MatchingPosturalStateSequenceswithFatigueandPainExperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandSit-StandWorkstations
NancyL.Black1,AndrewHamilton-Wright2,JoshuaLange2,ClémentBouet1,Mariah
MartinShein31MechanicalEngineeringDepartment,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,NB,Canada
2SchoolofComputerScience,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,ON,Canada3ComputerScience/TheoreticalNeuroscience,UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada
Introduction
Officeworkplacesaretypicallysedentaryandinvolveintensivecomputeruse(1),andresearchconsistentlylinkssedentarybehaviourstohealthdegradationincludingmusculoskeletaldisorders(MSDs)(2),withapproximately75%ofofficeworkersreportingsignificantdiscomfortinoneormorebodyregions,particularlyintheneck,backandshoulders(3,4).Regularlychangingbetweensittingandstanding,includingafter6or9minutesofa20minutecycle,hasbeenshowntoreducediscomfortrelativetocontinuouslysitting(5).Usingaone-hourrecordedsessionrepresentativeofanysuchhour-longperiodoftheworkingday(5),continuouslyrecordedposturaldeviationsfromaneutralpositionwererelatedtoperceivedgeneralfatigueandneckandbackpain.Thispaperexploresthetechniquesusedtouncoverrelationshipsbetweensequencesofposturalstates,andparticipants’experienceofpainorfatigue.EmphasisonthereasoningbehindthemethodschosensothatothersmayapplyoradjustthisstrategytoimproveabilitytorecogniseposturalpatternsassociatedwithMSDrisk.
MethodsDatasource:Apreviouslyrecordedhour-longsimulateddataentrytaskusingseatedandtwosit-standalternatingpostureswasusedforthisstudy.Continuousphysicalbehavioursduringthistaskwerethusrelatedtoworkstationswhichtypicallylimitdiscomfort,painandfatigue(sit-standworkstations)ornot(sittingcontinuously).Groupedposturaldata:Wireless2-DinclinometersandCAPTIV7000analysissoftware(TEA,France)recordedposturaldeviationofheadandtrunkat15Hzinbothsagittalandfrontalplanes.Theseweregroupedintolevelsofincreasingdeviationandrisklevels,definedasposturalstatesdesignatedbya4-charactercode(ex.HS-2)followingthelevelsdefinedbyRULA(6)sagittallyandKeyserling(7)frontally(seeTable1).Groupedperceivedfatigueandpain:Eachparticipantrecordedtheirperceivedfatigue,backpainandneckpainattheendoftheone-hourstudyforeachworkstation.Participantsplacedamarkonahorizontallinerepresentingavisualanaloguescalefrom0(none)to10(maximumimaginable).Thesevalueswerediscretizedintoquintiles,eachcontaining1/5oftheobservedpointsforagivenposturalfeatureandtogetherexactlycoveringtherangeofvaluesobservedforthatperceptualfeature.Subsequently,quintileswereaggregated,basedonwhetherthequintilewasidentified
Table1.Angulardeviation(°)groupingsbybodyregionandplane
StateIDHead Back
Sagittal(HS) Frontal(HF) Sagittal(BS) Frontal(BF)-2 -∞to-10 -∞to-10-1 -∞to-5 -10to-2 -∞to-5 -10to-20 -5to10 -2to2 -5to5 -2to2+1 10to20 2to10 5to20 2to10+2 20to∞ 10to∞ 20to60 10to∞+3 60to∞
52
withthepresenceorabsenceofagivenperception.Thisaggregationwasperformedbyplottingthequintilemeansandnotingwheretheinflectionpointoccurred,dividing“low”from“high”values.Combinedpostureandperception:Posturalgesturesofinterestwereidentifiedbycalculatingaχ2contingencybasedontheoccurrenceofeachposturalsequenceforthesetof“Low”versus“High”quintilesofperceptualfeatureresponsedata.Theχ2contingencycomparisonaccountsforvariationinproportion;thatis,ifoneproportiondescribes3/5ofthedata,andanother4/5,theχ2contingencyconsidersthetotalsizeofthedatasetwhenestimatingwhetherthisdifferencemaybeobservedbychance.ThegoalistodistinguishbetweenproportionsofoccurrencesofapatternthatvarybetweenLowgrouprelativetoHighgroupwithinthesameperceiveddimension.
ResultsAnumberof“significantposturalgestures”werefound,indicatingthatthereareidentifiablemovementsthat,foragivenperson,occuratsignificantlydifferentrateswhenpainorfatigueispresent,versusabsent.Nineparticipantsandallthreeworkstationstylescontributedto230significantpatternsand81patternswerepresentforallparticipantsusingsit-standworkstations.Differentsignificantpatternswereobservedwhenaperceptionwashigh,andwhenitwaslow.Thefrontalplanewasassociatedwithmostsignificantgestures(83%for10participants,73%for9).
Conclusionsanddiscussion
Thedifferentpatternssignificantlyassociatedwithhighandlowperceptionsofpainandfatiguethatarecommonacrossallparticipantsindicatethatthesegesturesmaydescribebehavioursthateitherarerisksfor,orarepotentiallyprotectiveagainst,painorfatigue.Byexaminingpatternsassociatedwithgeneratingpainorfatigue,andthosethatassociatewiththeiravoidance,dynamicposturalbehaviourstoinduceoravoidmaybeuncovered.Practitionersshouldwatchforposturalgesturesthatarelinkedsignificantlytochangesinperceptionandalertworkerstorisks.Addingdurationanalysistoposturalpatternorderingmayenhanceresults.
AcknowledgementNaturalSciencesandEngineeringResearchCouncil(NSERC)ofCanada,NewBrunswickInnovationFundResearchAssistantInitiative,andUniversitédeMonctonprovidedfundingforthiswork.
References1. ThorpAA,HealyGN,WinklerE,ClarkBK,GardinerPA,OwenN,etal.Prolongedsedentarytime
andphysicalactivityinworkplaceandnon-workcontexts:across-sectionalstudyofoffice,customerserviceandcallcentreemployees.IntJBehavNutrPhysAct.2012Oct26;9:128.
2. ChauJ,GrunseuiA,CheyT,StamatakisE,BrownWJ,MatthewsCE,etal.DailySittingTimeandAll-CauseMortality:AMeta-Analysis.PLOSOne.2013Nov13;8(11).
3. BhanderiD,ChoudharyS,ParmarL,DoshiV.AStudyofOccurrenceofMusculoskeletalDiscomfortinComputerOperators.IndianJCommunityMedOffPublIndianAssocPrevSocMed.2008Jan;33(1):65–6.
4. BlackN,ScoliègeJ.Ergonomicstudyofworkstationsandemployee’sposturetominimisetheinjuriesandimprovequality.MonctonNB;DartmouthNS:WSPCompany;2016.
5. BlackN,FortinA-P,HandriganGA.PosturalandPerceptionVariationsWhenUsingManuallyAdjustableandProgrammableSit–StandWorkstationsinanEmergencyCallCenter.IIETransOccupErgonHumFactors.2015Apr3;3(2):127–38.
6. McAtamneyL,CorlettEN.RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders.ApplErgon.1993;24(2):91–9.
7. KeyserlingWM.Posturalanalysisofthetrunkandshouldersinsimulatedrealtime.Ergonomics.1986;29(4):569–83.
53
AnevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemandsKaylaM.Fewster,GrahamMayberry,JackP.Callaghan
UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionProlongedstaticsittinghasbeenimplicatedwithanumberofnegativehealthconsequences,including,lowbackpain,heartdiseases,typeIIdiabetesandworkerdiscomfort(1–4).SittingforprolongedperiodshasbeenassociatedwithanincreasedincidenceofLBP(5,6)regardlessofwhetherornotaworkersuffersfromcurrentLBP.Damkotandcolleagues(7)identifiedtheinabilitytochangepositionwhilesittingasamajorfactorinthedevelopmentofLBPduringprolongedsitting.Ergonomicstudiesonofficeseatinghavefoundelementsthatencouragemovement,suchasadjustable/reclinablebackrests,seatpans,armrestsandtiltmechanismscanminimizediscomfortandstresstothebodyduringsitting(8).Wheninvestigatingofficeseatingdesigns,themainfocushasbeenonlumbarsupportsandbackrestreclineangles.Lumbarsupportshavedemonstratedtheabilitytoimprovelumbarlordosisinthelowback(9–11)andreducemuscleactivity(12,13).Thereisalsopreliminaryevidencetosuggestthatamodifiedbackrestallowingtheextensionoftheshouldersduringsittingcanalsoimprovespineposturesinsitting(14).However,todate,thereisverylimitedinformationontheimpactofbackrestheightonphysiologicresponsestositting.Thus,theprimaryfocusofthisstudywastoassesschangesinmuscularresponsestochangingbackrestheightinastandardizedofficechair.
MethodsSixteenparticipants(8femalesand8males)wererecruitedfromtheuniversitypopulationtoparticipateinthisstudy.Thisinvestigationsimulated4differentworkingposturesinstandardizedofficechairswiththreedifferentbackrestheights(Short,Mid,andTallchairbackheights).Thefourdifferentworkingposturesconsistedof:1)Uprightbackrestengagedsitting;2)Forwardleaningontoaworksurface;3)Midreclined;4)Fullyreclined(Fig1),acrossthe3standardizedofficechairbackrestheights.Thedurationofeachtrial(3chairsx4conditionsx3repeats=36trials)was70secondsintotal.Ineachtrail,duringthefirst5secondstheparticipantmovedfromuprightsittingtothedesiredposture,inthemiddle60secondstheparticipantheldthedesiredposture,andthenintheremaining5secondsattheendtheparticipantreturnedtouprightsitting.Posturaltrialswereblockrandomizedbychairacrossandwithinsubjects.
Figure1:TheFourconditionsexamined:1)Forwardleaningontoaworksurface;2)Uprightbackrestengagedsitting;3)Midreclined;4)Fullyreclined.
54
Acrossallconditionstested,surfaceelectromyography(EMG)wasusedtotrackmuscleactivityfromfivemusclesbilaterally:thoracicerectorspinae(TES),lumbarerectorspinae(LES),rectusabdominus(RA),sternocleidomastoid(SCM)andcervicalerectorspinae(CES).Maximumvoluntarycontractionswerecollectedfromeachmusclefornormalizationpurposes(%MVC).Foreachoftheconditionscollectedthemiddle30secondsofeachstaticholdwastakenandtheaveragemuscleactivationofthatmiddle30secondswascomputedforeachmuscle.This30secondaveragewasthenaveragedacrosseachofthe3trialsforeachcondition.Rightandleftmuscleswereaveragedresultinginatotalof5averagemuscleactivationvaluesforeachconditiontested.Rightandleftmuscleswereaveragedsinceallmovementsweresymmetricalacrossconditions.Inaddition,togiveanestimateoftotalactivation,eachofthe5muscleaveragesforeachconditionwasalsosummed,resultinginonetotalsumofactivationforeachconditiontested.Athree-waymixedgenerallinearmodelassessedtheinfluenceofBackrestHeight,PostureandGenderonaveragemuscleactivation.
Findings:Overallmuscleactivationlevelswereverylowwithaverageactivationsacrossallbackrestsandposturesbelowapproximately5%MVC(SCM3.8;CES5.3;TES4.7;RA4.2;LES4.3%MVC).TherewasasignificantmaineffectofBackrestHeightforaverageLESEMG(p=0.019).TheTallBackresthadsignificantlyhigheraverageLESactivationincomparisontotheShortBackrestheight(p=0.015).Therewasa3-wayinteractionacrossGender,BackrestHeightandPosturefortheSCM(p=0.005).MalesandFemaleshadsignificantlylessSCMmuscleactivationwhenusingtheTallBackrestintheFull-reclinedpositionincomparisontotheShortandMidheights.Inaddition,FemalesalsohadsignificantlylessSCMmuscleactivationwhenusingtheMidchairincomparisontotheShortchair.Forthetotalsumofallmuscleactivationfromthe5measuredmusclegroupstherewasasignificantBackrestHeightxPostureinteraction(p=0.045).WhenintheForwardandFull-reclinepositions,theMediumbackrestheightresultedinsignificantlygreatertotalmuscleactivation.Inaddition,whenintheFull-reclinedposition,theMediumbackrestheightresultedinsignificantlymoretotalmuscleactivationincomparisontotheTallbackrestheight
DiscussionOverallthemuscleactivationlevelswereverylowacrossallBackrestHeightsandPostures.WhiletherewaslittleimpactofBackrestHeightonmuscleactivation,theTallBackrestheighthadhigheraveragelumbarerectorspinaemuscleactivationincomparisontotheShortheight.Inaddition,therewaslessneckflexormuscleactivity(SCM)whenusingtheTallbackrestheightintheFull-reclinedpositionincomparisontotheShortandMidheights.ThismaybeindicativeoftheTallbackrestsupportingtheheadandneckbetterthantheShortandTallbackrestheights.ThefindingofgreatertotalmuscleactivationwhenintheForwardandFull-reclinepositionsfortheMidchairbackheightmaybeindicativeofmoreco-activationoftheflexorandextensormusclegroups.Thisstudywaslimitedbytheshortdurationofexposureforeachconditioninvestigated.Thismaynothavebeensufficienttimetoreflectmuscleactivationpatternsoverprolongedofficework.
References1)Callaghanetal.(2010)IntJIndErgon.40(2):165–70;2)Dunstanetal.(2012)DiaRes&ClinPractice.368–76;3)Grootenetal.(2013)Ergo.56(8):1304–14;4)Strakeretal.(2013)AppErgo44(4):517-522;5)Wilder,etal.(1988)J.ofSpDis;6)Frymoyeretal(1980)Spine5(5):419–23.7)Damkotetal.(1984)Spine9(4):395–9;8)Corlett(2006)Ergonomics;49(14):1538–46;9)DeCarvalho&Callaghan(2012)ApplErgo;43(5):876–82;10)Reineckeetal(1994)JSpinalDisord:7(1):29–35;11)Makhsousetal.(2003).Spine;28(11):1113–21;12)Andersson&Ortengren(1974)ScandJRehabilMed.6(3):73–90;13)Anderssonetal.(1979),Spine.1979,52–814)Goossensetal.(2003),Ergonomics.46(5):518–30.
55
PAPERSESSION4:APPLIEDCASESTUDIES
Day2–Oct16th
14:45-16:15
PaperSession4AppliedCaseStudies
AllisonStephensDoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?KristinaZucchiattiOneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers:isachairtheanswer?NicholasPatrickDevelopingphysicaldemandsdescriptionsfromjobsimulations
56
DoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?
AllisonStephens,MSc,CCPE,CPE1*,ChristinaCort,MHK,CPE,2,1FanshaweCollege,LondonOntario,Canada
2Siemens,AnnArbor,Mi,USA
BackgroundDigitalHumanModels(DHM)aredisruptivetechnologyforthefieldofErgonomics.Priortotheiradoption,ergonomicanalysisinavirtualenvironmentwaslimited.ThekeyaspectofthetaskanalysisistheHuman.InordertoassesstheriskfactorsofaworkspaceinaproactivedesignaDigitalHumanModelsuchastheSiemensJackandJillrepresentthehuman.ThedatareceivedfromtheDHMisbiomechanicalinnature.JointTorquesandspinalcompression.Visualandanalyticalanthropometricscanalsobeassessed.ThroughouttheyearsofusingDHM,ergonomicanalysistoolshavebeenaddedmakingtheiruseforbothproactiveandreactivesomethingtoconsider.
Objectives
1. WhatisaDHMandit’sunderlyingassumptions2. ReviewoftheadvancedergonomictoolsandresearchimplementationintoDHM’s3. Reviewofergonomictoolsandmeasurementsthatdriveergonomicdecisions4. UnderstandwhenaDHMisagoodinvestmentandergonomicanalysistool
TheuseofDigitalHumanModelsforergonomicshasbeenusedinindustrieslikeautomotivemanufacturing,buthaslimiteduseinotherindustriesandinreactiveergonomics.ThispaperwillreviewtheergonomictoolswithinDHM’sandapplications.ItwillalsoexploretheDHMasaplatformforfutureErgonomicresearch.ThisreviewisbasedonexperienceoftheuseofDigitalhumanModelswithinAutomotivemanufacturing.TheobjectiveofthereviewisallowthoseunfamiliarwithDigitalHumanmodelsknowledgeofDHMcapabilitiesinthefieldofergonomics.
ContextTraditionalErgonomicAnalysisrequireobservationofexistingjobs,withoverviewtoolssuchasRULA,SueRodgersandPDA’s(1-2).Inthedesignphaseofsettinguptheworkplacetheobservationoftheworkerisnotavailable.DigitalHumanmodelsallowstaticanddynamiccreationoffutureworkplacesforanalysis.ManycommontaskanalysistoolscanbeusedwithDigitalHumanModels.OtherneworcomplexergonomictoolscanbeaccessedwithDigitalHumanModels.
Spinalcompressionisanacceptedanalysisparametertoassessliftingandbackloading.ManybiomechanicalmodelslikeUofM3D(3)staticstrengthandWatbak(4)havebeenutilizedinergonomicassessments.TheDHM(SiemensJackandJill,includespinalcompressionbutalsocalculateajointtorqueforallinterestedpostures.Toassessbiomechanicalstrainonthehuman,ajointtorqueassessmentcanbeemployed.Acceptedpracticeistocomparethejointtorquerequirementsofatasktothoseofa25thpercentilefemalestrength.(5)Overtheyearsdigitalhumanmodelshaveincorporatedotherergonomicassessmentssuchasfrequencymodifiers,cumulativeloading,forceacceptabilityandpostureprediction(6).Thesetoolsandotherfutureadditionswillbeexplored.IstheDigitalHumanmodelthefutureplatformofallergonomictoolsforreactiveandproactiveanalysis?
ActionsInaproactiveErgonomicapplication,theDHMhasbeenusedforhandclearance,reachassessment
57
andstrengthcapability.Theacceptabilitydecisionreliesontheanthropometry,workstationparametersandtheworkingposture.Overtheyear’sresearchhasallowedtheseparameterstobebetterdefined.Globalpopulationswithimprovedanthropometricsallowsdecisionstomadeforglobalpopulations(7).Theabilitytopredicttheworkingpostureshavebeenenhancedbymotioncaptureandposturepredictionalgorithms(8)Repetitionshasposedchallengesforbiomechanicalmodels.Theintegrationoffrequencymodifiershasallowedmorerealisticjobevaluations.Fullsimulationshaveallowedcumulativeanalysissuchascumulativebackcompressionandmetabolicanalysis.
OutcomesThecontinuedimprovementoftheDHMtointegratenewergonomicresearchasitbecomesavailable,makestheDHMnotjustabiomechanicalanalysistoolbutinsteadaplatformforacomprehensiveergonomicanalysis.(9)Fullsimulationcapabilitiesallowscumulativetoolsamechanismtowork,thatinthepastrequiredsignificantcomputingpowerandtime.ResearchsuchastheArmForcefieldrecentlyintegratedintoprocesssimulateallowaccesstothelatestresearchinarmstrength.ResearchintheareaofperceivedexertionbeingconductedbyDrJonesattheUniversityofMichiganandFordistargetedforimplementationintoadigitalhumanmodel.
DiscussionThecostandexpertisetousedigitalhumanmodelshasbeenabarriertoit’sadoption.WiththeDHMbeingapromisingplatformtoconductallergonomicassessmentsisthereacaseforErgonomic,SafetyandengineeringprofessionalstoadopttheDHMasatoolofthetradeinthefuture?TheUSCARErgonomicstaskforcehasviewedtheDHMasaconduitforimplementingresearch.Thismodelwillbedemonstratedandinvokediscussiononit’sroleinthefutureuseofDHMforbothproactiveandreactiveergonomics.
RelevancetoPractitionersTheuseofdigitalhumanmodelswithinergonomicsislimitedtolargercompaniesandproactivedesignanalysis(10)It’suseasacommonergonomicanalysisforbothreactiveandproactiveergonomicsisbecomingmoreofareality.Theadvancedanalysiscapabilitiesandpathforresearchimplementationmakesitatoolthatallpractitionersshouldlookat.
References
1.LynnMcAtamney,E.NigelCorlett(1993).RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders,AppliedErgonomics,Volume24,Issue2,Pages91-99
2.SuzanneH.Rodgers,Afunctionaljobevaluationtechnique,inErgonomics,editedbyJ.S.MooreandA.Garg,OccupationalMedicine:StateoftheArtReviews.7(4):679-711,1992.
3.LynnMcAtamney,E.NigelCorlett(1993).RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders,AppliedErgonomics,Volume24,Issue2,,Pages91-99
4.D.Chaffinetal,(1991)3DstaticstrengthpredictionModel,UniversityofMichiganhttps://c4e.engin.umich.edu/tools-services/3dsspp-software/3dsspp-background-information/
5.SNeumann,W&PWells,R&Norman,Robert.(1999).4DWATBAK:AdaptingResearchToolsandEpidemiologicalFindingstoSoftwareforEasyApplicationbyIndustrialPersonnel.IndustrialEngineeringPublicationsandResearch.
6.Potvin,J.R.,Chiang,J.,Jones,M.L.H.,McInnes,B.andStephens,A.(2008).ProactiveErgonomicAnalyseswithDigitalHumanModeling:AValidationStudyofPercentCapableValues.Proceedingsofthe2008NorthAmericanCongressofBiomechanics.AnnArbor,MI.
7.Smets,M.,Jones,M.L.H.,andStephens,A.(2013).TowardstheDevelopmentofaGlobalManikinSetforProactiveErgonomicsinAutomotiveEngineering.Proceedingsofthe2013InstituteofIndustrialEngineersAppliedErgonomicsConference.Dallas,TX.
8.Jones,M.L.H.,Chiang,J.,Stephens,A.andPotvin,J.R.(2008).TheUseofPhysicalPropsinAutomotiveAssemblyMotionCaptureStudies.TechnicalPaper2008-01-0049.SAEInternationalJournalofPassengerCars-MechanicalSystems.1(1):1163-1171.
9.Stephens,A.andJones,M.L.H.(2008).WorkplaceMethodsandUseofDigitalHumanModels.InV.G.Duffy(Ed.),TheHandbookofDigitalHumanModelingforAppliedErgonomicsandHumanFactorsEngineering.pp.6-1-6-1.NewYork:CRCPress,2008.
10. Stephens,A.andGodin,C.,"TheTruckthatJackBuilt:DigitalHumanModelsandtheirRoleintheDesignofWorkCellsandProductDesign,"SAETechnicalPaper2006-01-2314,2006
58
Oneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers–isachairtheanswer?KristinaZucchiatti1*andCarrieTaylor1
1Taylor’dErgonomicsIncorporated,Cambridge,Ontario,Canada
BackgroundSpecifyingthe“ergonomic”heightforaworksurfaceisachallengeoftenfacedbyergonomists,butit’sachallengethatwecanmeetwiththerecommendationtomaketheworksurfaceadjustable.Adjustabilityofferstheopportunitytoaccommodateworkersofvaryingheights,withasimpleadjustment.Adjustableworksurfaceshavebecomesoprevalentintheworkplacethatofficeandfactoryworkersalikehavecometoexpectthem.
ProblemHowever,whentheworkinvolvesmanyworkerspositionedalongaconveyororline,adjustabilityisamorecomplexproposition.Inmanyfoodmanufacturingenvironmentssuchapoultryprocessingandcookiepackaging,workersstandshouldertoshoulder,workingathighlyrepetitivetasks.Despitehighratesofshoulder,elbow,andwristinjury,theirmostcommonrequestistypically,“CanIhaveachair?”Theycannotimagineasolutionfortherepetitivenatureofthework,buttheyfeelsurethatsittingwouldalleviatetheirlegandbackfatigue.
ContextThispresentationisacollectionofcasestudiesandexperiencesgainedthroughconsultingpractice.Theyareprimarilyfromfoodandautopartsmanufacturing.
ActionsAcollectionofcasestudiesevaluatedvarioussolutionstoimprovetherisksassociatedwithworkatconveyors,usingCSAreferenceguidelinesforidealstandingworkheights(1).Inonecasestudy,threetypesofplatformswereimplementedatadjacentworkstations,toallowheightadjustabilityforoperators.Operatorsweretrainedandencouragedtoadjusttheplatformheightwhileworkingateachsectionoftheproductionline.Asecondcasestudydepictshowachairmightmakethejobworsefortheupperbodyandback,asaresultofawkwardseatedposturesfromlimitedlegclearance,andconveyorheight.Anti-fatiguemattingandleanstoolswereinvestigated,butnewhazardsarisewiththetypeandenvironmentinwhichthetaskisperformed.
Outcomes
Safetyactionswereimplementedtoaddressfallandpinchpointhazardsfromthevariousheightsoftheadjacentplatforms.Implementationofplatformshashadpositivefeedbackfromworkersoperatingthelines.Anti-fatiguemattingisnotsuitableinmanyfood-basedindustriesbecauseofqualityandsanitarystandards.Inaddition,areaswithhighamountsoffoottrafficsurroundingtheconveyor,increasedthehazardofatripandfall.
DiscussionTherequestforseatingatconveyorscreatesadilemmaforergonomist;weunderstandtherisksofprolongedstanding,butwecanalsounderstandthatseatingataconveyorcanincreasetheriskofupperlimbinjury.Clearancerequirementsforappropriatechairuseisrarelyavailableataconveyor.Areleanstoolsabettersolution?
RelevancetoPractitionersWehavedevelopedafewrecommendationsforworkplacesfacingthischallenge:
59
1. Lowprofileconveyorsarerequiredtomakesittingpractical2. Platformsolutionsareavailabletoallowheight-adjustabilityforstandingworkat
conveyors3. Useofanti-fatiguemattingtoaddressprolongedstandingconcerns,andchallengesinfood
environments4. Implicationsofprolongedstandingonoperators5. Jobrotationsolutionsthatallowtheworkertositforpartoftheshift6. Off-linepackagingworkstationdesigntoallowlegclearanceforsitting
References1. CSAZ412-17:OfficeErgonomics—Anapplicationstandardforworkplaceergonomics.2017.
60
DevelopingPhysicalDemandsDescriptionsFromJobSimulations
NicholasPatrick1*,MartySmets2,AllisonStephens3,StevenFischer11UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada
2FordMotorCo.,Dearborn,Michigan,UnitedStatesofAmerica3FanshaweCollege,London,Ontario,Canada
Background
Physicaldemandsdescriptions(PDDs)areusedbyemployerstoobjectivelydescribethephysicaldemandsassociatedwithaparticularjob.PDDsserveavitalroleinanorganization’sergonomicsprogramwheretheyareusedtoinformpreventionefforts,andalsoserveascriticalinformationtoinformthereturntoworkprocess.
Digitalhumanmodelingsoftwarepackagesaretoolsinwhichtheuserisabletocreatevirtualenvironmentswithhumanavatarsforthepurposeofjobtaskevaluation.TheSiemensTecnomatixJack(Jack)digitalhumanmodelingprogramhasrecentlybeenupdated,providingtheuserwiththecapabilityusetheTaskSimulationBuilder(TSB)featuretodevelopPDDsdirectlyfromadynamicjobsimulationofaseriesofjobtasks(1).Forthisinvestigation,thesePDDdevelopedfromadigitalhumanmodelwillbeknownasanePDD(ePDD,forelectronicPDD).p
ProblemThecostassociatedwithacquiringalicenseforJack,therequiredoperatorskillsetnecessarytoefficientlyusetheprogram,andthetimerequiredtodevelopajobsimulationmayincreasethedevelopmentcostsforanePDD.However,theaddeddetail,inclusionofvideosimulatingthework,andopportunityforquickadditionalhazardassessmentmayprovidebenefittooffsettheaddeddevelopmentcosts.Forenterpriseergonomistsalreadycreatingsimulationsaspartofanadvanceproactiveprocess,ePDDscannowbeautomaticallygeneratedprovidingpotentialprocessefficiencies.ToevaluatetheprospectiveutilityoftheePDD,thiscaseexampledescribesthedevelopmentanduseofePDDs,asanadditionalstepoverandabovetraditionalPDDdevelopment,tosupportreturntoworkseffortsatanautomotiveassemblyfacility.
ContextThisinvestigationtookplaceatanautomotiveassemblyfacility.
ActionsTheprocessofePDDdevelopmentwasdocumented,frominitialdatacollectiontoreportgenerationtoidentifybarriersandopportunitiesforimprovement.Twentycyclicassemblylinejobs,cycletime<60seconds,wereevaluatedinordertogeneratesimulationsusingtheTSBfeatureinJackversion8.4.ThesimulationsweresubsequentlyusedtogenerateePDDsforeachjob.Forthisinvestigationllppp,datacollectionoccurredasifa“traditional”PDDwasbeingdeveloped,withadditionaldatabeingcollected,asrequired,inordertodevelophighfidelitysimulationse.g.detailedworkstationlayouts.Itwastheintentionofthereturntowork(RTW)teamtomakeuseofthesenewlygeneratedePDDsinordertosupplementtheirPDDcurrentdataintheRTWprocess.Simulationsweredevelopedusingmaleandfemalemannequinsscaledto50thpercentile(ANSURdatabase)forstatureandbodymass.ThegoalwastoleveragethecapabilitiesofJack,theTSB,andcertainePDDreportoutputsasrequired,toprovideadvancedinformationthatmaynotbeavailablewithinatraditionalPDD.
Outcomes
61
TheanalysisoftheprocessofePDDcreationuncoveredmultipleareasforimprovement.Oneimportantareaforimprovementrelatestothetimerequiredtodevelopasimulation.Theprocessofsimulationdevelopment,includingallstagesfromshopfloordatacollectionthroughreportgenerationrangedfrom8-24hoursperjobwiththemajorityofthetimeconsistingofsimulationdevelopment.Ingeneral,simulationtimeincreasedwithnumberofindividualtasksperformedduringacycle,aseachgoalorientedmovementmustbeindividuallysimulated.PrimaryresultsrelatedtotheuseoftheePDDwithintheRTWprocesssuggesttheePDDisabletoprovidecontexttothedatacontainedwithina“traditional”PDD.Thesimulationandthegraphicalrepresentationofjobtaskdemandse.g.figure1,werebeneficialinprovidingeasytounderstandcontexttoinformationthatmaybecontainedwithindatatablesinatraditionalPDD.Thiscontextappearstoallowforthequickidentificationoftasksofinterestwithinthejob,andpotentiallyanincreasedeaseofuseofthedatacontainedwithinatraditionallydevelopedPDD.
Figure4.SampleTSBoutputs
DiscussionAstheePDDwasinitiallydevelopedinconjunctionwithinputfromreturntoworkprofessionals(1),itwasexpectedthattheePDDshouldprovidevaluewithintheRTWprocess.Forselectjobs,ePDDoutputswereusedtosupplementthetraditionalPDDdatausedduringtheadjudicationprocess.ePDDswerealsousedtoassistinthematchingofindividualswithrestrictionstoalternativework.InterestinthepotentialuseoftheePDDwasgeneratedthroughoutmultiplelevelsoftheorganization,fromemployeesontheproductionfloorandunionrepresentation,throughdepartmentalmanagement.FurtherworkregardingtheePDDiscontinuingtoexaminethethoughtsandopinionsofPDDusers,e.gergonomists,clinicians,andRTWprofessionals,regardingfurtherdevelopmentoftheePDDasameansforpresentingphysicaldemandsdescriptiondata.Potentialcostsavingswerenotinvestigated,asthefocusofthisworkwastodevelopthedocumentsinasimilarfashionasatraditionalPDD,notinadditiontootherproactiveevaluations.
RelevancetoPractitionersTheePDDprovidespractitionerswithnewpossibilitiesfordevelopingaPDD,aswellasmorepossibilitiesforpresentingtheinformationcontainedwithinaPDDthatmaynotbepossiblewithcurrentmethods.
References1. WardR,StephensA,CortJ.Developmentofmedicalplacementprocessthroughtheuseof
digitalhumanmodelsimulation.In:46thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists.2015.
62
INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION
AppliedFieldResearchUsingField-Lab-Field(F2L2F)ApproachFacilitator:SandraDorman,Director,CROSHPanelists/Co-authors:AlisonGodwin,PhD,AssociateDirector,CROSHBrandonVance,MHK,ResearchTechnologist,CROSHMallorieLeduc,PhDCandidate,ResearchAssociate,CROSHTammyEger,PhD,ResearchChair,CROSHCROSH’sresearchphilosophyisbasedonaField-toLab-toField(F2L2F)approach,withthefirststepbeing:problemidentificationinthefield;secondstep:solutiondevelopmentinthelab;andthethirdstep:interventionevaluationbackinthefield.ThepanelistswillprovideseveralexamplesofhowCROSHhasusedtheF2L2Fapproach.Membersoftheaudiencewillbeinvitedtoaskquestionsandengageinaninteractiveconversationwiththepanelistsaroundthethemeoftheconference:ResearchtoPracticetoPrevention.
63
PAPERSESSION5:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE
Day3–Oct17th
11:15-12:00
PaperSession5ErgonomicsinHealthcare
CarolynnKallitsisEstimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudyJimPotvinCaregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices
64
Estimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudy
CarolynnKallitsis,BHSc.1*,JoanneHodder,PhD2
1OptionsInc.,Guelph,ON,Canada2SheridanCollege,BramptonON,Canada
BackgroundCare providers for the pediatric population are at high risk for sustaining injuries.1 Historically,research shows childcare and home support workers account for almost 10% of the lost timemusculoskeletal (MSK) injuries.2Non-neutralpostures like forwardbendingandsquattingcanbeidentifiedasoccupationalriskfactors inpediatricpopulations.3Lifts fromgroundlevel, liftswhensitting/kneeling, liftswith loadswith a far horizontal reach from the body, asymmetrical lifts oraboveheadliftsarecommonforpediatriccareprovidersandmaybeofconcerngiventheposturesadoptedduringthesetasks.4Currently,noguidelinesexistregardingmaximumpatientweightforcommonhandlingtaskinapediatricsetting.
PurposeThepurposeofthiscasestudywastocapturetheposturesadoptedbyone(1)careworkerduringpediatric patient care tasks and to use their postures to calculate an estimate of the maximumpatient weight that would be acceptable to lift for frequent tasks. This study is useful whenexaminingarangeofacceptable loads liftedbyworkersandwhether therangewouldbegreaterthan the average child patient weight. This will allow for more generalizable estimates ofacceptablepatientweights.
Methods
This case study was conducted over a 5hr period with one (1) volunteer female pediatric careprovider (168 cm; 63.5 kg) who provided care for infants 6-18 months. Trunk postures wererecordedusing theVirtual CorsetTM(VC)(Microstrain Inc.,Williston, VT,USA). TheVCmonitoredflexion-extensionandlateral(lefttoright)bendanglesofthetrunk.Thedevicewassecuredatthesternumforadurationof5hours.All taskscarriedoutbytheparticipantweredocumentedonatablet(SamsungGT-N8000,SamsungElectronicsCo.,Suwon,SouthKorea)withtheobservationalevent logging software WorkStudy+ 6 (Quetech Ltd., Waterloo, ON, CA). The postures for allperformed,tasksweresegmentedandmeanandpeakpostureswerefound.Usinga50thpercentilefemalemannequin in the3Dstatic strengthpredictionprogram(3DSSPP;UniversityofMichigan,Michigan,USA),posturesobservedwereusedtofindtheactionlimitforacceptablehandloads.
OutcomesThe pediatric care tasks of feeding/meal time tasks, nap time duties, physical activity and othertaskshad thepeak trunk flexiondisplacement as large as109.7°.Trunk flexionobserved rangedfrom4.2°to109.7°andlateraltrunkdisplacementsrangedfrom8.4°to61.9°(L)and1.4°to55.5°(R). The recommended weight limits (as determined from 3DSSPP) for pediatric care tasksanalyzed in thisstudyranged from6.36–10.91kg.Therecommendedweight limits forhygienictasks,naptimeduties,andphysicalactivitywerefoundtobeapproximately10kg.Limitsforliftingachildfromthefloorwereassessedtobe6.36kgandfromacribat9.55kg(Figure1).
ConclusionTheresultsofthisstudysuggestthatitisfeasibletodetermineworkerspecificliftinglimitsbasedonposturestheyutilize.Thismaybeeffectiveineducatingworkersandwithfurtherinvestigation,toestablishasafeliftingguidelineforpediatriccareworkerstohelpreducetheriskofMSKinjuries.This method of analysis was deemed beneficial since the recommended weight limits for the
65
pediatric care worker observed in this study were less than 50% of the NIOSH recommendedguideline.
DiscussionThereisalackofpublisheddataregardingtheacceptablelimitsforprovidingcareandhandlingapediatric population. Due to the considerably lowerweight of infants and children compared toadults,thispopulationisnotconsideredwhenimplementingliftguidelinesinpatientcaresettings.Theappliedanalysis completed in this casestudysuggests that identifyingguidelines for specificliftsandtasksisfeasibleinanappliedenvironment.Theworkerspecificresultsidentifyingthatliftsfromthefloorshouldbecappedat6.4kg.Thiswasofspecificinterestsince,accordingtotheWorldHealthOrganizationStandard forCanada6, themajorityof infantswill surpass thisweightby theageof6months,whichwouldbetheyoungestoftheagegroupthatmostdaycarefacilitieswouldcare for. Examining a range of acceptable loads lifted by careworkerswould be of interest andvaluetosupportadoptingmodifiedworkmethodsinapediatriccaresetting.
RelevancetoPractitioners
Despite a large amount of research on the postures and loads that patient care providers areexposedto,theactionlimitsbasedonposturesadoptedarewidelyunpublished.Understandingtherisks associatedwith variouspediatric care tasks, basedonworkmethodsused, could helpwithimplementationofmusculoskeletal injury riskmitigationandeliminationstrategies.Theextremeposturesobservedinthisstudyhighlighttheimportanceofsafeliftmethods,aswellasguidelineswhenworkingwithaninfantorchildpopulation.
References1Labajetal.IntJournalofIndustrialErgonomics,2016.2Pompeiietal.AmJIndMed,2009.3Swansonetal.Pediatrics,19944Craigetal.AIHAJournal,2003.5Waters,T.R.,V.Putz-Anderson,A.Garg,andL.J.Fine.1993.“RevisedNIOSHEquationfortheDesignandEvaluationofManualLiftingTasks.”Ergonomics36(7):749–76.https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139308967940.6WHO,WHOGrowthChartsforCanada,2006.
0.005.00
10.0015.0020.0025.00
HygenicTasks
LiftFromCrib
LiftFromFloor
NapTimeDuties
Other
PhysicalActivity
PlaceChild
ProviderRegularDuties
Standing(BabyInArms)
Walking(BabyIn Arms)
3DSSPPHandLoadsvs.NIOSHRWL
MaxLoad(kg) NIOSHLC(kg)
Figure1.Themaximumrecommendedweightlimitsestablishedin3DSSPPincomparisonto1991NIOSHLiftingEquationLoadConstant(LC)5.
66
Caregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices
JimR.Potvin1*
1PotvinBiomechanicsInc.Tecumseh,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionThedemandsassociatedwithpatienthandlingareamajorergonomicsissueinhealthcare.Historically,effortstoreducepatienthandlinginjuryriskhavefocusedonthetrainingofpropertechnique,buttheseeffortshavegenerallynotresultedinasignificantdecreaseinthenumberofmusculoskeletaldisorders.Thiswouldsuggestthatinterventionsshouldincludeeffortstodecreasethebiomechanicaldemandsassociatedwithpatientpositioningandposture.Thiscanbeaccomplishedwithassistivepatient-handlingdevices,whichcanbeeffectiveforreducinginjuriesrelatedtopatienttransfers,whenincorporatedwithinacomprehensiveergonomicsprogram1.Thepurposeofthisstudywastouseergonomicssimulationmethods,digitalhumanmodelingandbiomechanicssoftwaretoassessthedemandsoncaregiverswhenassistingpatientswiththeinitiationofstandingfromaseatedpositioninaclinical:(1)recliner,(2)chairand(3)bed.
MethodsThisstudyinvolvedthreedevices:(1)SymmetryPlusPatientRoomRecliner(termed"D1",Stryker,Portage,MI),(2)ProgressaTMBedSystem(termed"D2",Hill-Rom,Batesville,IN),and(3)TruRizeTMClinicalChair(termed"D3",Stryker).AllanthropometrywassetusingtheNationalHealthandNutritionExaminationSurvey(NHANES)(1990)databaseinJack(Siemens,AnnArbor,MI).MoredetailsofthelargerstudyareprovidedinPotvin(2017)2but,forthisabstract:(a)onlytheoptimalergonomicconditionsarepresentedforeachdevice(D1withnoseatpantilt,D2withitsmaximumseatpantiltof16°,andD3withitsmaximumtiltof21°),(b)thecaregiverssimulatedas50thpercentilefemales(71.0kgbodymass,1.63mstature),(c)thepatientwassimulatedasa95thpercentilemale(123.0kg,1.86m),(d)onecaregiverperformedthelift,(e)theycontributed100%toinitiatingtheliftand(f)theyusedagaitbelt.CADprimitiveswereusedtodeveloprenderingsoftheseatpan,backrest,armrestsandbaseforD1andD2,andCADdatawereprovidedbyStrykerforD3.TheJacksoftwarewasusedtoperformbiomechanicalanalysesforthecaregiverposturesassociatedwiththethreedevices.Foreachcondition,someassumptionsweremadebasedonstaticstodeterminethenecessarycaregiverhandforcestoinitiaterotationaboutthepatient'sankles,thenusedtheJacksoftwareandArmForceField3methodtodeterminethepatientanklemoment,lumbarcompressionandshearforcesandarm,hipandkneestrengthpercentincapable..
Figure1:SimulationswithD1,D2andD3,attheirmaximumseatpanangles,witha95thmalepatientanda50thfemalecaregiverusingagaitbelt
67
FindingsTheresultsherewereconsistentwiththefindingsofotherconditionsinthelargerstudy2.Theanklemomentaboutthepatient'sanklegenerallydeterminedthecaregiverforcesrequiredtoinitiaterotationduringasit-to-standandthisgreatlyinfluencedtheotherjointloads.ThismomentwasmuchlowerforD3,thanwithD1andD2(Table1).Subsequently,thelumbarcompressionandshearforces,andthepercentincapableofthearm,hipandkneestrengthdemandsweremuchlowerwithD1.
Table1:Jointloadingresultsforthesubsetofconditionspresentedhere,forthethreedevices.Absolutevaluesarepresentedasaretheratiosofthedeviceswithrespecttoeachother.Valuesinredindicatecompressionforces>3,400N4,shearvalues>1,000N5andstrengthpercentincapablevalues>25%6.
Discussion
Theresultswereconsistentacrossvariables,indicatingamuchlowerriskofcaregiverinjurywhenusingD3toassistpatientsinasit-to-standmovement,basedontypicalbiomechanicalvariablesusedinergonomicassessments.ThedesignoftheTruRizeTMClinicalChair(D3)allowedforthepatient'sfeettobemovedclosertotheedgeoftheseatpanthanD2(reducingthemomentcausedbytheirbodyweight)andallowedformoretiltandincreasedheightoftheseatpanthanD1andD2(initiatingtheliftandfurtherreducingthemomentabouttheankles).BothD1andD2exceededergonomicsthresholds(seeTable1)whena50thfemalecaregiverwasproviding100%oftheforcetolifta95thmalepatient.Thestudyhadsomelimitationassociatedwiththeassumptionsmade,andconstraintsused,torepresentaswideavarietyofconditionsaspossible.Theseconstraintsincluded:(1)theeliminationofalldynamicloadinganduseofmomentumsuchthatrotationofthepatientwouldoccurwhentheiranklemomentjustexceededzero,(2)onlyanalyzingonepostureforeachconditionwhileanumberofpostureswouldbepossibleforboththepatientandcaregiver,and(3)limitinghandforcestothesagittalplane.However,ergonomicssimulationswithdigitalhumanmodelsprovedtobeaneffectivemethodtocomparethephysicaldemandsoncaregiversforawidevarietyofpatientsit-to-standconditions.
RelevancetoPractitionersTheergonomicbenefitsofanovelclinicalchair(D3),weredemonstrated.Thischairliftsandrotatestheseatpanresultinginasubstantialreductionintheeffortrequiredbycaregiverswhenassistingwithasit-to-stand.Thestudyalsodemonstratesthepowerofworksimulationanddigitalhumanmodelsforcomparingergonomicsdemandsassociatedwithdifferentproductdesigns.
References2. GargA,KapelluschJM.HumanFactors.2012;54(4):608-625.3. PotvinJR.IntJSPHM.2017;7(2):64-73.4. LaDelfaNJ,Potvin,JR.AppliedErgonomics,2017;59:410-421.5. NationalInstituteforOccupationalSafetyandHealth(1981)No.81-122.Cincinnati.6. GallagherS,MarrasWS.ClinicalBiomechanics.2012;27(10):973-978.7. SnookSH,CirielloVM.Ergonomics,1991;34(9):1197-1213.
D1 D2 D3 D2/D1 D3/D1 D3/D2AnkleMoment(Nm) 347.6 357.6 148.8 1.03 0.43 0.42CompressonForce(N) 4,884 4,048 1,260 0.83 0.26 0.31ResultantShearForce(N) 1,381 1,163 371 0.84 0.27 0.32MaxArm%Incapable 53.4% 45.1% 2.3% 0.84 0.04 0.05MaxHip%Incapable 34.3% 42.0% 1.9% 1.22 0.06 0.05MaxKnee%Incapable 28.8% 26.6% 2.3% 0.92 0.08 0.09
RelativeValuesAbsoluteValues
68
PAPERSESSION6:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–UNDERGRADUATEANDMASTERS
Day3–Oct17th
10:15-12:00 PaperSession6StudentAwardFinalists
CROSHUndergraduateStudentAwardFinalistsJacquelineTonerTheimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstrollerErikaZiraldoDesignandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandlingCourtneyNickelEliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearchJMChristensenMastersAwardFinalistsMatthewBarrettCanseatpandesignmitigatelowerlimbswellingandbackpain?SaraSayedCareerfirefighters’real-timephysiologicalresponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:implicationsforinjuryprevention
69
Theimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstroller
JacquelineToner1,2,Dr.WayneAlbert2,Dr.UshaKuruganti11AndrewandMarjorieMcCainHumanPerformanceLab
2OccupationalPerformanceLabUniversityofNewBrunswick,Fredericton,NB,Canada
Introduction
Previousresearchexploringappropriatehandleorientationsforpushingtaskshasfoundmixedresults.Whencomparinghandledesignspastresearchhassuggested:gripstrengthisweakerusingahorizontalhandlecomparedtoverticalhandle(1);bothsemipronatedandhorizontalhandleorientationsproducedgreaterpushingcapacitiesthantheverticalhandles(2);andsemi-pronatedhandleorientationsattributedtolowerforcesthanhorizontalhandleorientations(3).Itisimportanttounderstandtheimpactofhandledesignonforceandmuscleactivitytopreventfatigueandmusculoskeletaldiscomfortthatcanaffecttheworkforce,includingdaycareworkers.
PurposeToexaminetheimpactofhandleorientationofa4-child(Quad)strollerontheforceandmuscleactivitycreatedtopushthestroller.
MethodsFourteenwomenwiththemeanage24±4.71yearsvolunteeredforthisstudy.Participantspushedthestrollerdownan8-meterstretch,followedbya90-degreeturntotherightorleftaroundafixedpoint,andcontinuedfor2metersbeforecomingtoacompletestop.Participantswereaskedtocompleteseparatetrialswitheachofthethreehandleorientations:horizontal,vertical,andsemi-pronated.Tosimulatefourchildreninthestrolleratotalcargoweightof54.4kgwasaddedtothestroller.Theweightwasbasedonthe85thpercentileweightfor2yearoldboysandgirls.Thestrollerwasinstrumentedwithforcetransducerswithinthehandlestomeasuretheforcerequiredtopushthestroller.Surfaceelectromyography(EMG)wasusedtomeasuremuscleactivationduringthestrollerpush(NoraxonTelemyo).Bipolarsurfaceelectrodeswereplacedovertheanteriordeltoid(AD),bicepsbrachii(BB),andsuperiortrapezius(TR)musclestorecordtheiractivityduringeachtrial.SurfaceEMGamplitudewasestimatedusingtheRootMeanSquare(RMS)ofthestraightaway,leftturn,andrightturnsegmentsofthepush.
Results
** *
70
Duetothepagelimitforthesubmissionoftheabstractonlyaportionoftheresultswillbeshared.Itshouldbeknownthattherewereadditionalsignificantdifferencesfoundwhencomparinghandleorientationsandtheforce&EMGpeakandareaamplitudes.
EMGFindingsDuringthestraightawaysegmentofthepushingtasksboththehorizontal(H)andsemipronated(S)handleshadsignificantlylowermeanamplitudevaluesfortheSTright(pH=0.0073)STleft(pH=0.00029,pS=0.0078),rightBB(pS=0.048),leftBB(pH=0.005,pS=0.014)thantheverticalhandle.Duringtheleftturn,semi-pronatedhandlescreatedsignificantlylowermeanamplitudeoftherightbiceps(p=0.0459)whencomparedtotheverticalhandle.Finally,duringtherightturn,thehorizontalhandleorientationresultedinameanamplitudesignificantlylowerthanverticalhandlesSTleft(p=0.011),BBleft(p=0.0066),BBright(p=0.097)andsemi-pronatedBBleft(p=0.029)handles.
ForceFindingsDuringthestraightawaysegmentofthepushingtaskthesemipronatedorientationhadsignificantlylowerpeak(p)andarea(a)amplitudesforceincomparisontotherightvertical(pp=0.048)handleandtheleft(pa=0.0387)andright(pa=0.0264)horizontalhandles.Duringtheleftturn,onlythelefthorizontalhandlehadsignificantlylowerpeakamplitudeforcethantheleftverticalhandle(p=0.00958).Nosignificantfindingsfoundcomparingthehandleorientationsforcesduringtherightturn.
DiscussionMusclefatigueiscommonlyseenasadecreaseinone’smaximalforcethattheinvolvedmusclescanproduce,anditdevelopsgradually,soonaftertheonsetofthesustainedphysicalactivity(4).Iftheonsetofthatfatiguecanbedelayedthroughhandledesignthaninjuriesmaybeabletobeprevented.TheEMGdatasuggeststhatboththehorizontalandsemi-pronatedhandlesresultinlowerlevelsofmusclesactivationcomparedtotheverticalhandle.SurfaceEMGhasbeenusedtostudymusclefatigueextensivelyintheliteratureandthereisevidencethatthereiscorrelationbetweenthedevelopmentofmusclefatigueandinanincreaseintheamplitudeanddecreaseinthecharacteristicspectralfrequencies(4).Thispreliminarystudysuggeststhatthetaskbeingperformedbyaworkertopushastrollermaycausemusclefatigueduetotheforceandmusclerequirementsandthathandledesigncouldreducetheamountofstrain.Furtherinvestigationiswarrantedtodeterminetheoptimumhandledesignaswellasestablishmentofappropriateworkprotocols.Futurestudiesshouldexaminemuscleactivityofbothupperandlowerlimbsandmonitormuscleactivityoveralongerperiodoftimetobettersimulatetypicalworkingconditions.
FutureImplicationsUnderstandingtheimpactofhandleorientationonstrollerdesigniscriticalinordertopreventinjuryandfatigueofaworker.Thisstudyhasprovidedpreliminarydatasuggestingthattherearedifferencesinforceandmuscleactivityrequirementsduetohandleorientationandfurtherinvestigationshouldexaminehandlesdesigntoensurethesafetyfortheworker.Outsideofthechildcareindustrythesefindingcouldinspireergonomicchangesthatwilllowertheimpactontheworkerandenhancetheirphysicalcapacitytocompletepushingtasks.
References
1.Mogk,J.,&Keir,P.(2003)Theeffectsofpostureonforearmmuscleloadingduringgripping,Ergonomics,46:9,956-975.2.Lin,J,H.,McGorry,R,W.,&Chang,C,C.,(2012).Effectsofhandleorientationandbetween-handledistanceonbi-manualisometricpushstrength,AppliedErgonomics,43,664-670.3.OlanrewajuO.Okunribido&ChristineM.Haslegrave(2008)Readysteadypush–astudyoftheroleofarmpostureinmanualexertions,Ergonomics,51:2,192-216.4.Kallenberg,L.,Schulte,E.,Disselhorst-Klug,C.,&Hermens,H,J.(2007).Myoelectricmanifestationsoffatigueatlowcontractionlevelsinsubjectswithandwithoutchronicpain.JournalofElectromyographyKinesiology,17,264–274.
71
Designandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandling
ErikaZiraldo,HannahArthurs,EliseHuet,JessieLeith,MicheleOliver
SchoolofEngineering,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionWorkrelatedmusculoskeletaldisorders(WMSDs)aretheleadingworkplaceinjuryinOntariogeneratingmorethan40%oflost-timeinjuries(1).AccordingtotheWorkplaceSafetyandInsuranceBoard(WSIB),lowbackinjuriesaccountedfor17%ofOntario’sallowedclaimsin2017withapproximatelythreeoffourCanadianswhoseworkinvolvesmanualmaterialshandling(MMH)experiencingalowbackinjuryduringtheircareer(1).Employerscanassessriskusingwelldevelopedergonomictoolswhichofteninvolveanergonomistwatchingandevaluatingemployeesperformingatask.Unfortunately,workersoftenperformtasksdifferentlywhilebeingobserved(2).Toreducetheneedforanergonomisttodirectlymonitoraworker,thepurposeofthisworkwastodesign,buildandvalidateaprototypewearabledevicefortheautomationoflowbackinjuryriskfactorquantification.
MethodsDesignTomeasuretheliftverticallocation,displacement,twistangle,frequencyanddurationtobeusedasinputparametersforthe1991NIOSHliftingequation(3)andMitaltables(4),twosensorswereusedincombinationwithanArduinoMicromicrocontroller.Thefirst,aLightDetectionAndRanging(LiDAR)systemuseslightintheformofapulsedlasertomeasuredistancefromthesensortoanobject.Thissensor,attachedatthewristonafreelyrotatingjoint,trackshandpositionduringthelift.CustomsoftwareidentifiesliftingcyclesfromtheLiDARpositiondataenablingliftingfrequencydetermination.Thesecondsensorisaninedegreeoffreedominertialmeasurementunit(IMU)containinganaccelerometer,gyroscope,andmagnetometer.Outputsfromthesetoolsareusedtocalculatepitch,roll,andheadingoftheIMU,whichdescribesensororientation.Placedontheshoulder,thefilteredIMUoutputscanthenbeusedtocalculatemaximumandminimumtrunktwist.Thesensorsareattachedtotheuserbyanarmband,andallauxiliaryelectricalcomponentsareenclosedwithina3Dprintedbox(Figure1).SensordataaresavedtoamicroSDcardforsubsequenttransfertoacustomsoftwareprogramwheretheuserispromptedtoinputhandcoupling,sex,liftingdurationaswellasthedepthandweightoftheobjectbeinglifted.Thesoftwarethencalculatesarecommendedweightlimitandriskindexoverdurationswhichcanrangefromasingleliftingcycletoanentireworkshift.
Figure5:Wearabledevicecomponentsandlayout
72
ValidationTovalidatesensorandcalibrationaccuracy,sensordataweretestedagainstdistancesandanglescalculatedduringasampleliftusinganinecameraBonitaVICONMotionCapturesystem.Sphericalmarkers(1cmdiameter)wereplacedonboththeleftandrightacromionprocessesandtheradialandulnarstyloidprocessesoftherightwrist.Alldataweresampledat100Hzandsmoothedusinga4thorderButterworthfilter.Figure2comparestheverticaldistancefromthestandingsurfacethroughoutthedurationofthesampleliftasmeasuredbybothLiDARandVICON,whileFigure3providesanillustrationofthetwistangleforthesamelift.
Figure6:TrackingverticaldistancewithVICONandLiDAR
Figure3:TrackingtwistanglewithVICONand9DOFIMU
DiscussionLiDARresultsfortheverticaldistanceparametercloselyfollowVICONmeasurements(Figure2).Whilethereissomeclippingatthepeaks,theaveragemaximaanddisplacementsareverysimilar.Theclippingerrorisminorgiventhatmosthand-calculatedliftingriskassessmentsaresimplifiedbyassumingthatanyliftfromthefloorstartsat0cmandendsattheheightofthefinishingsurface,despiterecommendationfromNIOSHtomeasurefromthehand(3).Therefore,theVICONandLiDARdataprovideamoreaccuratemeasureofverticaldistancethanahand-measuredvalue.
Incontrast,thetrunktwistinganglemeasuredusingtheIMUdoesnotcloselymatchthevaluescalculatedfromVICONpositiondata.Thiscanbeexplainedbythemagnetometercalibration,whichcorrectsdriftinthegyroscopemeasurements.Toimprovetwistangleaccuracy,anextendedcalibrationwhichcompensatesforbothhardandsoftironerrorswasdevelopedfortheIMU.Datacollectioniscurrentlyinprogresstotestthemethod,however,itisanticipatedthatthenewcalibrationshouldgreatlyimprovethetrunktwistestimation.
References1.WSIB.BytheNumbers:2017WSIBStatisticalReport.WSIB;2018.2.ClaypooleV,DewarA,FrauliniN,SzalmaJ.EffectsofSocialFacilitationonPerceivedWorkload,SubjectiveStress,andVigilance-RelatedAnxiety.ProceedingsoftheHumanFactorsandErgonomicsSocietyAnnualMeeting.2016;60(1):1169-1173.
3.WatersT,Putz-AndersonV,GargA,FineL.RevisedNIOSHequationforthedesignandevaluationofmanualliftingtasks.Ergonomics.1993;36(7):749-776.
4.MitalA,NicholsonA,AyoubM.Aguidetomanualmaterialshandling,2nded.2nded.London:TaylorandFrancis;1997.
Manual OnboardSensors VICONFinalHeight(cm) 114 123 120StartingHeight(cm) 0 10 8TrunkTwist(°) 90 41 86
Table1:Summaryofexperimentalinputvariablesasmeasuredmanually,bythedevicesensors,andbyVICON.
73
Eliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearch
CourtneyNickel1*,2,CarolynKnight2,AlisonGodwin1,21SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionSimulatorsprovideameansbywhichresearcherscanevaluatetrainingandperformanceinarelativelyrisk-freeenvironment.Thiscanbeespeciallyusefulinhighriskworkplaces,suchastheminingindustry.TichonandBurgess-Limerick(2011)identifiednotonlyhazardasareasontoexplorevirtualrealitytrainingmethodsbutalsothereducedcostandimpactonworkplaceproductivity,andtheabilitytoexplorescenariosthatareimpossibletorecreateintherealworld.Trainingnoviceusersinasimulatoralsohasthebenefitofimprovingtheperceptuo-motorskillsrequiredtoenhancereal-worlddecisionmaking,problemsolvingandhazardidentification(Tichon&Burgess-Limerick(2011).Theseareimportantconstructsthatleadtoaworkerhavingbettersituationalawarenessoncetheyareintheworkplace(Sausetal.2012).
Areviewoftheindustry-leadingThoroughtecCyberminesimulatorshowedthattraineesfoundthesimulatortobeveryrealisticandtheybelievedthatthecompetenciesdevelopedduringtrainingwouldbetransferabletotherealworld(Bellehumeur&Marquis,2016).Notallresearchlabshaveaccesstothefundsrequiredtopurchaseandinstallthesehigh-fidelitysimulators.Additionally,theabilitytobuildcustomsoftwarespecifictoresearchinterestshasmeritsfromaresearchperspective.Withthisinmind,ourresearchlabhasdesignedavirtualrealitysimulatorontheUnitygamingplatform,withanintegratedjoystickandpedalcontrollertocloselymimicoperationofaload-haul-dump(LHD)machine.Themaintaskinthesimulatorisfortheindividualtopickuporeinthebucketofanaccurately-scaledLHDanddelivertheoreinasimulatedminedrifttoanorepasslocation.Severalfeaturesintendedtotestsituationalawarenesshavebeenbuiltintothesimulator,andadatalogfeaturerecordsperformancefeaturessuchasmachinespeed,headdirection,collisionstatisticsandreactiontime.Inpreliminaryresearch,itwasfoundthatastronglearningcurvewasaffectinganalysisofperformancevariablesacrossdifferentresearchconditions.Assuch,thisresearchstudysetouttodeterminea)theimpactofatutorialsessiononthelearningeffectandb)atwhatpointdidthelearningeffecttaperoff.
MethodsAtotalof18participantswererecruitedtothisstudy,andrandomlyassignedtooneoftwogroups,tutorialornotutorial.Thetutorialwasafive-minutesessioninaseparatevirtualreality(VR)spacethatprovidedanoverviewoftheLHDmachine,howthecontrolsworkedandhowtonavigateinVR.Allparticipantsthencompletedfivesessionslastingfiveminuteseachinthesimulator(Figure1).Thesessionsallhadthesamegoal,whichwastodeliverorefromthemuckpiletotheorepass.Alongtheway,participants
encounteredpedestrians,whichtheywereinstructedtoavoidhittingandtorespondtowithaspecialbuttononthejoystick.Thiswasloggedasaperception-responsetimebythesimulatordatalog.Aftereachsession,theparticipantwasgivenabreakandaskedasituationalawarenessquestion.
Figure1:UserwithVRheadsetnavigatinganLHDmachineinthevirtualmineenvironment.
74
Duetonon-normaldatadistributions,non-parametrictestswereusedthroughouttoevaluatetheimpactofthetutorialsessionontotalcollisions,perception-responsetimeandnumberofcorrectlyansweredsituationalawarenessquestions.Whereapplicable,Levene’sTestforEqualityofVarianceswasusedtoevaluatethedifferenceinvariancebetweentutorialandnotutorialgroups.
FindingsTheMann-WhitneyUprovidednoevidenceofadifferenceintotalcollisions(p=0.203)oraverageperception-responsetime(p=.515)whencomparingthetutorialgrouptothenotutorialgroup.Largeindividualvariabilitywaslikelydrivingthisrelationship(Figure2),andpromptedustolook
atameasuretoevaluateequalityofvariance(Levene’sTest).TheLeveneTestviolation(p<0.05)fortotalcollisionssuggeststhatthelowervarianceforthetutorialgroup(27.7±17.1)comparedtonotutorial(56.6±46.4)isworthyofnote.
TheLeveneTestwasnotviolatedforaverageperceptionresponsetimesothegroupswerecollapsedandtheFriedmantest(p=0.04)wasusedtodemonstrateasignificantrepeatedmeasureseffectacrosstime(Session1-5).FollowupWilcoxonSignedRanksTestsuggeststhatperception-responsetimeinSession1wassignificantlyslowerthanallotherSessions.
DiscussionThefindingsofthisworkdemonstratethatusingthetutorialsessiontoorientunfamiliaruserswiththeVRenvironmentisbeneficialforreducingintra-individualvariabilityincollisionoccurrence.Achievingabaselevelofcompetencyinthephysicaltaskofdrivingallowstheresearcherstohaveconfidenceinthesubsequentmeasuresofcognitiveloadthatwillbeusedintheevaluationofinterfacedesign.
RelevancetoPractitionersUsingVRinatrainingorresearchcontextisgainingtractionbutalargelearningcurveexiststhatmustbeovercome.Further,manyindividualsmaynottolerateVRasamediumforlongperiodsoftime.Thisworkhasdemonstratedtheimportanceofusingatutorialsessiontoorienttheuser,andthedecreasingvariancethatcanbeachievedwithincreasedpracticeintheVRsimulation.
References1. Tichon,J.,Burgess-Limerick,R.Areviewofvirtualrealityasamediumforsafetyrelatedtrainingin
mining.JournalofHealthandSafety,ResearchandPractice2011;3(1),33–40.2. Saus,E.-R.,Johnsen,B.H.,Eid,J.,Thayer,J.F.Whobenefitsfromsimulatortraining:Computersin
HumanBehavior,2012;28(4),1262–1268.3. Bellehumeur,V.,Marquis,R.Pouruneimplantationréussiedelaformationparsimulateurd’engins
miniersauQuébec.Institutnationaldesmines.2016
Figure2:TotalcollisionsacrossSessionsfortutorialandnon-tutorialgroups
-10-5051015202530
Tutorial Non-tutorial
TotalCollisions
Session1 Session2 Session3 Session4 Session5
75
CanSeatPanDesignMitigateLowerLimbSwellingandBackPain?
MatthewBarrett*,MonaFrey,DianaDeCarvalhoDivisionofClinicalEpidemiology,DisciplineofMedicine,FacultyofMedicine,MemorialUniversityof
Newfoundland,St.John’s,NewfoundlandandLabrador,Canada
IntroductionProlongedsittinghasbeenshowntohaveverynegativehealthconsequences,includingearlydeathandcardiovasculardisease,especiallywhennotoffsetbyphysicalactivity1Further,thereisevidencethatprolongedsittingisrelatedtoincreasedratesoflowbackpain(LBP)2.Forthesereasons,increasingmovementduringtheworkdayhasbeenadvocatedfordeskworkersinofficesettings.Onepossiblesolutiontothisproblemcouldbealternativechairdesigns:specifically,adesignthatpermitsmovementofthelowback,hipsandlowerlimbsinseatedposture.Thepurposeofthisstudywastoexaminetheimpactofan“active”multi-axischaironlowerlimbswellingandperceivedbackpainoveraprolongedsittingexposure.
MethodsInthisrandomizedrepeatedmeasurescross-sectionalstudy,30maleparticipantsofworkingage(19-65)wererecruitedfromthelocalpopulation.Participantscompletedtwo,threehour,experimentalsessions,atthesametimeofday,atleast24hoursapart.Eachsessionconsistedofinstrumentationwithtwoaccelerometersattheupperandlowerback,followedbya2-hourstandardizedtypingtaskatanergonomicallyadjustedworkstation.Participantswereblockrandomizedtoeithertypeinthe“active”ortypicalofficechaironthefirstday,followedbytheotherchairduringthesecondsession.Lumbarspineanglewascalculatedattherelativeanglebetweenaccelerometersnormalizedtospineflexionrangeofmotion(%ROM),calfcircumferencewasmeasured10cmdistaltothekneecapoftherightlegimmediatelybeforeandaftertheprolongedsittingtrialandratingsofperceivedbackpainwerecollectedat7.5minuteintervalsthroughoutthetrialusingadigital100mmVisualAnalogScale(VAS)withanchorsof0mm=“nopain”and100mm=“worstpainimaginable”.Qualitativefeedbackonbothchairswasalsocollected.Theseoutcomemeasureswerecomparedbetweenchairtypeusinga1-wayrepeatedmeasuresANOVA(SPSSversion22.0,IBMCorporation,Armonk,NY,USA).
FindingsParticipantssatwithsignificantlylessspineflexiononaverageintheactivechair(62.25%ROM+/-18.22SD)comparedtothetypicalchair(70.80%ROM+/-11.98SD;p=0.039).Averagepeakperceivedpainratinginthelowbackregionwasfoundtobesignificantlylowerintheactivecomparedtothecontroltypicalchair(p=0.025).Calfcircumferencemeasuresincreasedsignificantlylessinresponsetotheprolongedsittingtrialwiththe“active”(averagecircumferencedifferential+0.021cm+/-0.73cm)comparedtothecontroltypicalchair(averagecircumferencedifferential+0.962cm+/-0.74)(p<0.00).Qualitativedataindicatedparticipantsperceivedtheactivechairfavourably.
Discussion
Theprimaryfindingfromthisinvestigationwasthatparticipant’sexhibitsignificantlylesslumbarflexionthroughouta2-hourstandardizedofficetasksittingintheactivechaircomparedtothetypicalofficechair.Participantssittinginanoveralllessflexedposturecouldpointtoareductionintheriskofinjurysincethepercentoftimespentinnon-neutralorflexedlowbackposturesisaknownriskfactorforLBP3.Steadilyincreasingperceivedlowbackpain,wasalsoseenforboth
76
chairconditionsinthisstudy,however,participantsreachedasignificantlyhigheraveragepeakpainratinginthetypicalcomparedtothe“active”chair.
Theseresultssuggestparticipantshadalesspainfulexperiencewhileseatedintheactivechairwhilecompletingthetypingtask.Previousliteraturehasshownthatincreasedcalfcircumferenceduetolegswellingassociatedwithvenouspoolingexistsafterperiodsofprolongedsitting4.Calfcircumferenceincreasewassignificantlylowerintheactivechairsuggestingthattheparticipantshadlessvenousbloodpoolingintheirlowerlimbswhileseatedinthe“active”comparedtothecontrol.Thiscouldberelatedthemoreerectposturewhichmayhavereducedcompressionofthevascularsystematthehips,however,aslowerlimbpostureand/ormuscleactivitywerenotmeasuredwecannotsayforsure.Futurelaboratorystudiesshouldfocusonthesemeasurestoprovidemoreinsightintothemechanismofthiseffect.
RelevancetoPractitionersThisstudyfoundthat,incomparisontoatypicalofficechair,the“active”chairdesignhadsignificantimpactsonspineposture,calfcircumferenceandperceivedbackpain.Thisresultisveryencouraginggiventhatthesemeasuresshouldbetheoreticallyrelatedtocardiovascularhealthandlowbackpain.Largeepidemiologicalstudieswouldberequiredtoexaminetheimpactontheseaspectsofhealthatthepopulationlevel.
References
1.EklundU,Steene-JohannessenJ,BrownWJetal.Doesphysicalactivityattenuate,oreveneliminate,thedetrimentalassociationofsittingtimewithmortality?Aharmonizedmeta-analysisofdatafrommorethan1millionmenandwomen.TheLancet.2016.EpubJuly28.2.GuptaN,ChristiansenCS,HallmanDM,KorshøjM,CarneiroIG,HoltermannA.Isobjectivelymeasuredsittingtimeassociatedwithlowbackpain?Across-sectionalinvestigationintheNOMADstudy.PLoSOne.2015Mar25;10(3):e0121159.3.DunkNM,CallaghanJP.Gender-baseddifferencesinposturalresponsestoseatedexposures.Clinicalbiomechanics.2005Dec1;20(10):1101-10.4.ChesterMR,RysMJ,KonzSA.Legswelling,comfortandfatiguewhensitting,standing,andsit/standing.InternationalJournalofIndustrialErgonomics.2002May1;29(5):289-96.
Figure2.Averagechangeincalfcircumference(cm)forthirtyparticipantsafterthe2-hourtypingtrialinboththeactivechairandcontrolchairconditions
Figure1.AverageNormalizedLumbarFlexionAngle(%ROM)overthe2-hourtypingtrialforthirtyparticipantsinboththeactivechairandcontrolchairconditions.
77
CareerFirefighters’real-timephysiologicalResponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:Implicationsforinjuryprevention
SaraSayedMSc(candidate)1*,ReganBolduc2,KathrynE.Sinden,RKin,PhD,1
1SchoolofKinesiology,LakeheadUniversityThunderBay,ON,Canada2ThunderBayFireRescue
Introduction
Firefightingisaphysicallydemandingjobthatrequiresfirefighterstoperformworktasksunderextremeconditions.Theseconditionsareoftenphysiologicallytaxing,requiringperformanceofstrenuoustasksinchallengingworkenvironments(1).Studiesoffirefighterphysiologicalresponseareoftenperformedincontrolledenvironmentswhichmaylimitapplicationtopractice(2).Thepurposeofthisstudyistodeterminecareerfirefighters’real-timephysiologicalresponsetotwofirefightingtasksover6-monthswithaviewonfirefighterinjuryprevention.
MethodsContext:ThisisacohortstudyconductedinpartnershipwithThunderBayFireRescueandtheThunderBayProfessionalFirefightersAssociation.Baselinedataiscomplete;6-monthdatawillbecompletedinMay2018.Sample:37careerfirefighters(36=male)wererecruitedfromtheThunderBayFireRescue.DataCollection:Allstudycomponentswereperformedinthefiredepartment’strainingfacilitywhichallowedaccesstofirefightingequipment.Demographicinformation(age,height,weight,yearsofservice)wascollectedpriortotaskperformance.FirefighterswerethenfittedwithaZephyrBioHarnessthatwasusedtocollectphysiologicalmeasuresoverthecourseofthetaskperformance(3).Firefightersdonnedallbunkergearincludingtheself-containedbreathingapparatusandwereaskedtoperformahose-dragtaskwithachargedlineandapatienttransferintoastairchair.Thehosedragtaskbeganwithfirefightersinastandingposition.Wheninstructed,theyretrievedthenozzleofthechargedfirehose(1000kpa),fromthefloorandthendraggedthehose100ft.Thehosewasthendischargedusinga“straightstream”settingforfiveseconds.Thistaskwasperformedtwicebeforeparticipantsperformedthepatienttransfer.Thepatient
transfertaskrequiredapairedlifttotransferaweightedmanikin(68kg)fromthefloorintoastairchair.Theliftwasperformedtwice;onceliftingattheheadofthemanikinandonceliftingatthefeetofthemanikin.DataAnalysis:Thefollowingisanalysisofbaselinedata;thefinalconferencepresentationwillincludeacomparativeanalysisbetweenbaselineand6-monthdata.Descriptiveanalysesofdemographicandphysiologicalmeasureswereexamined;comparativeanalyseswithintask(trial1vs.trial2.forhosedragandpatientlift)andbetweentasks(hosedragandpatientlift)werealsoconducted.Cumulativephysiologicalloadwasdeterminedbycalculatingchangeinphysiologicalmeasuresbetweenbaselineandpost-task(definedascompletionofbothhosedragandpatient-transfer).Physiologicalmeasuresofinterestincluded:heartrate,heartratevariability,breathrateandestimatedcoretemperature.
FindingsOursampleincludedactiveduty,careerfirefighterswhowere39(+/-8)yearsofagewithanaverageBMIof29whichplacestheminthe“overweight”category(4).
Figure1.Firefighterdischarginghoseonstraightstreamsetting.
78
Table1:DemographicInformation
Mean(SD) Min. Max.Age(yrs) 39.8(7.8) 27 58Height(cm) 183.95(8.23) 167.64 198.12Weight(Kg) 99.6(23.7) 78.5 187.96
yearsofservice 11.6(7.2) 3 26Heartratevariability(HRV)significantlydecreasedbetweenbaselineandendoftaskcompletion(t(19)=2.473,p<.05).Heartrate(HR)increasedthrough-outtaskcompletion,(t(19)=-3.347,p=.003)whereasbreathratedecreased,t(19)=2.491,p=.022.Coretemperatureappearedtoremainconstanthowevertherewasasignificantincreasebetweenpatienttransfercomparedtothehosedragtask,t(16)=-5.867,p<.001.Table2:Physiologicalresponsefrominitiationoffirefightingtasks(hosedrag)tocompletion(patienttransfer)andbetweenfirefightingtasks[𝑋(SD)]
(HRV=HeartRateVariability;HR=HeartRate;BR=BreathRate;CT=CoreTemperature)Discussion
InitialresultssuggestincreasedphysiologicalloadduringperformanceofthesetwofirefightingtasksasdemonstratedbyadecreaseinHRVandincreasedinHR.DecreasingHRVsuggestsanincreaseinsympatheticactivityoftheautonomicnervoussystem(ANS)andisoftenobservedwithanincreasedHR,indicativeofphysiologicalorpsychologicalstress(5).TheobserveddecreaseinBRmayberesultofparticipantsemployingtheValsalvamaneuverduringthepatientlift,therebyreducingtheirbreathingrate.Measuresofphysiologicalloadmayelucidatemanifestationoffatigueandfirefighters’abilitytoregulatephysiologicalresponsetovariousstressors(5).Thesepreliminaryfindingssuggestanincreasingphysiologicalloadoverthecourseoftaskperformance.
RelevancetoPractitionersThesestudyfindingsprovideuniqueinsightsintofirefighters’real-timephysiologicalloadduringtwophysicallydemandingfirefightingtasks.Ergonomistswhoaimtopreventinjuryandillnessinhighworkdemandoccupationsmayusethisinformationtotargetstrategiesaimedtoreducephysiologicalload.
References1. MichaelidesMA,ParpaKM,HenryLJ,etal.Assessmentofphysicalfitnessaspectsandtheir
relationshiptofirefighters’jobabilities.JStrengthCondRes.2011;25(4):956–65.2. SmithDL,HallerJM,DolezalBA,etal.Evaluationofawearablephysiologicalstatusmonitorduring
simulatedfirefightingactivities.JOccupEnvironHyg.2014;11(7):427–33.3. NazariG,MacDermidJC,SindenR.Kin.KE,etal.ReliabilityofZephyrBioharnessandFitbitCharge
MeasuresofHeartRateandActivityatRest,DuringtheModifiedCanadianAerobicFitnessTestandRecovery.JStrengthCondResearch.2017.(Epubaheadofprint)
4. WorldHealthOrganization.BodyMassIndex(BMI)Classification[Internet].;[citedDecember2017].Website:http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html
5. KaikkonenP,LindholmH,LusaS.PhysiologicalLoadandPsychologicalStressduringa24-hourWorkShiftamongFinnishFirefighters.JOccupEnvironMed.2017;59(1):41–6.
Baseline End HoseDrag PatientTransferHRV(ms) 78.5(35.8) 57.4(25.1) 80.2(39.3) 55.7(24.1)HR(bpm) 97.4(21.9) 110.8(17.2) 118.1(17.8) 106.6(17.1)BR(bpm) 20.4(6.4) 16.1(4.8) 18.9(5.4) 17.6(4.1)CT(°F) 99.59(0.23) 99.88(0.25) 99.64(0.24) 99.89(0.24)
79
INTERACTIVELECTURE
Flawedsituationalawareness:astealthkillerintheworkplaceRichardGasaway,PhD,EFO,CFO
Thissessionbuildsonthefoundationestablishedduringthekeynoteaddressandoffersattendeesspecificexamplesofhowflawedsituationalawarenesscanimpactsafety.FlawedsituationalawarenessisNEVERtherootcauseofanear-missorcasualty.ItisaSYMPTOM.Thebarriersthatflawsituationalawarenessaretherootcauses.Thisfast-pacedprogramwillintroduceyoutobarriersthatflawawarenessandmayinclude
• Pre-arrivallens• Missionmyopia• Staffingissues• Normalizationofdeviance• Overconfidence• Miscommunications• Peerpressure• Supervisorpressure• Overload• Taskfixation• Tasksaturation• Minddrift
• Cognitivebiases• Thecurseofknowledge• Humanfactors• Technology• Commandlocation• Commandsupport• Fear-drivendecisions• Culture• …andmore
80
PAPERSESSION7:MOBILEEQUIPMENT
Day3–Oct17th
13:15-14:45
PaperSession7MobileEquipment
KevinGillespieForensicErgonomics:Lineofsignandvisibilityassessmentincriticalinjuryandfatality‘struck-by’investigations;acasestudyHeatherKahleEfficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perceptionandsafetyBrandonVanceDocumentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies
AmandeepSinghInvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod
81
ForensicErgonomics:LineofSightandVisibilityAssessmentinCriticalInjuryandFatality‘Struck-by’Investigations;ACaseStudy
KevinGillespie
OntarioMinistryofLabour,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionStruck-byincidentsareoneoftheleadingcausesofcriticalinjuriesandfatalitiesinOntarioworkplaces.ThegoalsofanyMinistryofLabour(MOL)investigationintoaworkplacehealthandsafetyincidentaretopreventareoccurrenceandidentifyanycontraventionsoftheOccupationalHealthandSafetyActandassociatedregulationsthatmayhavecontributedtotheincident.During‘struck-by’investigations,theinvestigationteamtypicallyincludesaMOLergonomisttoconductalineofsightandvisibilityassessmentwhichisusuallykeytoidentifyingtheincident’srootcause.
Thispaperoutlinesthemethodologyandfindingsoftheergonomicsassessmentthatwasperformedaspartofafatalityinvestigation.
DescriptionofIncidentandErgonomistInvestigationAworkerusingatorchtodismantleequipmentinascrapmetalyardwasfatallyinjuredwhenhewasstruckandrunoverbya47tonnecrawler(track)excavator.Theexcavatorwasreversingthroughtheyardwhilepullingacitybususingthehydraulicshearmountedontheexcavator’sboom.Avisibilityandlineofsightassessmentwasconductedaspartoftheinvestigationtoidentifyblindspotsorareaswithanobstructedview,fromtheperspectiveoftheexcavatoroperatorand/orareasvisibleusingmirrors.Physicalandcognitivefactorsaffectingthevisibilityofthefatallyinjuredworkertotheexcavatoroperatorwerealsoinvestigatedincludingthehumaneyevisualfield,resolutionandpositionofthefatallyinjuredworker,contrastbetweentheworker’sclothingandthebackground,objectsizeandmovement,operator’sexpectancyandtaskcomplexity.
ForensicmappingofthescenewasconductedusingaRoboticTotalStation;anelectronic/opticalinstrumentconsistingofanelectronictheodolite(transit)integratedwithanelectronicdistancemeasurement(EDM).UsingthehorizontalandverticalanglesfromtheelectronictheodoliteandtheslopedistancefromtheEDM,precisethree-dimensionalpointcoordinatesinaphysicalenvironmentarerecorded.Thetotalstationwasalsousedtomaptheboundariesoftheareavisibleusingtherightsidemirrorasitwastheonlymeansofvisibilitytowardthevicinityofthefatallyinjuredworker.Therecordeddatawereusedtocreateathree-dimensionaldigitalmodeloftheequipmentanddepicttheareavisibletotheoperatorusingtherightsidemirror(Figure1).
InvestigationFindingsandOutcomesThefieldofviewprovidedbytherightsidemirrorextendedrearwardalongalinetangenttotherightsideoftheexcavator’sbodyandinapieshapetotheright(Figure2).Withtheoperatorlookingatthehydraulicshearandbus,therightsidemirrorwaspositioned70°totheright,attheouteredgeoftheoperator’svisualfield(Figure2)whereobjectsareunlikelytobenoticed,especiallyifnotlarge,highcontrastandmoving(1).Inthiscase,thefatallyinjuredworkerwasstationarywithhisbacktotheexcavatorandhisclothingprovidedlowcontrastwiththesurroundingbackgroundenvironment.Thepositionofthemirroranditsconvexshapealsoresultedinsmallreflectedimagesofobjectsanddistortionwhichaffectsdistanceperception.Furthermore,themirrorswerenotbeingmaintainedinaconditiontomaximizetheireffectiveness,withdustanddirtonthereflectivesurfacereducingthevisibilityinthemirrors.Asaresultofthelowcontrast,smallreflectedimagesizeandlackofmovementofthefatallyinjuredworker,
82
particularlywhilepositionedneartheedgeoftheoperator’svisualfield,itisunlikelythatthefatallyinjuredworkerwouldhavebeendetectedbytheexcavatoroperatorintherightsidemirror(2,3).Furthermore,therightsidemirrorwascompletelyobstructedbytheexcavator’sboomunlesstheoperatorleanedforwardawayfromtheseatbackandturnedhisheadsignificantlytotheright.Itwasdeterminedthattheoperatorwasnotlikelyusingtherightsidemirrorwhilereversingthroughtheyardandtheoperatorwasfocusedonthehydraulicsheartowingthebus.However,evenifhehadbeenusingthemirrors,therewasnovisibilitytobehindtheexcavatorandthereforenoabilityfortheoperatortoseethepathoftravelwhenoperatinginreverse.
Thecomplexityofthetaskofpullingthebusthroughthescrapyardwasincreasedduetotheamountofcongestionwithlargeamountsofscrapmetal,heavyequipmentandvehicles,reducingtheoperator’slikelihoodofnoticingobstructionsorpedestrians(2,3).Thelackofdedicatedpedestrianworkareasintheyardandthelackofdelineationbetweenareaswhereheavyequipmentoperates,deliveryvehiclesaremovingandpedestriantrafficincreasedtheprobabilityofapedestrian/vehicleincident.Despitetheoperatorbeingpreviouslyawareofthefatallyinjuredworker’spresenceandposition,theoperator’sprimaryfocuswasonthebusthatwasbeingpulledthroughtheyardandnotonhispositionorthatofotherworkersintheyard.Theemployerwaschargedwithmultiplecontraventionsincludingfailingtoensurethatbarriers,warningsignsorothersafeguardsfortheprotectionofallworkerswereusedinareaswherevehicletrafficmayendangerthesafetyofworkersaswellasfailingtoensurethatacompetentsignallerwasusedastheoperatordidnothavefullviewofhisintendedpathoftravel.
RelevancetoPractitionersUnderstandingline-of-sightandvisibilityfactorsinvolvedinstruck-byincidentscanassistpractitionerssettingupworkplaces,policiesandtrainingprogramstopreventworkplaceinjuries.AnunderstandingoftheinvestigationprocessforthesetypesofincidentscanalsoassistpractitionersinvestigatingcomplaintsornearmissincidentswheretheMOLisnotinvolved.
References2. KroemerK.H.E.andGrandjeanE.FittingtheTasktotheHuman.5thed.BocaRaton:Taylor
andFrancis;1997.3. OlsonP.L.,DewarR.andFarberE.ForensicAspectsofDriverPerceptionandResponse.3rd
ed.Tucson:Lawyers&JudgesPublishingCompanyInc.;2010.4. SmileyA,editor.HumanFactorsinTrafficSafety.3rded.Tucson:Lawyers&Judges
PublishingCompanyInc.;2016.
Figure1:Digitalmodelofequipment&LOSdepictionFigure2:Lineofsight(LOS)dimensionsandsightlineangle
83
Efficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perception&safety
HeatherKahle*,JennyColman2,SashaBrown31WorkSafeBC,Richmond,BC,Canada
Introduction
Whenequipmentorvehicles–especiallylargeones-arereversing,peopleandobjectsmaynotbeinthedriver’sviewduetothesizeofthevehicle,theequipmentonboard,orothervehiclesorobjectsinthevicinity.Ratherthanonlyrelyuponthedriver’sview,acousticbackupalarmsareoftenusedtoalertthosenearbyoftheimpendingdangersothattheyknowtogetoutofharm’sway.Despitetheavailabilityanduseofaudiblealarmshowever,accidentsandfatalitiesinvolvingreversingvehiclescontinue.DatafromWorkSafeBC’sdatawarehouseidentified550backoverincidentsfrom2001to2015.Amongtheidentifiedincidents,13workerswerekilledwhentheywerepinned,struckorrolledoverbymobileequipmentorvehiclesthatwerereversing.
Theubiquitousconventionalsingle-frequencytonal(beep…beep…beep),reversingalarmshaveatypicalvolumeof97-112decibels(dB)andasoundthatpropagatesuptothreekilometersfromthedangerzone;needlesslyalertingothers(1).Inenvironmentssuchasbusyconstructionorminingsiteswithvariouspiecesofequipmentandmachineryconstantlyarriving,workingandleavingthesite,manyofwhichalsoemitbeepingandalarmnoises,single-frequencytonalalarmscanbeignored,difficulttolocalize,andmaskedsuchthattheymightnotbeaudibleabovetheothersounds.Recently–thebroadbandalarm(BBA)isgainingpopularityasameanstomitigateriskfromreversingequipment.TheBBAemitsaunique“pssht....pssht..”soundcomprisedofallaudiblefrequenciesfrom400-10,000Hertzbroadcastsimultaneously,ratherthanasinglefrequencylikethatofthetonalalarm.Broadbandalarmshavemanypotentialbenefitssuchasbeingeasiertolocalize,orpinpointwhichvehicleisreversingbutfewstudieshaveinvestigatedworkers’real-worldperceptionstotheBBAthatultimatelyeffectworkersafety.
MethodsAmultidisciplinary,teamfromWorkSafeBCdevelopedasurveytoassessworkers’perceptionsregardingthebroadbandalarm.Theresearchwasconductedasacontrolledexperimentbyexposingrespondentstothesoundfollowedbyasurvey.BuildingontheworkofDr.DeborahWithington(2),theonlinesurveyaskedparticipantsiftheyhadheardthebroadbandalarmbefore.IftheparticipanthadheardtheBBAsoundbefore,theywereaskedtocompletethesurveycomprisedof15questions.Ifrespondentsindicatedtheyhadn’theardthebroadbandalarm,thesurveyjumpedtotheoutropagewhererespondentswerethankedandexitedoutofthesurvey.Itisnotedthatexcludingthosewhohadn’theardthenoisepreviouslylimitedthedepthoffindings,andisalimitationofthecurrentstudy.Questions1-3assessedoverallawarenessoftheBBA,questions4and5probedreactiontoandcomprehensionoftheBBA,question6askedaboutassociationwithareversingvehicle,questions7-9askedaboutinterpretationasawarning,questions10-11askedifnoisesinterferewiththeBBA,questions12-13askedaboutlevelsofannoyanceandquestions14-15queriedtrainingfortheBBA.
Findings
Thetotalnumberofrespondentswhohadheardthebroadbandalarmbeforewas138.Amongthose,63%hearditatwork;30%hearditnearaconstructionsite;22%hearditinaloadingbay.24%ofrespondentsheardthealarmelsewherenotlisted.
84
DiscussionBBAshaveseveralfavourablefeaturesincludingbeingeasiertolocalize,andprojectingamoreuniformsoundfieldbehindthevehicle(therebyprovidingfewermisleadingproximitycues),andtheBBAalarmsignalismorefocussedintheareawhereapersonmaybeatrisk.Also,itislesslikelytobemaskedbyothernoisesonaworksiteandcauseslessnoiseannoyanceforneighboringcommunities.However,astheBBAisrelativelynewtoworksitesinB.C.,hence,focusisneededtoboostunderstandingofthemeaningofthebroadbandsignalanditsinterpretationasbothawarningsignaltomoveoutofharm’swayandasanindicatorofimminentdanger.Theresearchsupportedourhypothesisthatrespondentswillfindthebroadbandalarmeffectiveincapturingattentiontoindicatethelocationofthehazardbuthaslimitedeffectinconsistentlysignallingwhatthehazardisandwhetheritisalifethreateninghazard.
RelevancetoPractitionersApplyingthesefindingswillhelppractitionersdevelopeffectiveeducationprogramsthatbecomepartofanyemployeeorientationand/orsafetydiscussionacrossindustrieswhendeployingnewtechnologysuchastheBBA.
References
1.Vaillancourt,V.,Nelisse,H.,Laroche,C.Giguere,C.,Boutin,J.,andLaferriere,P.(2013).Comparisonofsoundpropagationandperceptionofthreetypesofbackupalarmswithregardstoworkersafety.Noise&Health,15(67),420-436.2.Withington,D.J.(2004).ReversingGoesBroadband.QuarryManagementJournal.May2004.Retrievedfromhttp://www.agg-net.com/files/qmj-corp/Reversing%20goes%20Broadband_0.pdf
Whenaskedwhatdidyouthinkthesoundmeant,24%thoughtitsoundedlikeabirdindistress.Othersthoughtthealarmsoundedlikestrangeducknoiseswhileothersbelievedthesoundmeantsomethingwasbrokenonapieceofequipmentsuchasanairleak.Othersthoughtitmeanttherewasanissuewiththealarm;believingthebeepermightbebroken.Stillseveralothersindicatedthattheyhadnoideawhatthesoundwas.Thereweremultiple,varyingperceptionsastohowthesignalwastaken.72%ofrespondentsperceiveditaswarningsignal;24%didnot.While66%thoughtitmeanttomoveoutofharm’sway,athirddidnot.Overhalfofrespondentsdidn’tfeelitindicatedimminentdanger.
Figure1:Firstreactiontohearingthebroadbandalarm
42
34
21
19
9
16
I looked around
I turned my head
I was confused
I moved out of the way
I felt surprised
Other
%
Figure2:Interpretationasawarning/danger
85
Documentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies
AlyssaBrunton1,2,BrandonVance*1,2,AlisonGodwin1,2
1SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
Introduction
Accidentsandfatalitiesrelatedtoreversingmachinerycontinuetobealargeissueandareverycostlytotheindustrialsector.Evenwiththepoliciesandlegislationeffortsestablishedonworksitesthataimtoreducethenumberofequipment-humaninteractions,theseaccidentsandfatalitiescontinuetooccur.Thiscanbeattributedtothedynamicenvironmentofworksitesand,attimes,confinedspacesinwhichworkersarerequiredtoperformtasks1.Themostcommoncontributingcausestostruck-byaccidentshavebeenfoundtobehumanfactorsinvolvingmisjudgmentofahazardoussituation,aswellaslargeblindspots2.Evenwithcurrentprecautionssuchasspotters,backupalarms,PPEinplace,theseincidencesstillmanagetooccur.Therefore,effortshavebeenmadetoimproveoperator’ssituationalawarenessandlineofsighttoblindareasaroundthemachine.
InOntario,itismandatedthatadumptruckmusthaveanautomaticaudiblealarmthatalertsindividualswhenitthetruckisreversing(s.105)3.Theconstantbeepingisoftenconsideredanuisancenoise;andoperatorsreportedlydisablethesealarms.Infact,in56outof69fatalitiesusingheavymachineryreviewedbyHinzeandTeizer,theback-upalarmsweredisabledornon-functional1.Usingaspotterforreversingmaneuversmayalsohelptoreducepedestrian-equipmentinteractionsbutonestudyfoundthatunqualifiedindividualsoftenattempttoworkasasignallertoaccelerateworksiteoperations4.Theuseofback-upcamerasandotherproximityawarenesstechnology(PAT)hasbeguntocreepontoworksitesbutisnotroutinelyfound.Thegoalofthisworkwastodocumentconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudetowardsback-uppoliciesandtechnologies.
MethodsAtotalof56participantsfromtheconstructionindustrywererecruitedfromahealthandsafetytrainingfacilitytocompleteasurveyrelatedtovisibilityknowledge.Thesurveytookabout15minutestocompleteandincludedquestionsrelatedtoknowledgeofvisibilitypolicy,ratingsofreversingaidutilityandfrequencyofuse,andratingsofvisibilityaroundcommonpiecesofmachinery.Participantswereaskedtodifferentiatewhethertheywereoperatorsorsomeonewhoworkedaroundthemachinery.Dataweresummatedandpresentedasdescriptivedatabelow.
FindingsParticipantswereaskedtoratethefrequencyofuseforfivetypesofreversingaids:mirrors,cameras,RFIDsystem,spotters,audio.ThepercentofparticipantsreportingusageofeachaidispresentedinTable1.Theratingofeffectivenesswasmeasuredona3pointscalerangingfrom1=noteffectiveto3=veryeffective(Figure1).
Participantsthenprovidedaratingofperceivedvisibilityineightsectorsaroundthemachineandsubsequently,whengivenabirds-eyeviewoftheareaaroundamachine,wereaskedtoindicatewithafreehand‘X’wheretheywouldpositionthemselvesiftheyweretaskedwithbeingaspotterforthatmachineoperatinginreverse.ResultsforthedumptruckarepresentedinFigure2below.
86
Table1:Frequencyofuseforvariousreversingaidsintheconstructionsector.TypeofReversingAid ReportedFrequencyofuse(%respondents)
Neveruse SometimesUse AlwaysUse UnavailableMirror 1.8 7.1 82.1 1.8Camera 21.1 19.3 17.5 29.8Spotter 5.3 31.6 47.4 1.8RFID 29.8 15.8 14.0 21.1Audio 21.1 33.3 26.3 8.8
Discussion
Themostconsistentreversingaidtowhichconstructionworkershaveaccesswasthemirror,withcameraandRFIDsystemswereunavailabletomostworkers.Furthermore,despiteperceptionsintheindustry,nearlyhalf(47.3%)ofallrespondentsreportedusingaspotterforreversingandonly1.8%reportedspottersasbeingunavailable.Thissuggeststhatmandatedlegislationhashadapositiveimpactonthatrole.Theeffectivenessrankingsofthereversingaidsmirroredtheusequestionwithmirrorshavingthehighestutilityrankingofalldevices(88%).TheRFIDsystemsreceivedequalratingsofnoteffectiveorbeingsomewhatorveryeffective.WhenevaluatingthespotterlocationvaluesoverlaidonaNIOSHvisibilitygraph,onecanseethatthemajorityofworkerswouldpositionthemselvesintheleftrearsectortohelpadumptruckperformareversingmaneuver.Aconcerning17%wouldpositionthemselvesintherearsector,whichismostlyacompleteblindspottotheoperator,unlessacamerasystemhasbeeninstalled.
RelevancetoPractitionersDatafromthesurveyscanbeusedtoguidefuturetrainingsessionsrelatedtooperatorvisibilityfromavarietyofmachinery.
References1. HinzeJW,TeizerJ.Visibility-relatedfatalitiesrelatedtoconstructionequipment.SafSci,2011;49(5),
709–718.2. HinzeJ,HuangX,TerryL.TheNatureofStruck-byAccidents.JofConstrEngMan,2005;131(2),262-
268.3. MinistryofLabour(MOL).ConstructionProjectsRegulationO.Reg.213/91.OntarioGazette;
124(22),2081-2139.4. SertyesilisikB,TunstallA,McLouglinJ.AninvestigationofliftingoperationsonUKconstructionsites.
SafSci,2010;48,72-79.5. 5.NIOSH.HighwayWorkZoneSafety.2009.Availablefrom
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/highwayworkzones/bad/imagelookup.html
0
50
100
Mirrors RFID Camera Spotter Audio
NotEffectiveRanking SomewhatorVeryEffectiveRanking
Figure7:Ratingsofeffectivenessforavarietyofreversingaids Figure2:Chosenspotterlocationbehindadumptruck.Grey(blindarea).Yellow(mirrorvisibility)
87
InvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod
AmandeepSingh1*,LakhwinderPalSingh1,SarbjitSingh1,HarwinderSingh2,VarinderSingh3
1Dr.BRAmbedkarNationalInstituteofTechnologyJalandhar,Punjab,India2GuruNanakDevEngineeringCollege,Ludhiana,Punjab,India
3AshokaEngineeringWorks,Patiala,Punjab,India
IntroductionTillage is an essential agricultural activity for preparing soil to develop the ideal optimumconditionsforseedgermination,seedlingestablishmentandgrowthofcrops.Anumberofprimaryand secondary soil tillage operations are required in every agricultural field. Cultivation is asecondarytillageoperationperformedbyatoothedtypecultivatoroftensimilartochiselplows.Itismountedtoatractorbyusingathree-pointhitchanddriventhroughapowertake-off(PTO).Thetractoranditsmountedimplementsgiverisetovibrationduringinteractionswithuneventerrain[1].Vibrationtransmitstothedriverthroughmanysources(e.g.steeringwheel,seat,seatbackrest,tractor platform etc.) that may affect the ride comfort [2]. Moreover, prolonged exposure tovibrationcanincreaseriskof lowbackdisordersamongtractordrivers[3].Thismaybeduehighamplitudes to which a tractor driver is exposed during off-road operations. In current era, thetractorsarebeingequippedwithadvance technology likecabandeffectivesuspensionsystemtoprovide better ride. However, these are very expensive to buy by the farmers of developingcountries like India. Therefore, it is important to provide optimumdriving conditions in existingtractorstoimproveridecomfort.Therefore,thepresentstudyattemptedtoinvestigatetheeffectofthree ride conditions namely, forward speed, pulling force and tilling depth on ride comfort intermsofoverallvibrationtotalvalue(OVTV).
MethodsThestudywascarriedoutinthefieldsituatedatPunjabAgricultureUniversity,Ludhiana,Punjab(India).A50hptractor‘T’of2014modelwasselectedforthestudy.Therideconditionsandtheirlevels include forwardspeed (1.3,1.5,1.7m/s),pulling force (2,4,6kN)and tillingdepth (0.10,0.13,0.16).Thestudyaimedat toobtainoptimumrideconditionstoreducetheoverallvibrationtotal value response. The experimental design is formulated by using Taguchi’s L27 orthogonalarrayinMinitab17.0software.
FindingsThemeanoverall vibration totalvalue in this tillageoperation ranges from0.625 to0.831m/s2.ThecomputedS/Nratiosarefurtherusedtoobtainoptimumlevelsofinputparametersforgettingreducedoverallvibrationtotalvalue.TheresponseforSignaltoNoise(S/N)ratioswithrespecttorankingofeachinputfactorisrepresentedinTable1.
Table1:ResponseTableforSignaltoNoise(S/N)Ratios(Smaller-the-better)Level InputFactors
ForwardSpeed(m/s) PullingForce(kN) TillingDepth(m)1 3.359 2.172 2.4222 2.323 2.608 2.6153 2.002 2.904 2.648
Delta 1.357 0.732 0.226
In Table 1, the delta value was calculated for each ride conditions and it can be observed thatforwardspeedhadmaximumdeltavalue(1.357)followedbypullingforce(0.732)andtillingdepth
88
(0.226). The delta value showed the intensity of effect of respective condition on the outputresponse.Therefore,theforwardspeedhasmaximumcontributioninaffectingtheoverallvibrationtotalvalue.ThetrendofS/NratioswithrespecttoselectedinputfactorsandtheirrespectivelevelsisshowninFigure1.
Figure 8: Main Effects Plot for Signal to Noise (S/N) Ratios
DiscussionThe mean OVTV response increases with increase in forward speed and it get decreases withincreaseinpullingforce.ThisincreaseinOVTVcouldbeduetotheincreaseinvibrationcausedbyacceleratingspeedsonuneventerrains[4].TheOVTVtendstodecreasesuddenlywithincreaseinthe tilling depth from 0.10 to 0.13 m, however this change represents a slight decrease withincrease in tilling depth from 0.13 to 0.16 m. It means that the vibration get absorbed whileincreasing the tillingdepth. Itwasobserved that forward speedandpulling forcehad significanteffectonoverallvibrationtotalvalueat95%significancelevel.
RelevancetoPractitionersRide comfort has become a challenging issue for tractor manufacturing industries to satisfycustomer demand. Information pertaining to ride comfort among drivers could be useful to thetractormanufacturersforsuitableimprovements.
References1. MehtaCR,TiwariPS,VarshneyAC.Ridevibrationsona7·5kWrotarypowertiller.JournalofAgriculturalEngineeringResearch.1997Mar1;66(3):169-76.2. VillageJ,TraskC,ChowY,MorrisonJB,KoehoornM,TeschkeK.Assessingwholebodyvibrationexposureforuseinepidemiologicalstudiesofbackinjuries:measurements,observationsandself-reports.Ergonomics.2012Apr1;55(4):415-24.3. TiemessenIJ,HulshofCT,Frings-DresenMH.Lowbackpainindriversexposedtowholebodyvibration:analysisofadose–responsepattern.Occupationalandenvironmentalmedicine.2008Oct1;65(10):667-75.4. Vrielink,H.H.O.:Exposuretowhole-bodyvibrationandeffectivenessofchairdampinginhigh-poweragriculturaltractorsReport(2012-0601).ErgoLabResearchBV(2009).
89
PAPERSESSION8:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–PHDANDPOST-DOCTORAL
FELLOWS
Day3–Oct17th
13:15-14:45
PaperSession8FoundersAwardFinalists:PhDandPost-Doctoral
Fellows
MichalGlinkaChairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstandingKatieGogginsAnatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudedifferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposureColinMcKinnonTheinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks
90
Chairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstanding
MikeGlinka,KaylaFewster,GrahamMayberry,MamikoNoguchi,JackP.Callaghan
UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionHeight-adjustablesit-standdeskshaveseenwidespreaduseintheworkplace.Thesedevicesallowusers to freely transition from sitting to standingwithminimal disruption towork flow. Thoughstanding is often touted as an active alternative to sitting, a range of health concerns—includinglow back pain (LBP)—remain unresolved in workers who stand for prolonged periods. Thepersistenceofbackpaininbothsittingandstandingmayberelatedtotheeffecteachposturehasonload-bearingstructuresinthelumbarspine.Insitting,thepelvisslopesbackward,introducingaconvex curve that loads the posterior tissues of the lumbar spine and compresses the anteriorportionoftheintervertebraldisc.Standingpresentstheoppositescenario,wherebythepelvistiltsforward more naturally, but the lumbar spine often extends too much, introducing stressconcentrationson theposteriorelementsof thevertebral column(i.e., facet joints). Interestingly,radiographic[1]andmagneticimaging[2,3]studiessuggestthattrunk-thighanglesbetweensitting(90°) and standing (180°) may provide some relief to the lumbar spine and hip joint tissues.Accordingly, chair manufacturers have developed sitting solutions aimed at supporting users inpostures that approach amore open trunk-thigh angle. Thework presented herein consolidatesdata from three studies aimed at understanding the biomechanical response and perception ofeffort and discomfort of individuals when transitioning, while supported by different seatconfigurations, from sitting up toward standing. The goal was to highlight chair and posturalconstraintsthatmayaffectuserperceptionsofcomfortandphysicaldemandsinopentrunk-thighpostures,withaneyetowardinformingusersit-standworkstationguidelines.
MethodsThe first study involved24participants (mean age= 25.0 ± 2.2 years) transitioning in 5° trunk-thigh angle increments from conventional sitting (hips and knees at 90°) to standing (hips andkneesat180°).Participantsweresupportedateach incrementbya flat, rigidsurfaceunder theirbuttocks and thighs. The second study involved 16 participants (mean age = 25.0 ± 2.2 years)performingasimilartransitiontostudy1,butonlyuptoa135°trunk-thighangleandthistimeinacontouredprototypechairwithahigherfrictionfabricontheseatpanandalumbarsupportpad.Inthefirsttwostudies,participantsperformedsimulatedofficeworkfor1minuteateachtrunk-thighincrementwhilebiomechanicaldatawerecollected.Thethirdstudyinvolved24participants(meanage=25.0±2.2years)simulatingdifferentworkingpostures(e.g.,forwardleaningversusreclined)in threedifferentofficechairswithvaryingbackrestheights.Meanvalueswerecomputed for thefollowingmeasures:foot-floorsupportforces(studies1,2),lumbarspineandpelvisangles(studies1,2,3), chair interface pressures (study 2), and muscle activities of the leg extensors (study1),lumbar extensors (studies 1,3), and neck flexors (study 3). Subjective ratings of perceived effortand discomfort associatedwith the different chair products in each posturewere also assessed.Finally, a trade-off indexwas calculated,which incorporatednormalized values of required foot-floor force (i.e., representing physiologic cost) and the resulting lumbar spine posture (i.e., thepotentialbenefitforpayingthatcost).Relevantmeasureswerecomparedacrosstrunk-thighangles(studies 1,2), backrest heights (study 3) and between support types (study 2,3) using a mixed-modelANOVAwithα=0.05.
FindingsAschairheightincreasedtofacilitatelargertrunk-thighangles(study1),participants’bodyweightshifted fromtheseatpan to the feet. Inorder tokeep thebuttocks fromsliding forwardat these
91
intermediatepostures,kneeextensoractivity increased(up to12%ofmaximum),whichallowedthe feet to apply the required stabilizing force at the floor.Thisphysiologic cost of increased legmuscleactivitywasreducedinstudy2withacontouredseatpan(p<0.001),butthiscameattheexpense of greater pressure under the thighs at more open trunk-thigh angles (p= 0.001). Thetrade-off index encapsulates this competing dynamic, indicating that while the prototype chairgenerally involved a more favourable trade-off of leg muscular demand versus lumbar spineposture(p=0.012),raisingthechairtoinducemoreopentrunk-thighanglesdidnotreducelumbarspine flexion enough to offset the required increase in foot-floor force (Fig. 1A). Individuals’subjectiveresponsesmirroredthesefindings,withgreaterlevelsofperceivedphysicaldemandanddiscomfortatincreasingchairheights(Fig.1B).
Figure9:(A)Trade-offindexcomparedbetweentheflatandprototypechair,and(B)subjectivediscomfortandphysicaldemand responses for theprototype chair. Lower trade-off scores representmore favourablescenarios,wherethelumbarspineisfurtherawayfrommaximumflexion,andfoot-floorforcesarelower.
DiscussionChairs that accommodate intermediate sit-stand desk heights introduce important tradeoffsbetweenphysiologicdemandsandpotentialposturalbenefits.Severalbiomechanicalmeasures inthecurrentwork(e.g., thighpressure, foot force,pelvic tilt)startedtodeviate fromsittingvaluesaroundtrunk-thighanglesof115-120°.Thissuggeststhatthereisalimittotheheight—ortrunk-thighangle—atwhichexistingchairproductscancomfortablysupportusers.Practitionersshouldbemindfulof theunintendedconsequences thataccompanythe intendedpostural improvementsassociatedwithmoreopentrunk-thighangles.Adeterminationshouldbemadeastowhetherthemagnitudeof thepostural improvement isworth thephysiologic cost.Withoutadequate supportforthepelvisandthighs,andevendistributionofbodyweightat theseat interface,sustained legmuscle activation requirements and higher pressure on the soft tissues of the thigh can lead tomusclefatigue,bloodflowocclusion,andincreaseddiscomfort—asreportedbyparticipantsinourstudies. As measures indirectly related to these issues (i.e., foot force, pressure) weremodestlyhigherintheintermediateposturesthaninconventionalsitting,perhapstheseposturesshouldbeusedonlyasa short-termalternative tosittingandstanding.Futureproductsmightbenefit fromexploringhowtoreducethecostsobservedinthiswork,forexample,byincorporatinggreaterbacksupportandallowingbackresttilt(whichhasshownminimaleffectonneckandupperbackmuscledemands(study3)).
References1. KeeganJJ.Alterationsofthelumbarcurverelatedtopostureandseating.JBone&JointSurg.1953;35A(3):589-
603.2. HirasawaYetal.PosturalchangesoftheduralsacinthelumbarspineusingMRI.Spine.2007;32(4):E136-E140.3. AlexanderLetal.Theresponseofthenucleustopositions.Spine.2007;32(14):1508-1512.
0102030405060708090100
85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135
Trade-offscore(%
)
HipAngle
FlatPrototype
0.08.1
21.3
Discomfort Physical Demand
0.013.1
28.8
(A) (B)
92
Anatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudediffferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposure
KatieA.Goggins1,2*,BruceE.Oddson2,3,W.BrentLievers1,2,TammyR.Eger2,3
1BhartiSchoolofEngineering,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,
Canada3SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
Introduction
Vibrationexposuremayresultinvibration-inducedwhitefeet(VIWFt),aconditionthatissimilartovibration-inducedwhitefinger(1).Oneshortcomingcommontopreviousfoot-transmittedvibration(FTV)studiesisthatmeasurementshavebeenlimitedtoafewanatomicallocationsonthefoot:theheadofthefirstmetatarsal,andthemedialandlateralmalleoli(2,3).BasedontheresultsfromaFTVstudycapturingtransmissibilityat24anatomicallocations,itisunlikelythattheresponseofastructureascomplexasthefootcanbecharacterizedwithtwoorlessanatomicallocations(4,5).Resonanceisusedasanindicationofinjuryasitleadstothemaximumdisplacementbetweenorgansandskeletalstructures,placingstrainonthetissuesinvolvedandincreasinginjuryrisk(6).Astransmissibilitymagnitudeisameasureoftheabilityofthebodytoeitherattenuateoramplifyaninputvibrationsignal,understandinghowtocapturetheregionaldifferencesintransmissibilitymagnitudeofthefeetbyidentifyingwhichanatomicallocationsneedtobemeasuredmayaidinthepreventionofinjury.Thepurposeofthisresearchistodeterminethenumberandlocationsoftheminimumpointsrequiredtocapturethedifferencesinmagnitudeofthetransmissibilityresponseofthefoot.
MethodsTransmissibilitymeasurementsof21participants(15malesand6females),submittedtoaverticalsinesweepfrom10-200Hz,takenat24anatomicallocations,wereanalysed(4).Multiplecorrespondenceanalysis(MCA)(7)wasconductedonthemaximumtransmissibilitymagnitudeinthreestandingpositions(natural,forwardandbackwardlean).Atransmissibilitymagnitudethresholdof2.0wasused,meaningthevibrationinputswereevaluatedbasedonreaching100%amplification.FromtheMCAanalysisresults,anatomicalmeasurementlocationswerethengroupedbasedoncomparableresponse.Recommendedminimummeasurementlocationsweredeterminedbasedontheresponsegroupings,anatomicalproximity,andeaseofmeasurement.
FindingsTheresultsoftheMCAanalysisaresummarizedinFigure1.Inordertocapturethedifferencesintransmissibilitymagnitudeofthebiodynamicresponseofthefoot,whileaccountingforcentreofpressurechanges,measurementsshouldbetakenat:[1]T1P3,[2]anytoelocationexceptT1P3,[3]M1orL1,[4]M2orL2,and[5]M4orL4.MeasurementsatH1,M3andL3shouldbeavoidedastheselocationsaredifficulttocapturewithanaccelerometerorlaserDopplervibrometerduetoskinartifact.
DiscussionItisimperativetounderstandresonance(maximumtransmissibility)inordertopreventinjuryfromvibrationexposure(6).Thisstudyidentifiesfivemeasurementlocationsforcapturingthepatternofmaximumtransmissibilitymagnitudeatathresholdof2.0over21participants.Thisstudysuggeststhatthebiodynamicresponseofthefootcannotbefullycapturedwith2anatomicallocations(2,3),andrequiresadditionalmeasurementsatthemidfootandtoes.Inordertocapturethemostpotentialforinjury,measurementsattheredanatomicallocations(Figure1)hadthemost
93
participantswithtransmissibilitymagnitudesover2.0.SubsequentstudiesofFTVexposureshouldbemindfulofthetransmissibilitymagnitudedifferencesatanatomicallocations.
Figure1:AnatomicalrepresentationoftheclusteredmeasurementlocationsfromtheMCAconductedatatransmissibilitymagnitudethresholdof2.0.
RelevancetoPractitionersWhenmeasuringFTVexposure,thereareregionalanatomicdifferencesinthebiodynamicresponseofthefoot.Thisstudyidentifiedanatomicallocationswiththegreatestpotentialforinjury(red)fromthetransmissibilitymagnituderesponseof21participants.FutureFTVstudiesfocusedoninjurypreventionbasedontransmissibilityamplificationshouldincludemeasurementsatthefivespecifiedanatomiclocations,ataminimum,inordertoensurethattheregionalresponsesofthefootarecharacterized.
References1. ThompsonAMS,HouseR,KrajnakK,EgerT.Vibration-whitefoot:acasereport.OccupationalMedicine.2010;60:572-4.2. GogginsK,GodwinA,LariviereC,EgerT.Studyofthebiodynamicresponseofthefoottovibrationexposure.OccupationalErgonomics.2016;13:53-66.3. KiiskiJ,HeinonenA,JarvinenTL,KannuaP,SievanenH.Transmissionofverticalwholebodyvibrationtothehumanbody.JournalofBoneandMineralResearch.2008;23(8):1318-25.4. GogginsK,TarabiniM,CortiF,LieversWB,EgerT,editors.Resonantfrequencyidentificationatthefootwhenstandinginanaturaluprightpositionduringverticalvibrationexposure.6thInternationalConferenceonWhole-BodyVibrationInjuries;2017;InstituteofOccupationalMedicine,Gothenburg,Sweden:Work&Health.5. GogginsK,TarabiniM,LieversWB,EgerT,editors.Standingcentreofpressurealtersthevibrationtransmissibilityresponseofthefoot.7thAmericanConferenceonHumanVibration;2018;CedarbrookeLodge,Seattle,Washington.6. MansfieldNJ.HumanResponsetoVibration.London:CRCPress;2004.256p.7. LeRouxB,RouanetH.MultipleCorrespondenceAnalysis.JohnFoxS,McMasterUniversity,editor.California,UnitedStates:SAGEPublicationsInc.;2010.115p.
94
Theinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks
ColinD.McKinnon,ClarkR.Dickerson,JackP.Callaghan
UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada
IntroductionCurrent workstation design guidelines include recommendations for forward and lateral reachdistances during occupational tasks based on task frequency and anthropometry. Forward reachguidelines focus on maintaining a neutral shoulder posture since large reaches create largeshoulder loads, causepeople to fatiguemorequickly, and causemore reportingof shoulderpain(1).Forlateralreaches,currentguidelinesareunderdevelopedanddonothavethesameresearch-based foundation. Rather, lateral reach guidelines generally apply forward reach concepts to thelateral reach envelope determined by worker size and arm length. Low back twisting has beenstronglyassociatedwith lowbackpainandinjurydevelopment(2),andtherelationshipbetweenreaching taskhand location and lowback twist is currently unknown.Thepurpose of this studywastoinvestigatelowbacktwistduringsimulatedmanuallabourtasksacrossarangeofforwardandlateralreachdistances,taskheights,andexertiondirections.
MethodsTwenty-four (12 male, 12 female) right-handed participants performed single-handed exertionsagainstaloadcell(MSA-6,AMTI,USA)attachedtotheendofa6-DOFroboticarm(MotomanHP50,Yaskawa,USA).Elevenright-handtargetlocationscorrespondedtoCanadianStandardsAssociationforwardand lateralreachguidelines for frequent(A), infrequent(B)andoccasional(C) tasks(3).
Exertionswere performed at each hand location in allcombinationsofthreedirections(forwardpush,upwardexertion, downward exertion) and two heights(standingacromionandolecranonheights)foratotalof66 1-second isometric exertion trials. Participantthoracopelvic and right upper limb postures wererecordedusing reflectivemarkersonboney landmarksand an optical motion capture system (MX20+, Vicon,USA). Thoracopelvic angles (YZX Euler sequence) andright upper arm angles (YXY Euler sequence) werecalculated using custom-written Matlab software.Thoracopelvic angles were normalized and expressedrelative to a static upright standing trial. Joint angleswere compared using a mixed general linear model(RStudio 1.0.136) with sex (M/F), target location (11levels), height (elbow/shoulder) and direction (up,
down,push)asfactors(α=.05).ATukeyHSDposthoctesttestedlevelswithinsignificantmainandinteractioneffects.
FindingsSignificanttarget-by-direction(p<.003)anddirection-by-height(p<.03)interactionswereobservedfor all three axes of thoracopelvic motion (axial twist, flexion/extension, lateral bend). Thesemotionaxesalso showed target (p<.0003)anddirection (p<.007)maineffects.Posthocanalysesshowedaxialtwistangleincreasedwithmorelateralhandtargets,andthisincreasewasgenerallysimilar - regardless of reach distance (A vs. B vs. C). Thoracopelvic flexion showed the opposite
Figure1:Elevenhandtargetlocationsusedfor manual exertions. Targets correspondto current ergonomics reach guidelines(CSA,2012).
95
response,with less flexionatmore lateraltargetsandmoreflexionwith increasedreachdistance(Figure2).Significant target-by-direction-by-height (p=.01), direction-by-height (p<.0001), target-by-height(p<.0001), and target-by-direction (p<.0001) interactions were observed for glenohumeralelevation angle. Elevation was highest for straight forward targets and decreased laterally.ElevationshowedsimilarlevelswithAandBreachesbutincreasedforCreaches.Planeofelevationshowedseveralsignificant2-factorand3-factorinteractionsincludingdirection-by-height(p=.003)andtarget-by-direction(p<.0001).Planeofelevationtendedtobeclosertoshoulderabductionforlateraltargetsandclosertoshoulderflexionforforwardtargets,asexpected.
DiscussionThese results indicate a trade-off between the twist and flexion motion axes, with opposingposturaldemandsforforwardandlateralreaches.Participantsusedacontralateraltwiststrategyforstraightforwardhandlocations,withanaverage7.3°ofleftwardlumbaraxialtwistacrossthethree reach zones. This twist indicates that participantsmay favour lumbar twist over shoulderflexion,asthiscontralateraltwistwouldreducetheeffectivereachdistanceforthesehandtargets.Themost lateralhandtargetselicitedapproximately15°ofaxialtwist,whichrepresentsbetween36and41%ofmaximumtwistrangeofmotioninanupright,neutralposture(4,5).Elevatedriskoflumbarspineaxialtwistinjuryisestimatedtooccuratapproximately25%oftwistrangeofmotion,or 8.5° (5). Hand target locationsin the current study greater than60° from themidline of the body(A3, B4 and C4) exceeded thisthreshold and may elicit elevatedinjury risk regardless of taskheightorexertiondirection.
Lumbar flexiondemonstrated the oppositeresponse of twist, with a lessflexed, more upright posture atmore lateral hand targets andgreater flexion with increasedreach distance. Flexion angle wassimilar for the frequent (A) and infrequent (B) reach zones and showed greater flexion for theoccasional (C) reach zone. While clear trends were evident across hand target locations andexertiondirections,itshouldbenotedthatlumbarflexionwaslessthan5°acrossallconditions.
RelevancetoPractitionersThoracopelvicaxial twistwascharacterizedacrossa rangeofhand target locationsand indicatesthatfutureergonomicsguidelinesshouldsuggestlimitingdesignofreachingtasksbeyond60°fromthemidlineof theparticipantorworker.Beyondthis threshold, lumbar intervertebral injuryriskmaybeelevated.Itappearsthatwhileshoulderdemandsareappropriateforderivationofforwardreachguidelinesandtaskrecommendations, lumbaraxial twist is theprimaryconcern for lateralreachingtasks,andfutureguidelinesshouldbeadjustedaccordingly.
References
1.DickersonCR,MartinBJ,ChaffinDB.Ergonomics200649(11):1036-1051.2.MarrasWS.Ergonomics200043(7):880-902.3.CanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA).Z1104-12,2012.4.DrakeJDM,CallaghanJP.ClinBiomech200823(5):510-519,2008.5.McKinnonCD,CallaghanJP.TIES(inrevision)TTIE-2017-0054.
Figure2:Thoracopelvicaxialtwistangleandflexionanglebyhandtargetlocation.Positivevaluesshowrightwardtwistandflexion.
96
PAPERSESSION9:GENERALERGONOMICS
Day3–Oct17th
15:15-16:45
PaperSession9GeneralErgonomics
CatherineTraskEgresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffallsMallorieLeducVibrationToolkit:EvaluationofaneducationalinterventionCoreyBouwmeesterTheeffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort
97
Egresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffalls
BehzadBashiri1,StephanMilosavljevic2,CatherineTrask*1,21CanadianCentreforHealthandSafetyinAgriculture,CollegeofMedicine,Universityof
Saskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada2SchoolofRehabilitationSciences,UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada
Introduction
FallsfromaheightareanimportantcontributingfactortoinjuryhospitalizationsinCanada.AccordingtotheCanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI)(1),over60%ofallinjuryhospitalizationswereduetofallsfromaheight.InSaskatchewan,fallshavebeenidentifiedastheleadingcauseoffarminjuries(2);dismounting(egressing)fromfarmmachineryisaprimaryformofexposuretofallinghazardwithverytallmodernagriculturalmachinery,requiringtallladdersorstairstogetaccesstothecab.
Egressfrommachineryisacomplexactionthatrequiresprecisecoordinationofthebody(3).AccordingtoFathallah(4)therearetwopossiblescenariosinwhichegressfrommachinerycouldleadtodriverinjuries:1)driversmightjumpoutofavehiclecab,entirelyorpartially(i.e.fromstairorsteps)thatwouldimposeexcessiveforcesonthejoints,especiallyonankles,knees,andthelowerback;and2)theriskofslipandfallrisesimmediatelyafterlandingduetofactorssuchasstepsurfacegripandpresenceofsurfacecontaminants.Inadditiontotheaforementionedfactors,drivers’egresstechniquemayalsobeacontributortoegressinjuries;Ithasbeenobservedthattractoroperatorspreferredtheegressmethodoffacingawayfromthetractorthatmimicsgoingdownthestairs,whereastherecommendedmethodisegressingwhilefacingtowardthecab,likeclimbingdownaladder(5-6).Whilethefacing-awayegressmethodmightbepreferredbecauseoftheresulting“comfortable”(i.e.lessflexed)kneejointangles(5),itismoredifficulttomaintainasecuregriponthehandrailswhenfacingawayfromthetractor(6).Anadditionalfactorthathasnotbeenaddressedintheliterature,isthefootcontactareaonthemachinerysteps;footcontactareacanbesignificantlysmallerwhenfacingawaycomparedtofacingtowardsthecab.Theobjectiveofthisstudyistocomparefacing-invsfacing-awayegressmethodsintermsoflowerbodykinematicsaswellaswhole-bodycontactpointsforbetterunderstandingofegressperformanceinagriculturalvehicles.
MethodsThisstudyusedastaircaseandcabplatformdevelopedtosimulatethestairsofanagriculturaltractorintheErgonomicsLaboratoryattheUniversityofSaskatchewan.Twenty-fourhealthyparticipantswithatleastoneseasonofexperienceoperatingagriculturalmachinerywererecruitedtocompletethetrials.Theparticipantswereassignedtoperformfiveegresstrialswhilefacingawayofthecab(Figure1a),andfivewhilefacingtowardsthecab(Figure1b)inarandomizedorder.RepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasusedtodeterminetheeffectsofegresstechnique(i.e.facing-inorfacing-away)onpoints-of-contact,durationofthree-point-contact,kinematicsoflowerlimb,andplantarpressure.Points-of-contactwasdefinedasthenumberofbodysegmentsthatwereintouchwiththestairwayduringegress.Participants’egressperformancewascapturedusingavideocamerathatwasprocessedpost-trialforcountingcontactpointsandcalculatingthedurationofthree-point-contact.Kinematicsoflowerlimbparameterswerecalculated,includingrangeofmotionandminimumflexionanglesofknees,ankles,andforefeet.AViconmotioncapturesystemwith10cameras(ViconMXsystem,OxfordMetrics,Oxford,UK)wasusedtorecordparticipants’motionduringtrials.Finally,footplantarpressurewasmeasuredusingNovelPedarsensorinsoles(NovelElectronicsInc.,St.Paul,MN,USA).
98
Findings
Preliminaryfindingsindicatethatfacingawayegressmethodresultedinshorterdurationthree-pointcontacts.Inaddition,resultsfromthemotioncapturesystemshowsthatfacingawayofthecabresultedinlessflexionsinlowerlimbjointsduringegress.Finally,themaximumplantarpressureatlandingissignificantlyhigherduringfacingawayegresscomparedtoegressingwhilefacingtowardsthecab.Weanticipatefurtheranalysiswilldemonstrateinmoredetailhowfacingawayofthecabegressmethodwouldexposeoperatorstoriskfactorsforfallsfrommachinery.
References1. CanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI).InjuryHospitalizationsandSocio-
EconomicStatus[Internet].CanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI);2010[cited2017Jan9].Availablefrom:https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/Injury_aib_vE4CCF_v3_en.pdf
2. HagelL,KoehnckeN,NeudorfJ.FatalfarminjuriesinSaskatchewan.2013;Availablefrom:http://www.cchsa-ccssma.usask.ca/documents/FatalFarmInjuriesSK1990_2013.pdf
3. AitElMenceurMO,PudloP,DécoufourN,BassementM,GilletC,ChateaurouxE,etal.Anexperimentalprotocoltostudythecaringress/egressmovementforelderlyandpathologicalpopulation.In:ProceedingsoftheEuropeanAnnualConferenceonHumanDecisionMakingandManualControl.Valenciennes;2006.
4. FathallahFA.Fallsduringentry/egressfromvehicles.In:HaslamR,StubbsD,editors.UnderstandingandPreventingFalls:AnErgonomicsApproach.CRCPress;2005.p.157–72.
5. KlebanN,MannD,MorrisonJ.TheCanadianSocietyforBioengineeringPositionanalysisoftractoringressandegress.In:CSBE/SCGAB2013AnnualConference.Saskatoon,SK;2013.
6. LeskinenT,SuutarinenJ,VäänänenJ,LehteläJ,HaapalaH,PlakettiP.Apilotstudyonsafetyofmovementpracticesonaccesspathsofmobilemachinery.SafetyScience.2002;40(7):675–87.
Figure1:thestaircaseandcabplatformintheErgonomicsLaboratoryallowsegress(dismount)botha)facingawayandb)facingin.
a b
99
Vibrationtoolkit:developmentandevaluationofanoccupationalhealtheducationinterventionfocusedonvibrationexposureinmining
MallorieLeduc1,2*,TammyEger1,3,RonHouse1,4,5,AlisonGodwin1,3,NancyLightfoot1,2
1CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
2SchoolofRuralandNorthernHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada3SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
4St.Michael’sHospital,UniversityofToronto,Toronto,Ontario,Canada5NorthernOntarioSchoolofMedicine,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada
IntroductionWorkersintheminingindustryaretypicallyexposedtothreetypesofvibrationexposurewhileperformingtheirjobtasks:whole-bodyvibration(WBV),hand-armvibration(HAV),andfoottransmittedvibration(FTV).Occupationalhealthandsafety(OHS)programmingiscriticalininfluencingworkers’knowledge,attitudesand/orbehavioursregardinghazardousworkplaceexposuresandoccupationalinjuriesanddiseases1.FindingscontinuetosupporttheunderstandingthatOHSeducationandtrainingpositivelyimpactstheoverallworkpracticesofworkers2.Despitethepotentialimpactonthehealthoftheworkers,thereiscurrentlyalackofeducationandtrainingresourcematerialavailabletoaddressthehealthandsafetyissuesrelatedtovibrationexposurewithintheminingindustry.Theobjectiveofthisstudyistodesign,implement,andevaluateacomprehensiveoccupationalhealtheducationinterventiontoimproveknowledge,attitudes,and/orbehaviourbeliefsassociatedwithundergroundmining-relatedvibrationexposure.
MethodsAnempiricallybasedandtheoreticallyinformedvibrationeducationintervention,the‘VibrationToolkit’,wasdevelopedandcustomizedforanundergroundminingsettingtoaddresstheidentificationofhazards,healtheffects,andcontrolstrategiesforWBV,HAV,andFTVexposure.TheVibrationToolkitconsistsof:educationsessionsforeachtypeofvibrationexposure,correspondingposters,stickers,hazardidentificationcards,WBVPod,andpersonalprotectiveequipmentsamples.Theimplementationofthe‘VibrationToolkit’interventionwasconductedwithaninternationalminingcompanywithminesitesinNorthernOntariooveraperiodoffivemonths.TheVibrationToolkitwascustomizedfollowingconsultationwiththeparticipatingminingcompany.Allworkersattendingtheminesite’sstartoftheshiftline-upmeetingwereeligibletoparticipate.Pre-interventionsurveyswerecompleted1monthpriortothe3-monthimplementationoftheinterventionandpost-interventionsurveyswerecompleted1monthaftertheendofthelastsession.
Findings142workerstookpartinvariousaspectsoftheVibrationToolkitintervention.Therewere61participantsattheminethatattendedalleducationsessionsandcompletedthepre-interventionandpost-interventionsurveys.Dataanalyseswereperformedforthe61matchedpairs.Thehighestpercentageofparticipants,37.7%(n=23),reportedexposuretoWBV,HAV,andFTVintheircurrentjob(Table1).Statisticallysignificantpositiveimprovementswereobservedforworkers’behaviourbeliefscores,forpre-intervention(M=4.46,SD=5.697)versuspost-interventionscores(M=8.02,SD=6.417),t(60)=4.212,p<0.001.
100
Table1:Self-reportedvibrationexposureincurrentjobVibrationType Frequency(N) Percent
(%)HAVOnly 7 11.5WBVOnly 6 9.8FTVOnly 0 0
HAVandFTV 3 4.9HAVandWBV 13 21.3
HAVandWBVandFTV 23 37.7None 9 14.8Total 61 100.0
Discussion
Anidentifiedgapwasfoundineducationcoursesandmaterialsfocusedoneducatingworkersintheminingindustryaboutvibrationexposureintheirworkplace.TheVibrationToolkitwasdevelopedtofilltheidentifiedgapandprovideeducationresourcesfortheminingindustry.However,acustomizedapproachtoconsidertheorganization,worksite,andequipmentcharacteristicsisneededtoensuresuccess.TheVibrationToolkitresultedinstatisticallysignificantimprovementinbehaviourbeliefsrelatedtovibrationexposure.Understandingworker’sknowledge,attitudesandbehaviourbeliefsregardingvibrationexposureisimportanttoassistwitheducation,prevention,andcontrolstrategiesintheminingindustry.
RelevancetoPractitioners
ContinuedOHSeducationandtrainingfocusedonvibrationexposureshouldcontinuewithintheminingindustryasoneelementofalargeroverallplantopreventtheinjuryandillnessofworkers.ContinuedeffortsfromOHSprofessionals,ergonomistsandengineersneedtoaddressthetechnicalanddesignchangesthatalsohavethepotentialtoreducevibrationexposure.TheVibrationToolkitalsohasthepotentialtoprovidemeaningfulvibrationspecificeducationforothersectorsthatalsoexperiencevibrationexposure:transportation,agriculture,forestry,andconstruction.Eachsectorpresentsuniqueequipmentandoperatingconditionsfortheirrespectiveworkersandasaresult,theVibrationToolkitshouldbetailoredtothetargetpopulationandindustrytoimprovefutureoutcomesoftheintervention.
References5. GoldenharLandSchulteP.Interventionresearchinoccupationalhealthandsafety.JOccup
Med.1994;36(7):763-75.6. RobsonL,StephensonC,SchulteP,AmickB,IrvinE,EggerthD,ChanS,BieleckyA,WangA,
HeidottingT,PetersR,ClarkeJ,CullenK,RotundaC,GrubbP.Asystematicreviewoftheeffectivenessofoccupationalhealthandsafetytraining.ScandJWorkEnvironHealth.2012;38(3):193-208.
Figure10:VibrationToolkitDesign
101
TheEffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort
CoreyBouwmeester1,2*,AlisonGodwin1,2,BruceOddson1,2,TammyEger1,2
1SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Ontario,Canada
Introduction
Slip,trip,andfall(STF)incidentsaccountedfor15%ofthereportedlost-timeinjury/illnessclaimsintheOntarioMiningsector1.Lowlightconditions,highheatandhumiditylevels,hazardousterrainandenvironment,fatigue,andcumbersomepersonalprotectiveequipment(PPE)havebeenreportedasriskfactorsforSTFinundergroundmines2-4.ControlstrategiestoreduceSTFrisks,formanyofthesefactors,canbedifficulttoimplement;however,improvementstofootwearmaybefeasible.Although,bootscurrentlywornbyundergroundminersareheavy,stiff,anduncomfortablefortheworker5,6,theimpactthesefootweartypeshaveonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfortlevelisunderresearched.Thisstudylookedtodeterminetheimpactthatvariousundergroundminingfootwearhaveonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandperceivedcomfort.
Methods
15participantswereselectedfromconveniencesample.ParticipantswererequiredtohaveMen’s9-12(~Women’s10-14)sizedfeetandfreefromlowerlimbandbackinjuriesinthepast6months.Participantswerehabituatedtoeachofthreeundergroundminingfootwearconditionsbeforecompletingthelaboratorytrials.Afterthehabituationperiodparticipantscompletedacomfortquestionnaireforeachcondition.Thelaboratorytrialsconsistedoffivepassesofthewalkwayforeachrandomizedundergroundfootwearconditioninadditiontoacontrolrunningshoecondition.Thewalkwayconsistedoftwoforceplateshalfwaydownthewalkway,aMicrosoftKinectcamerasystempositionedinfrontoftheparticipant,adigitalvideocamerasystempositionedtotherightoftheparticipant,andtheNotch7motionsensorsystempositionedonthesubject.Theforceplatesmeasuredthelandingandpushoffforces;Kinectsystemmeasuredthegaitphasetimingandwalkingvelocity;videocamerasystemmeasuredthetoeheightclearanceoftheswingleg;andtheNotchsensorsystemmeasuredthehip,knee,andanklejointanglesofboththerightandleftlegs.
Aftercompletionofthefivepassesinafootwearconditiontheparticipantcompletedthecomfortquestionnaireandafterallfourconditionshadbeensuccessfullycompletedtheparticipantcompletedanexitquestionnairetodeterminetheirundergroundminingfootwearpreferenceandtoratethefootwearconditionstooneanother.
Findings/DiscussionStudyresultsandfindingsarestillpending,tobecompletedbyAugust2018.
DataanalysiswilluseRepeatedMeasuresANOVAtodetermineifanysignificantdifferencesarepresentbetweenthethreeundergroundminingfootwearconditions.Comparisonswillbemadebetweenthethreeundergroundminingfootwearconditionstothecontrolconditionasthedeviationfromtheparticipant’snormalgaitinacontrolfootwearisabettermeasureoftheimpactofthefootwearontheparticipantthantheoverallgaitpatternchanges.Thevariablesusedforcomparisonareimpactforce,pushoffforce,walkingangle,hipjointangle,kneejointangle,stepandstridelength,toeheightclearance,andsubjectivecomfortlevels.
102
-300
200
700
1200
VerticalGroundReaction
Force(N)
P7
Control Oliver
Titanium Viking
PreliminarydatacanbeseeninFigure1.Thedatashowsthe‘Viking’condition,andtoalesserdegreethe‘Titaniumcondition’,tocauseincreasesinpeakimpactforceandchangestotheprofileoftheimpact.IncreasesinpeakimpactforceanddeviationsfromnormallandingprofilesmayhaveimplicationsforSTFrisk.Thesechangesarelikelyduetothecumbersomebootdesignandmaterials.Figure1:Verticalgroundreactionforceprofileofrightfootduringgait,takenduringthe3rdgaitcycleofthetrial.Comparisonofallfourfootwearconditions.
RelevancetoPractitioners
SafetyfootwearisdesignedtoprotectworkersfromcrushtypeinjuriestothefootandshankbuttheeffectitcanhaveonmovementandcomfortmaycausedeficitstogaitpatternsandincreasetheriskofSTF,lowerlimbinjuriesandworkerdiscomfort.Theidealfootwearforthejobathandshouldbeamajorconsiderationtoreducetheseriskfactorsforallworkersintheirworkplaces.
References
1. WorkplaceHealthandSafetySnapshotfortheOntarioMiningSectorin2015.WorkplaceSafetyNorth.(2015)
2. CappelliniG,IvanenkoYP,DominiciN,PoppeleRE,LacquanitiF.MotorPatternsDuringWalkingonaSlipperyWalkway.JNeurophysiol.2010Feb1;103(2):746–60.
3. WadeC,GarnerJC,RedfernMS,AndresRO.Walkingonballastimpactsbalance.Ergonomics.2014Jan2;57(1):66–73.
4. LayAN,HassCJ,RichardNicholsT,GregorRJ.Theeffectsofslopedsurfacesonlocomotion:Anelectromyographicanalysis.JBiomech.2007Jan;40(6):1276–85.
5. DobsonJA,Riddiford-HarlandDL,BellAF,SteeleJR.Workbootdesignaffectsthewayworkerswalk:Asystematicreviewoftheliterature.ApplErgon.2017May;61:53–68.
6. DobsonJA,Riddiford-HarlandDL,SteeleJR.Effectsofwearinggumbootsandleatherlace-upbootsonlowerlimbmuscleactivitywhenwalkingonsimulatedundergroundcoalminesurfaces.ApplErgon.2015Jul;49:34–40.
7. Notch:SmartMotionCaptureforMobileDevices,website.(2018).Availablefrom:https://wearnotch.com/#
0
500
1000
VerticalGroundReaction
Force(N)
P2
Control Oliver
Titanium Viking
103
PAPERSESSION10:GENERALERGONOMICS
Day4–Oct18th
10:30-12:00
PaperSession10GeneralErgonomics
PegScherzingerErgonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladdersHeatherKahle‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustryOrnwipaThamsuwanField-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchardsCyrusLeeEvaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones
104
Ergonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladders
PegScherzinger,
OntarioMinistryofLabour,Sudbury,Ontario,
IntroductionWhenafatalorcriticalinjuryoccursinaworkplace,andaninvestigationisdone,oneofthegoalsistodeterminethecauseoftheincident,inordertohelppreventfuturesimilaroccurrences.InvestigationsarealsodonetodetermineiftherewerecontraventionstotheOccupationalHealthandSafetyActorRegulationsthatcontributedtotheincident.
Thispaperoutlinestwocasestudieswhereergonomicsassessmentmethodsandrelatedguidelineswereusedasresourcestohelpdeterminethecausesoftheincidents,andwhethercontraventionsoccurred.
DescriptionoffallincidentsandmethodsusedCase1:Ayoungworkeronhisfirstdayofworkwastaskedwithcarryingbundlesofshinglesupanextensionladderleanedagainsttheedgeofaroof.Hesupportedasinglebundleonhisshoulderduringeachladderclimb.Hecarriedseveralbundlesupandplacedthemontheroofinfrontoftheladder.Asthisareabecamefilled,hethenleanedsidewaystoaplacethebundlebesidetheothers.Theladderslidsidewaysandhefell,breakinghisfemur.Therewasarequestforanassessmentofthehandlingmethodandwhetheritcontributedtothefall.Abiomechanicalmodelinganalysisprogram(1)wasusedtomodeltheeffectsonaperson’shandlingdemandsandstabilityfora)aloadplacedontheshoulderwhileclimbing,andb)whilereachingtotheside.
Case2:Agrocerystoreworkerwasarranging(flattening)itemsonshelvesinthestoretomakethemeasiertocountduringanupcominginventory.Shewasusingasmallstepladderthatconsistedofonestepandacap(Figure2).Storevideoshowedthattheworker’sfootappearedtoslipfromthecapoftheladderandshefellbackward,sustainingafatalheadinjury.Thestepladderhadthewords“NOSTEP”imprintedonthecap.Therewasaquestionofwhetherthetaskrequiredtheworkertoreachinamannerthatwouldrequirehertostepuphigherthanthefirststepoftheladder.Anthropometricinformation(2),alongwiththeworker’sheightwasusedtoestimateherreachcapacityinbothhorizontalandverticaldirections.Thisinformation,alongwithdimensionsoftheladderandtheshelving,wasusedtomakeadeterminationonthisquestion.
InvestigationFindingsandOutcomesCase1:Areviewofguidelinesregardingroofingworkandladderuse(3,4)indicatedthatcarryingpacksofshinglesupaladderwasnotarecommendedpracticedue,inpart,totheweightsinvolved(~36kg),theinabilitytouse3pointcontactwhileascendingtheladder,andthepossibleavailabilityofmechanicalassistssuchasladderhoistsorboomtrucks.
Theplacementofa36kgloadlocatedovertherightshoulderandupperarmwillshiftaperson’scentreofgravitytotheright,whichisillustratedinthe3DSSPPanalysisshowninFigure1.Thebalancewasclassifiedasunacceptablewhentherightfootisabovetheleftduringtheladderclimb.Thebalancepointmovedconsiderablytotheright,andthestrengthdemandsalsoincreasedintotheunacceptablerangefortheshoulderandleg.
105
Theergonomicsinvestigationreportconcludedthattheshinglesweremovedinamannerthatendangeredtheworker.Theemployerpleadedguiltytoachargeoffailingtoensurethatmaterialsaremovedinamannerthatdoesnotendangeraworker.
Case2:Theworkerwas157.5cminheightwhichplacesherataboutthe25thpercentileintermsofheight.Anthropometricdataforshoulderheightandarmreachindicatedthatinorderfora50thpercentilesizedfemaletoreachthebackpartoftheshelvingfromthefirstrungoftheladder,hershoulderswouldhavetobeatthesameheightastheshelving.However,theuppershelfwas20cmabovethisheight,requiring50thpercentileorsmallerworkerstosteptothetopcapoftheladder.Thecapwasahardsmoothplasticmaterialthatmayhavecontributedtotheslipandfall(Figure2).Theergonomicsinvestigationreportconcludedthattheheightoffirststepwasnotadequatetoallowtheworkertoproperlyaccesstheshelving,whichcouldhavecontributedtotheworkerinthisinstancesteppingtothetop(cap)ofthestepladdertoaccesstheitemsontheshelving.Theemployerpleadguiltytoachargeoffailingtotakethereasonableprecautionofprovidingappropriateequipmentfortheprotectionoftheworkerwhileperformingtheflatteningtask.
RelevancetoPractitionersThisdescriptionofinvestigationscanassistthosewhoinvestigateand/orworktopreventworkplaceinjuriesrelatedtoladderuseasitoutlinesmethodstoidentify:a)causalfactorsinaladderfallincident,and/orb)possiblehazardsrelatedtoladderusetoaidinpreventionoffallincidents.
References8. UniversityofMichigan,3DStaticStrengthPredictionProgram(3DSSPP),Version6.0.5,Ann
Arbour,MI20119. Pheasant,S,andHaslegrave,C.M.,BodySpace:Anthropometry,Ergonomics,andtheDesign
ofWork,3rded.,TaylorandFrancis,NY.200610. InfrastructureHealthandSafetyAssociation,“MusculoskeletalHazardsandControls:Home
Building,SlopedRoofing,Availablefrom:http://www.csao.org/images/pfiles/386_W309.pdf
11. MinistryofLabourGuideline:PortableLadders(Step,Platform,orTrestleLadders),2011,Availablefrom:https://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/pubs/ladder_sliding.php
Figure11:Michigan3DSSPPmodel:ladderclimbcarryingpackofshinglesFigure2:StepLadder:Case2
106
‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustry
HeatherKahle*,JennyColman,2*,TomBigda-Peyton3,ClarissaSawyer4
1WorkSafeBC,Richmond,BC,Canada2ActionLearningSystemsInc.,Boston,Massachusetts,USA
Introduction
AppreciativeActionResearch(AAR)isaqualitative,participatorymethodologyforunderstandinghowpeopleconductsuccessfulworkwithinthecontextofaspecificenvironment.It’sbasedongatheringnarrativesandobservationsfrommultipleperspectivestoappreciatehowfeaturesofanenvironmentandsystem-levelfactorsinfluencepeoples’performancebothpositivelyandnegatively(1).InthecontextoftheSilvicultureindustry,thequalitativedatawasabletoprovideinsightsintohowplantersatthefrontlinesuccessfullymanageworkplacefactorsandwereabletodosowithoutexperiencinganinjurystate.Ultimately,thegoalofAARresearchisinunderstandingwhat‘goeswell’(successfuloutcomes)sothoseactionscanbelearnedfrom,andreplicatedtoassistandadvanceoccupationalhealthandsafetyinitiatives.Thepurposeofthisresearchwastwo-fold;1)toaddressthehighrateofMusculoskeletalInjuries(MSIs)whichhaspersistedamongsttreeplantersinspiteofeffortstoreducethisrate.Itaccomplishedthisbygatheringinformationaboutsystemicbeliefs,practices,assumptionsandsafetyculturefromtreeplanterswhoplantedahighnumberoftreesandwereinjuryfree.Uniquely,theresearchapproachengagedwiththeplanterswhohadnothadinjuriesbyhearingtheirstoriesandexperiencestodeterminehowtheymanagedthisverycomplexanddemandingworkenvironment.Thisinformationwasthenusedtoassistnewplantersorthosewhohadalreadyexperiencedaninjurytobettercopewiththetree-plantingenvironment.2)Thisresearchalsoaugmentedthehistorical,individual-focusedapproachofmanytraditionalMSIpreventioninitiatives.Itexpandedthefocusfromtheindividualworkertoothersystem-levelfactorssuchas;thepay-structure,industryincentives,theenvironment,thecontextoftheworkaswellastheinfluencesofthesocialnetworkofforemenandsupervisorsandthesafetyculture.Thisprovidedaframeworkforcollaborativeproblemsolvingaroundcomplexandconsistentrisks.
MethodsStep1:CollectingdataThestudyresultedfrominterestbytheWesternSilviculturalContractors’Association(WSCA)intacklingthehistoricallyhighrateofMSIsusingadifferentapproach.TheresearchteamconsistedofacollaborationbetweenWorkSafeBC’shumanfactorgroup,theWSCAandassociatesfromSecondCurveSystems,adivisionofActionLearningSystemsinBoston,Massachusetts. EmployersregisteredwiththeWSCAwerecontactedtorecruitparticipantsforthisproject.Threeindustryrepresentatives,oneseniormanager,threesupervisorsaswellassixplanters,wereinterviewedtogathertheirobservations,stories,experiences,andanecdotes.DatagatheringwasconductedbetweenMay-June,2012usingastory-tellingguideandsemi-structuredinterviews.Theinterviewsqueriedwhattheproblemsoropportunitieswerefromtheirperspective;whattheyhadtriedsofarandwhat‘workedbest’ingivensituations;probingfortimeswhentheirworkwassuccessfulandwhatfactorstheybelievedmadeitpossible.Thisapproachwasselectedinordertodiscoverpossiblecomplex,system-levelworkplacefactorsthatmightbeaffectingmusculoskeletalinjuriesinadditiontosimplytheindividualworker.Forpurposesofplanninganddebriefingaswellasanalysisofthepilotstudydataset,thehumanfactorsteamatWorkSafeBCandSecond-CurveSystems,engagedinmultipleteleconferencecalls.Step2:AnalysisDatafromtheinterviewswastranscribedandanalyzedusingaframeworktoestablishrepeatingemergingthemesorpatterns(2).TheHourglassmodelframeworkwasusedtohelpsummarize,aggregateandexplaindata.Fromtheanalysis,factorsbecametransparent(seeFigure1)showingtheirimportanceandinfluenceonperformanceandMSIrates.Sharedstoriesinferredcluesaboutperformanceandpracticesinthecontextoftheorganization’sstructure.Thefactorswereverifiedincollaborationwiththestudy
107
participantsagainstactualday-to-dayworkandamatrixofmajorthemeswasdeveloped.Theseinsightsandthemes–concerningboththeproblemandthesolution,gaveglimpsesintothesystematicbeliefs,culture,assumptionsandpatternsofpractice.Bylearningandunderstandingtheworkofplantingtreesincomplexandchallengingsettingsfrommultipleperspectives,thismethodologyprovidedabroadinsightintothesystem-levelworkplacefactorsaffectingtheonsetofMSIs.
FindingsFigure1depictsthesystemoffactorsreportedininterviewsthatinfluenceandshapeperformance.Individualstrategiesamongplanters,foremen,crewmanagersandcontractorswereshowntoproduceimprovements.Multipleandvariedorganizational,customer/supplierandcrewmanagementpracticesemergedinsupportofsafeproduction.Projectdataregardingthissuccessfulworkcanbeusedtosupportfutureplanning,goalsandobjectives.Whilestructural
interventionssuchasreturn-to-workprogramscanimprovesafetycultureandperformance,movingfromteachingto‘actionlearning’(usingAAR)canmakesimilarimprovementsaswellasenhancesafetyandindustrysustainability;ratherthanhavingseparatestrategies.Importantly,tacitknowledgeofskillfulplanters,supervisorsandownerscanbesurfaced,usedandre-used.Notably,evenseasonedplanterswerefoundtobenefitfrompeerlearning.TheAARmethodcanbeusedtogatherandspreadlearningsaswellasaccelerateindustryprogressallwhilebolsteringalearningstrategyandenvironmenttopromoteachievinghigherperformancelevelssooner.
DiscussionThisprojectexaminedthesilviculturalsystemofworkusingtheAARapproach;gatheringperspectivesofparticipantsfromdifferentlevelsinthesysteminordertodiscoverandunderstandwhatstrategiesworkedwell(andthosethatdidnot)tobesuccessfulinthedynamicandcomplexenvironmentoftreeplanting.Thisprojectidentifiedkeyfactorsandhowtheyareappliedindifferentsituationsaswellashowplantersactivelyadapt,learnandanticipatehazardsonthejob.Thesestrategiescanbetriedinthefield-buildingonthemasnecessary-toachievesuccess.UsingtheAARapproachisincontrasttothetraditional,prescriptiveapproachthatappliespreventionsolutionsto‘whatgoeswrong’(re:postinjury).Ratherthandefiningdatanarrowly,andpursuinglaggingindicators,thisresearchapproachcollaboratescloselywiththosewhoproducetheworkgivingaccesstoleadingindicators.Overall,thevalueoftheAARisthatpeopleliketotalkaboutwhatgoeswellratherthanwaitingforinjury/incidenttooccur;itwasdiscoveredthatparticipantsenthusiasticallysharedperspectivesoutliningstrategiesthatworkedwellduringday-to-dayactivities.
RelevancetoPractitionersPractitionerswithaninterestinalternativeapproachesforinjurypreventionandmitigatingstubbornriskscanbenefitfromthisappliedresearchapproach.ApplyingtheprinciplesofAARtounderstandhowpositiveworkplacesystemfactorscanbereplicatedandenhancedtoincreasewhatgoesrightonthejobratherthanjustmanagingnegativeoutcomes,canproduceeffective,sustainableresults.
References
1. Schön,DonaldA.(1983).Thereflectivepractitioner:howprofessionalsthinkinaction.NewYork:BasicBooksISBN046506874X.OCLC8709452
2. Miles,M.B.,&Huberman,A.M.(1994).Qualitativedataanalysis2nded.ThousandOaks:SagePublications.
Customer/SupplierPractices:Forester,
Nursery
IndustryPractices
CompanyCulture:SustainabilityorExtraction
Safetymanagementsystem
Crewmanagementpractices
Education(coaching,mentoring,training)
Individualstrategies
Figure1:PerformanceShapingFactors
108
Field-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchards
OrnwipaThamsuwan1*,KitGalvin2,MariaTchong-French2,MargaretHughes3,Katherine
Gregersen4,PabloPalmandez2,MariaNegrete2,PeterW.Johnson21UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,SK,Canada;2UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA,USA;3Intel
Corporation,Hillsboro,OR,USA;4WashingtonStateDepartmentofLaborandIndustries,Olympia,WA,USA
IntroductionSemi-automatedmobileorchardplatformshavebeenimplementedinindustrializedorchardstohelpwiththinning,pruningandharvestingtreefruits.Withthistechnology,workerscanstandonaheight-adjustableplatformwhiletheplatformtransportstheworkersalongtreerows(Figure1).Althoughmobileorchardplatformscouldpreventinjuriesduetoworkersfallingfromladderandmayimproveworkposture,(1)itisunknownwhethertheymayintroducenewergonomicriskfactorsduetostaticrepetitivemovementinaconstrictedspace.Thehighworkrepetitioncouldleadtochronicmuscleinjuries.(2)
Surfaceelectromyography(EMG)isanon-invasivetechniqueforestimatingmuscularload.Itmaynotbesuitableforagriculturaluseduetoenvironmentalissuessuchassweatingresultinginlossofskin-electrodeconnection.EMGsignalqualityneedstobeexaminedtopermitderivingmuscleactivityparameters.
Objectivesofthisstudywere(1.)todevelopmethodstomeasureshoulderEMGinagriculturalsettinganddetecterrorsinEMGsignalsand(2.)toinvestigatedifferencesinshouldermuscleactivitiesofworkersduringharvestingapplesusingamobileorchardplatformcomparedtothetraditionalmethodofusingaladder.
MethodsTwenty-fourfarmworkerswithatleastoneseasonofappleharvestingexperienceparticipatedinthestudy.Eightworkersusedladders(“ladder”group),eightusedasemi-automatedorchardplatform(“platform”group),andtheeightharvestedappleswhilewalking(“ground”group).
Figure1:MobileOrchardPlatform Figure2:EMGDataCollectionSystem Figure3:ReferenceActivityforEMGNormalization
UppertrapeziusEMGwascollectedat1,000Hzusingpre-gelleddisposableelectrodes(BlueSensorN;Ambu;Ballerup,Denmark)connectedtoabattery-powereddatalogger(BiomonitorME6000;MegaElectronicsLtd.;Kuopio,Finland)thattheparticipantsworeontheirlowback(Figure2).Anti-sweatadhesive,whichincludesbenzointincture,wasappliedtosecureskin-electrodeconnection.EMGsignalswerefilteredusinga2nd-orderButterworthdual-pass10-350Hzbandpassfilter.Root-mean-square(RMS)amplitudesofthefilteredsignalswerecalculatedforevery125-millisecondwindow.Foreachsecond,the1stpercentile(PCT)ofRMSsignalsandmedianpowerfrequency(MDF)ofthefilteredsignalswascalculated.Asuddenandprolongedincreaseordecrease
109
inthe1stPCTorMDFovertimewasinspectedandusedtoindicatewhenskin-electrodeconnectionwaslost.
The10thpercentilesofRMSamplitudeswereusedtorepresentthelevelsofstaticmuscleactivities.EMGamplitudeswerenormalizedtothereferencevoluntarycontractions,whichwereperformedasastandardizedreferencestaticactivityofstretchingeacharmforwardandholdingastaticloadof0.91kg(Figure3).Staticmuscleactivitiesduringonlythefirsthourwereusedtocomparethethreeharvestingmethods.DifferencesweretestedusingANOVAwithharvestingmethodandbodysideasmaineffects,participantsasarandomeffect,andatypeIerrorof0.05.
Findings
SystematicshiftsinMDFand/orthe1stPCToftheEMGindicatedthetimewhenelectrodescameoffparticipants’skin(Figure4).Datainthree“ladder”participantsandone“ground”participantcouldnotbeusedduetothelossofEMG-skinconnectionbeforetheendofthefirstworkhour.Withtheremainingdata,staticmuscleactivitieswerenotsignificantlydifferentacrossharvestingmethodsorsideofbody(Figure5).
Figure4(left):Medianpowerfrequencyand1stpercentileRMSamplitudeofEMGinworkday.
Figure5(below):Staticmuscleactivities,10thpercentileofEMGamplitude,normalizedtoreferencevoluntaryactivity;DM=dominantbodyside,ND=non-dominantbodyside.
Discussion
Thisstudycharacterizedmuscleactivityinachallengingenvironment.Anti-sweatskinpreparationhelpedmaintainelectrodeconnections.However,thewaysomeparticipantscarriedaladderontheirshoulderstillcausedelectrodestocomeoffparticipants’skin.TheEMGerrordetectiontechniquedevelopedinthisstudymadethecollecteddatastillusablefor80%oftheparticipants.
Staticmuscleactivityisanindicatoroftherepetitivenatureofappleharvestingtask.Harvestingmethoddidnothaveasignificanteffectonstaticmuscleactivitiesinthisstudy.Thatis,theuseofmobileorchardplatformmaynotintroducetheergonomicriskfactorofstaticrepetitivetasks.
References1. ThamsuwanO,JohnsonPW.Comparingupperarmandbackposturalexposuresbetweenapple
harvestingwithladdersandmobileplatform.In:ProceedingsoftheHumanFactorsandErgonomicsSociety.2015.p.1252–6.
2. Sjøgaard G, Søgaard K. Muscle injury in repetitive motion disorders. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1998;351(JULY):21–31.
110
Evaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones
CyrusLee,RaishamShahzad,MohammadAbdoli-Ermaki
SchoolofOccupationalandPublicHealth,RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,Canada
AbstractNoiseisaprevalenthealthhazardaffectingmanyworkersinvariousindustriesaroundtheworld.Themanagementofnoiseispredicatedonaccurateandreliablemeasurementsofnoise,andthereforethequalityandprecisionofequipmentisparamount.Ourinitialstudytestedtheaccuracyandviabilityofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplications(apps).TeniOSandAndroidsmartphoneswereusedtoconductnoiselevelmanagementonfiveappsfromeachrespectiveplatform.Fivedifferentsoundsignalswereusedtorepresenttheentirespectrumpresentinanoccupationalenvironment(60,70,80,90dBA)foratotalof1000tests.AcalibratedLarsonDavisLxTsoundlevelmeterwasusedasareference.Thisstudyconcludesthatmostappsarelimitedforuseasscreeningtoolsandcannotbeusedforaccuratedeterminationofnoiselevels.Buildingonthisstudy,investigatorslooktofurtherthisstudybytestingtheaccuracyofexternalandinternalmicrophonesfor1/1octavebandanalysiswhichresemblestheconditionsofworkenvironments.
IntroductionNoiseisaconstantandongoinghealthhazardacrossmanyworkplacesandindustriesworldwide.Theeffectivemanagementofnoise-relatedhealtheffectsispredicatedonaccuratemeasurementsofnoiselevels.Inourinitialstudy,theaccuracyandfeasibilityofsmartphonesoundlevelmeter(SLM)applications(apps)usedformonitoringnoiseinoccupationalandenvironmentalscenariosweretested.TeniOSandAndroidsmartphoneswereusedtoconductnoiselevelmeasurementswithfiveappsoneachrespectiveplatform.Thesewereconsideredarepresentativesampleofthemostpopularsmartphonesatthetimeoftesting.FivedeviceswereiOSandfivewereAndroid.Theinclusioncriteriafortheselectedappsrequiredoctavebandanalysisandtheabilitytosaverecordeddataforsubsequentanalysis.Fivedifferentsoundsignalswereusedtorepresenttheentirespectrumpresentinanoccupationalenvironmentatfourdifferentreferencenoiselevels(60,70,80,and90dBA).Atotalof1000testswerecollected.AcalibratedLarsonDavisLxTsoundlevelmeterwasusedasreference.ResultssuggestthatappsontheiOSplatformhavelessvariationassociatedwithnoiselevelmeasurementsandarethusmorereliableandaccuratethanAndroidapps.However,thisstudyconcludesthatmostappsontheiOSplatformarecurrentlylimitedforuseasscreeningtoolsandcannotbeusedforaccuratedeterminationofnoiselevels.Ourpresentstudyaimstocomparetheaccuracyofexternalandinternalmicrophonesoftheeightdifferentoctavesforanalysisthatresemblesworkplaceconditions.
MethodsTendifferentsmartphoneswerecollectedfromstudentsontheRyersonUniversity
111
(Toronto,Ontario)campus.FiveiOSandfiveAndroidappswiththeabilityofoctavebandanalysisweredownloadedandinstalledonthedevicesfortesting.PriortoeachtestingsessiontheSLMwascalibratedusingaLarsonDavisCAL200calibrator.Thetwoexternalmicrophones(DaytonAudioiMM-6microphoneandMicWi436microphone)werecalibratedusingtheappscalibrationfunctionwithreferencetotheLarsonDavisLxTSLM.Allsmartphonecasesandcoverswereremovedpriortotestingtopreventanypossibleinterferencewithmicrophonesandthemicrophoneswereorientedtowardsthespeaker.Backgroundsoundlevelmeasurementsneverexceeded40dBA.SmartphonesandthereferenceSLMweremountedontripodsataheightof91cmandadistanceof100cmfromthespeaker.AnAppleMacBookPro(containingallsoundfiles)connectedtoaPioneerAVreceiver(ModelVSX-524-K)andfivePolkaudioloudspeakers(fourofwhichwereofmodelRM6751andtheothermodelRM6752)wereusedtogeneratethesignals.Noiselevelwasmanuallycontrolledusingthevolumeknobofthereceiver.Signalsweregeneratedat60,70,80and90dBA.SoundlevelswereconfirmedusingaLarsonDavisLxTSLM(factorycalibratedtwoweekspriortotesting).Threedifferentsoundsignals(sweepingsound,anoffice,andanindustrialworkenvironment)weregeneratedintheexperimentalsetup.Singlemeasurementswererecordedforeachapp,oneachsmartphonemodel,ateachnoiselevelforallthreesoundsignalstotalingonehundredmeasurementsperappandsixhundredmeasurementsintotal.
DiscussionThesoundrangeof60-90dBAwasusedtorepresentthemostlikelyoccupationalnoiseexposurelevelspresentinreallifescenarios.Directionalitywasnottakenintoconsiderationinthisstudy,aspilotstudytestingshowednosignificantdifferenceintheresults.Furthermore,duringthepilotstudyrepeatedmeasurementsweretakenontworandomlychosensmartphones(onefromeachplatform)usingallfiveappsatallfoursoundlevelsandforallfivesoundsignals.Resultsshowednosignificantdifferencebetweenrepeatedmeasurements,thereforeconductingrepeatedmeasurementsoneachdevicewasconsiderednotnecessary.
RelevancetoPractitionersIndustrialgradesoundlevelmetersareexpensiveindustrialtoolsthatrequireacertainlevelofcareandmaintenance.Soundlevelmetersareanintegratetoolintherecognitionandmanagementofnoiserelatedhealtheffects.Inthisstudy,weareaccessingtheviabilityofanalternativeoptiontoindustrialgradesoundlevelmetersintheformofsmartphones.Smartphoneshavebecomeacornerstoneofeverydaylifewiththeirmultifaceteduses;whichmakesthemapotentialalternativethatcanbeaccessibleandeconomicallyfeasible.
112
PAPERSESSION11:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE
Day4–Oct18th
10:30-12:00
PaperSession11ErgonomicsinHealthcare
AmyDoanMedicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorPerceptionsNicholasLaDelfaQuantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresDuringmanualpillcrushingJosieBlakeThefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)RyanSmileyCasestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation
113
Medicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorperceptions
AmyDoan,Dr.RatvinderGrewalLaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,ON,Canada
Computer-HumanInteractionLabatLaurentian(CHILL)
IntroductionIntoday’shealthcareenvironments,theriseofthenumberandincreasingsophisticationofmedicaldevicespresentsanincreasedriskofmedicaldeviceerroroccurrence.Widespreadbeliefthattheuseristheprimarycauseofmedicaldeviceerroristhecurrentmindsetforamajorityofindividualsinthehealthcareenvironment(1)(2)(3).Theculturesurroundingtheword‘error’intheseenvironmentsperpetuatesblameanddecreasestheconfidenceandmoraleofthosewhohavecreatedsuchanerror(4).Asaresultofthismindset,theactofretrainingandremindingtheuser“tobemorecareful”inordertoencouragevigilancetopreventfutureeventsandsubsequentlyreducethefrequencyoferrorsrelatedtomedicaldeviceusageistypicallyemployed(4)(5).Thecurrentmindsetsurroundingtheblameoftheuserrelatedtoallmedicaldeviceerrorsneedstoshifttowardsevaluatingthemedicaldevice’sroleincreatingtheseerrors(2)(6).Thismeta-studyaimstoidentifythefrequencyofmedicaldevicerelatederrorsthathavebeenclassifiedasresultingfromanerrororiginationfromtheuseofthedeviceortheuserofthedevice.
MethodsThismeta-studyaimedtoevaluatepertinentliteraturesurroundingtheoutcomesofmedicaldeviceuserinterfaceerrorsandtheirresultingrootcauseclassifications.Articlesselectedforthismeta-studywerenotlimitedtoaspecificpublishingdate.Theselectedarticleswereevaluatedanduncoveredusingthefollowingdatabases:GoogleScholar,CumulativeIndexofNursingandAlliedHealthLiterature(CINHAL)andPubMedusingacombinationofthekeywords:“medicaldevice”,“useerror”,“usererror”,“userinterfaceerror”,“errorclassification”and“blame”.
FindingsThedatabasesearchresultsprovedtoproducelimitedresultsthatpertainedtothisareaofinterest.However,thedatabasesearchyielded7articlesthatwereincludedinthismeta-study.Twoarticlesthatwereexploredcontainedscenariosinwhichelementsofbiasandblameculturemayhaveincorrectlyconcludedthattheuserandnottheuseofthemedicaldevicewasthecauseofanerror(7)(8).Inaddition,articleswereuncoveredwhichexpressedtheneedtoclearlydefineuseandusererrorwithinthehealthcarecontextinordertoproperlyclassifyerroneouseventsinordertopreventtheiroccurrenceandimprovepatientandusersafety(9)(10)(11).Andlastly,twoarticleswereuncoveredthatproposedthaterroneousrootcauseswerebeingincorrectlyclassifiedduetobiasesthatexisttowardsusersofdevicesinhealthcareenvironmentsduetothenatureofblameculture(12)(13).These7articlesmay
114
indicateapotentialeffectthatblamecultureinhealthcareenvironmentshaveoneffectivelyclassifyingmedicaldeviceerrorsappropriately.
DiscussionAneedcurrentlyexiststoproperlyclassifyerroneousmedicaldeviceeventssothatallmembersinthehealthcaresectorcanincreasetheirknowledgeoftheprevalenceofmedicaldeviceuseandusererrorandhowtobestlearnfromtheseerroneousevents.Inaddition,allowingtheincorporationofbiasedassessoropinionsisproblematicconsideringtheheavyblameculturethatexistsinhealthcarewhichoftenallocatestheblameoferrorstowardshumancounterpartsinvolved(13).Inaddition,varyinglevelsofworkexperiencethatanassessorhascaninfluencewhattheyperceivetobetherootcauseofanerroraswellastheseverityandseriousnessofanerror.Throughthiscurrenttechnique,itiseasytounderstandhowasingleerroneouseventinvolvingamedicaldevicecanbeinterpretedandcategorizedintoseveraldifferenttypesoferrorswithdifferentrootcauses.Thiscreatesaproblemwithclassificationconsistency,accuracyandconfusionintheliteratureaswellasinthehealthcareenvironment.
References1. BonneyW.Medicalerrors:Moralandethicalconsiderations.JHospAdm.2013Dec8;3(2):80.2. CouncilNR,EducationDofBandSSand,IntegrationConH-S,CareContheRofHFinHH.TheRoleof
HumanFactorsinHomeHealthCare:WorkshopSummary.NationalAcademiesPress;2010.322p.3. KarshB-T,ScanlonM.WhenIsaDefibrillatorNotaDefibrillator?WhenIt’sLikeaClockRadio….The
ChallengeofUsabilityandPatientSafetyintheRealWorld.AnnEmergMed.2007Oct1;50(4):433–5.4. GroberED,BohnenJMA.Definingmedicalerror.CanJSurg.2005Feb;48(1):39–44.5. JohnsonTR,TangX,GrahamMJ,BrixeyJ,TurleyJP,ZhangJ,etal.AttitudesTowardMedicalDeviceUse
ErrorsandthePreventionofAdverseEvents.JtCommJQualPatientSaf.2007Nov1;33(11):689–94.6. MedicineIof,AmericaConQofHCin.ToErrIsHuman:BuildingaSaferHealthSystem.
NationalAcademiesPress;2000.312p.7. LamsdaleA,ChisholmS,GagnonR,DaviesJ,CairdJ.AUsabilityEvaluationofanInfusionPumpby
NursesUsingaPatientSimulator.ProcHumFactorsErgonSocAnnuMeet.2005Sep1;49(11):1024–8.
8. PotterP,WolfL,BoxermanS,GraysonD,SledgeJ,DunaganC,etal.Understandingthecognitiveworkofnursingintheacutecareenvironment.JNursAdm.2005Aug;35(7–8):327–35.
9. GinsburgLR,ChuangY-T,RichardsonJ,NortonPG,BertaW,NgDTandP.CategorizingErrorsandAdverseEventsforLearning:AProviderPerspective[Internet].HealthcareQuarterly.2009[cited2018Mar12].Availablefrom:http://www.longwoods.com/content/20984/print
10. MattoxE.MedicalDevicesandPatientSafety.CritCareNurse.2012Aug1;32(4):60–8.11. WardJR,ClarksonPJ.Ananalysisofmedicaldevice-relatederrors:prevalenceandpossiblesolutions.J
MedEngTechnol.2004Jan1;28(1):2–21.12. ChippsE,WillsCE,TandaR,PattersonES,ElfrinkV,BrodnikM,etal.RegisteredNurses’Judgmentsof
theClassificationandRiskLevelofPatientCareErrors.JNursCareQual.2011Dec;26(4):302.13. FurnissD,MasciP,CurzonP,MayerA,BlandfordA.Exploringmedicaldevicedesignandusethrough
layersofDistributedCognition:Howaglucometeriscoupledwithitscontext.2015[cited2018Mar12];Availablefrom:http://repositorio.inesctec.pt/handle/123456789/5430
115
Quantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresduringmanualpillcrushing
NicholasLaDelfa1*,ArchanaKunasegaram2,RachelWhittaker3,ClarkDickerson31UniversityofOntarioInstituteofTechnology,Oshawa,Ontario,Canada
2UniversityofToronto,Toronto,Ontario,Canada3UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada
Introduction
Thenursingoccupationsuffersfromahighprevalenceofwork-relatedmusculoskeletaldisorders(1),withinjuriestothelowbackandshoulderrepresentingthemostcommonandseverereported claims (2). Nurses in long-term care homes oftenadministerseveralmedicationsthroughouttheirshift(3).Toaidinconsumption,pillsareoftencrushedintoafinepowderusing a manual device (Figure 1). Despite the forceful andrepetitivemusculareffortanecdotallyreportedbynurseswhoperformthisactivityregularly,thephysicaldemandsgermanetothistaskhaveyettobequantified.Thepurposeofthisstudywastoquantifytheupperextremitymuscleexposureswhileoperating a pill-crushing device in a variety of job-relevantsimulatedexperimentalconditions.
MethodsEighteenhealthyfemaleparticipantswereinstrumentedwithsurfaceelectromyography(EMG)over12musclesofthedominantarm(Figure2).Severalmusclespecificmaximumvoluntarycontractionswereconductedtoelicitmaximumvoluntaryexcitations(MVEs).EMGsignalsweredigitallysampledat1500Hz,de-biased,linearenveloped,andnormalizedtoMVEstorepresentproportionalmuscleactivation(%MVE).Inastandingposture,participantsusedaSilentKnight™devicetocrushpillsin18factorialconditions, defined by: working height (87, 102, or 117 cm), device orientation (parallel orperpendicular to the sagittal plane) and pill quantity (1, 3 or 5 pills). Amplitude probabilitydistributionfunctions(APDFs)wereusedtocomputeconditionstatic(P=0.1),median(P=0.5)andpeak (P=0.9)muscle exposure levels.EMGamplitudes (%MVE)were compared to recommendedmaximum acceptable efforts (%MAE) at the static (2.5%), median (15.3%) and peak (42.5%)exposure levels (4), with a value above 1.0 indicating an exposure ratio above recommendedergonomicslimits.Separate3(height)x3(pill#)x2(orientation)factorialANOVAswereconductedonthestatic,medianandpeakexposureratiosforeachmuscle,butonlystaticdemandsarepresentedhereastheyweremostimplicated.Tukey’sHSDcomparisons(p<0.05)wereusedtoassessfactorleveldifferencesposthoc.FindingsOverallStatic,Median&PeakMuscleExposures:Collapsedacrossallconditions,exposureratioswerehighestatstaticlevelsincomparisontomedianandpeakexposures(Figure2).ThestaticlimitsexceededtheMAEthresholds(1.0exposureratio)inthesupraspinatus(1.30),pectoralismajor(1.07)anduppertrapezius(1.65)muscles.Medianandpeakloadinghadanexposureratiobelow0.63inallmusclesstudiedexpectforthetriceps,whichwastheonlymuscletoexhibititshighestexposureratioforpeakloading(0.66).EffectofHeight,PillNumber&DeviceOrientation:Themostprominentfindingwasaninteractionbetweenworkingheightandpillnumberformiddle(p<0.05,ω2=0.02)andposterior(p<0.05,ω2=0.03)deltoids,uppertrapezius(p<0.04,ω2=0.05)andpectoralismajor(p<0.04,0.03)(Figure3),aswellastricepsandflexorcarpiulnaris(notshown).
116
Middledeltoid,posteriordeltoidanduppertrapeziusactivationsweresignificantlyhigheratthe117cmheightincomparisontothelow87cmheights.Pectoralismajorwastheonlymusclethathadanincreasedexposureratio(1.16)atthe87cmheightincomparisontothe117cm,andthemagnitudeofthisdifferenceincreasedwiththenumberofpillsbeingcrushed(1.25for3pillsand1.35for5pills).Deviceorientationhadamarginaleffectonmuscleactivity.Theparallelorientationresultedinhigher muscle activity for upper trapezius (by 27%) and pectoralis major (by 45%), but theperpendicularorientationresultedinhigheractivityformiddledeltoid(by12%)andFCU(by18%).
DiscussionThisstudydiscoveredhighlevelsofstaticmuscleloadingwhenperformingmanualpillcrushinginavariety of occupationally relevant conditions. Static muscle exposures above 2.5%MVE indicateprolonged, lower levelmuscle loading,andarerisk factors for thedevelopmentofmuscle fatigueover the course of an 8-hourworkday (4,5). Thework surface height and number of pills beingcrushedwereimportantfactorsthatinfluencedthestaticshouldermuscleactivations.Inmostcases,workingatapproximatelya50thpercentilefemale’shipheight(87cm)reducedthelevelofmuscleactivity,oftentimestobelowtheMAElimit,comparedtohigherheights.Aperpendicularlyorienteddevice required substantially lower muscle activity in some shoulder muscles, with marginaldifferencesoccurring inmusclesof theelbowandwrist.Futureresearchshouldevaluatespecificposturalandjointloadingdemandsduringpillcrushingwork,aswellasdifferentdeviceorientations(e.g.45°relativetosagittal), to furtherestablishbestpractices fornurseswhoperformthisworkregularly.
RelevancetoPractitionersThisstudyisoneofthefirsttoprovidequantitativedataonthemuscleloadingexperiencedduringpillcrushing.Givenpopulationdemographics,thistaskwillcontinuetobefrequentlyperformedbylong-termcarenurses.Thesedatacaninformspecificdesignrecommendationstoreducemuscularactivitywhileperformingpillcrushing.Specifically,whenamotorizedpillcrusherisunavailableornotpreferred,manualpillcrushingshouldbeconductedwiththefewestamountofpillspossible,withthedeviceorientedperpendicularlytothesagittalplaneatapproximatelyhipheight(~87cmfora50thpercentilefemale).
References1)Shamian,J.(2003).Int.J.Sociol.Soc.Policy,23(8/9);2)Owen,B.D.,Keene,K.,&Olson,S.(2002).Int.J.Nurs.Stud.,39(3),295–302;3)Reinhard,S.etal.(2006).NursingOutlook,54(2),74-80;4)Potvin,J.R.(2012).Hum.Factors,54(2),175–188;5)Jonsson,B.(1982).J.HumanErgol.11,73-88.
117
Thefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)
JosieBlake1*
1Taylor’dErgonomicsIncorporated,Cambridge,Ontario,Canada
BackgroundAccommodatingworkerswithlimitationscanbeachallenge,especiallywhentheworkisunpredictableorvariable.Nurses,andotherworkersinthehealthcareindustry,aresusceptibletobackinjuriesduetovaryingpatientabilities,staturesandconditions,andtheworkplaceenvironment.Afteraseriousinjury,permanentdamagehasbeendone,andoften,permanentlimitationsareputinplacetofurtherprotecttheworkerfromdoingmoredamage.Theemployermustaccommodatetheselimitations,whilecontinuingtoprovidepatienttreatment.
ProblemThispaperpresentsacasestudyoftwonurseswhohavebackinjuries,withlimitationsasextremeas“nobackbendingatall”,and“noovershoulderwork”.Priortotheassessment,thenurseswerenotperformingallduties,astheyfeltthatsomeofthetasksrequiredsignificantbackbendingandwereoutsideoftheircapabilities.Thetaskof“earsyringing”wasthenurses’mostsignificantconcern.Asaresult,theclinicwasunabletoperformanyearsyringeservices.TheErgonomistwascontactedtoassessthesuitabilityoftheentirejobforthetwonurses,andprovidesolutionstoallowthenursestoreturntofullduties.
ContextThispaperisacasestudythatreviewsaprojectundertakenbyaconsultingergonomist.Thenurses’supervisorandtheclinic’sHRspecialistcontactedtheconsultingErgonomisttoassistwithidentifyingsolutionstoallowthetwoexperiencednurses,workingfulltimeatafamilyhealthclinic,toreturntoperformingallduties,includingearsyringing.ThesupervisorandHRspecialistalsoaskedtheErgonomisttoidentifyanyothertasksthatmaybeoutsideofthenurses’capabilities,andtoprovidesolutionsfortheseconcernsaswell.Thenurseswerepresentthroughouttheentireassessment,andprovidedinputonrecommendations.Theassessmentandreportswerecompletedoveratotalof4days.Afterthereportswerecompleted,thesupervisorandHRspecialistworkedwithouttheconsultingergonomisttosourcetheproductsrecommendedinthereport.
ActionsTheergonomistobserved,measured,andphotographedthejob,completingadetailedphysicalandcognitivedemandsanalysis.Sheinterviewedandobservedthetwonurseswithpermanentmedicallimitations,andalsoclarifiedsomeoftheirlimitationswiththeirtreatinghealthcareproviders.Theergonomistcomparedthephysicaldemandsofeachessentialdutywitheachofthenurses’capabilitiesandlimitations.Ifthedutywasunsuitablefortheemployee,theergonomistworkedwiththenursestoidentifyaccommodationsthatwouldallowthenursestoworkwithintheircapabilities.Theergonomistresearchedappropriateproductsfromlocalvendors,andprovidedspecificdimensionsanddetailsonproductfeaturestoassistthesupervisorandHRspecialistinpurchasingthemostappropriateproducts.
118
OutcomesTheergonomistmetwiththestakeholdersintheprojecttodiscussthefindingsandaccommodationsforbothnurses.Thekeystakeholderswerepleasedwiththeobjectiveassessmentofthesuitabilityofthejobforeachofthenurses,andtheaccommodationsidentifiedbytheErgonomistweredeemedreasonable.Thenursesreturnedtofulltimeduties,aftertherecommendationshadbeenimplemented.Theaccommodationsalsobenefittedothernursesatthefamilyhealthclinic,inparticular,aheight-adjustablechair/bedasallnursesarenowabletoadjustthepatienttoacomfortableheighttoperformalltreatments.
DiscussionSolutionsconsideredthetwonurses’specificlimitations,considerationsfortherestofthenursesandstaffinthehealthteam,patientaccessibility,andcost.Oneofthechallengeswastofindaheight-adjustablechair/bedthatwouldallowsufficientclearanceandaccessibilityinthesmallpatientassessmentroom.Nursesandsupervisorshadtotrialseveralconfigurationsbeforefindinganappropriatelayout.Otherchallengesincludedkeepingallcommonlyuseitemsstoredbelowshoulderheight,sourcingastepstoolwithsufficientheightbutwaslight-weightenoughtobeliftedandcarriedwithinthenurses’capabilities,andlimitinguseofthestepstooltoretrievelesscommonlyuseitems.Afollowupwasscheduledtoensurethatthechangesimplementedmettheintentofthereport.
RelevancetoPractitionersDevelopingrecommendationstoaccommodateinjuredemployeescanbechallenging,butevenmoresowhentheemployees’jobinvolvesworkingwithpatientswhoalsoneedaccommodations.Thiscasestudyisuniqueinthatthesolutionscouldnotinanywayinconvenienceorincreasedemandsforthepatientswhoreceivecare.
119
Casestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation
RyanSmileyPHSA/BCEHS,Vancouver,BC,Canada
Background
In2014WorkSafeBC(WSBC)issuedorderstoProvincialHealthServicesAuthority(PHSA)anditsagency,BritishColumbiaEmergencyHealthServices(BCEHS)toeliminateorminimizeriskofmusculoskeletalinjury(MSI)toparamedics.Asystematicreviewwascompleted,andbeginningin2017,BCEHShasbeentransitioningtopoweredpatienthandlingequipmenttoreduceriskofinjuryassociatedwithpatientliftingtasks.
ProblemParamedicsareknowntoperformregularunsafepatientandequipmenthandlingtasksassociatedwithahighprevalenceofMSI(1).BCEHSstretchershavehistoricallybeenmanuallyoperatedtoraiseandlowertheirheight;andload/unloadinandoutofambulances.Additionally,paramedicsarecommonlyinjuredliftingpatientswithoutliftingequipment.
TheobjectiveofthiscasestudyistohighlightcontrolsimplementedalongwithchallengesthatBCEHShasexperiencedalongthewaywithsuchalargescaleequipmentrollout.
ContextBCEHSisaprovince-wideambulanceservicethatemploysover3,600paramedicsat193stationsusing511groundambulances,4helicoptersand7airplanes.BCEHSparamedicscompletedover900,000responsesin2017,andarethelargestemergencyhealthcareproviderinCanada.
ActionsIn2014,PHSAergonomicscompletedanergonomicsassessmentincludinghistoricalinjuryanalysisanddeterminedthatthetopthreeinjurycausingactivitieswereloadingandunloadingthestretcherintheambulance,liftingandloweringthestretcher/patient,andmanuallyliftingpatients(seeTable1).Recommendationstotheorganizationincludedimplementingpoweredequipmenttomechanizethesetasks.Asthecosttoimplementthisequipmentissignificant,abusinesscasewasdevelopedtodeterminepossiblereductionsininjuryrelatedcosts,showinganexpectedreturnoninvestmentwithin7yearspostimplementation.AsimilaroutcomewasfoundbyArmstrong(2),althoughthispaperwasnotavailableatthetimethebusinesscasewascompleted.AsseveralambulanceservicesinCanadahaveimplementedpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadingsystemsshowinginjuryreductions,justificationwasneededforBCEHStomoveaheadwithpowerloadingsystems.ThefactthatloadingandunloadingthestretcherintheambulancewastheleadingcauseofBCEHSMSIbyalargemargin,asolidfoundationtojustifyimplementationofpowerloadingsystemsexisted.Furthermore,ourowninternaltrialofpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadingsystemsfailedtoshowinjuryreduction.PHSAErgonomicsalsocompletedride-alongsandmeetingswithYork(powerloadequipped)andBrantford(powerstretcherwithnopowerload)ambulanceservicesinOntario.Thisqualitativereviewconfirmedthatpowerloadsystemsaresuperiorinreducingrisktoparamedics.InJuly2016,anorganizationaldecisionwasmadetoprocurethisequipment,resultingintheselectionofStrykerpowerstretchersandloadingsystems,andMangarElkliftingcushions.
120
OutcomesAfter16WSBCinspectionreportsbeginninginDecember2014and15responsesbyBCEHS/PHSA,theMSIreductionorderwasdeemedcompliedinFebruary2018.ThisoccurredafterBCEHSdemonstratedsignificantimplementationprogressandacomprehensiveplanandcommitmenttoimplementpowerstretchersandcushionsinallgroundambulancesbyJuly2018,andpowerloadsystemsinallgroundambulancesbyMarch2020.
AsofMay2018,approximatelyhalfoftheresponsevolumeisusingpowerstretchersandpowerloadsystemswithalargepercentageoftheremainingresponsesbeingcompletedwithpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadsystems.Itisarguablytooearlytolookatchangesininjuryratesassociatedwiththeseactivitiesasequipmentimplementationbeganinmid-2017,withagradualimplementationtimeline.However,in2017BCEHShasseentimelossincidentincreasesinload/unloadstretcher,significantreductionsinlift/lowerstretcher,andslightreductionsinpatientlifting.BCEHSwillmonitorincidentdatacloselymovingforward.
Table1:2014-17TimeLossIncidentsarelistedbyactivitytype.Powerstretcher,loadingsystemandliftingcushionimplementationstartedinspringof2017,andwillbecompletedprovinciallyin2020.
DiscussionTheimplementationofpoweredstretchersandloadingsystemsareanticipatedtoprofoundlyreduceBCEHSParamedicMSIincidentsandcostsinpartbecausethereisnootherwaytoperformtheseactivitiesthanbyusingpowerwiththepushofabutton.Incontrast,whiletheMangarElkliftingcushionreducesriskofinjurywhenitisused,itstillrequirestheparamedicstobringthispieceofequipmentfromtheambulancetothesceneandmakethedecisiontouseit.WeanticipatesomechallengesaroundtheprovincewithparamedicstakingtimetousetheElk,butbelieveitisacriticaltoolforparamedicstohaveavailable.
Duetofinancialandlogisticalreasons,thepowerstretchersandliftingcushionswereimplementedbeforepowerloadsystemsinmanycases.ThisresultsinParamedicsloadingheavierpowerstretchersmanuallyuntilinstallationofthepowerloadiscomplete.Theincreasedloadsrequiretwoparamedicstomanuallyloadandunloadthestretchers,buttheywerenotdesignedtobeusedthisway.Loading/unloadingisphysicallymoreawkwardanddeterminingwhenthestretcherhasbeenpulledoutoftheambulancefarenoughismoredifficult,increasingriskofthestretcherfallingoutoftheambulance.
References1. RobertsM.H.,SimM.R.,BlackO,SmithP.Occupationalinjuryriskamongambulanceofficers
andparamedicscomparedwithotherhealthcareworkersinVictoria,Australia:analysisofworkers'compensationclaimsfrom2003to2012.Occup.Environ.Med.2015;72:489-95.
2. ArmstrongD,FerronR,TaylorC,McLeodB,FletcherS,MacPheeRetal.Implementingpoweredstretcherandloadsystemswasacosteffectiveinterventiontoreducetheincidenceratesofstretcherrelatedinjuriesinaparamedicservice.AppliedErgonomics.2017;62:34-42.
2014 2015 2016 2017Load/UnloadStretcher 79 95 76 86 Liftingstretcherintoandoutoftheambulance.
LiftPatientwithoutequipment 39 43 55 42 Includesinjuriesoccurringwhenliftingapatienttothestretcherfromthefloor,chair,toilet,orvehicle.
Lift/LowerStretcher 72 55 56 33 Manuallyraisingandloweringthestretcherandincidentswherethestretcherdropsunexpectedly.
TOTALOverexertionIncidents 341 379 372 331 AllBCEHSincidentsrelatedtopatientandequipmenthandlingresultinginMSI.
TOTALBCEHSIncidents 525 555 549 506 AllBCEHSincidents.
Activity NumberofTimelossIncidents ActivityDescription
121
IndexofAuthors
A
AlanCudlip,42AlexieDennie,35AlisonC.McDonald,42AlisonGodwin,62,73AllisonStephens,28,56AlyssaBrunton,85AlyssaSmith,35AmandeepSingh,87AmyDoan,113AndrewHamilton-Wright,37AndrewTao-AnWong,40ArchanaKunasegaram,115
B
BehdinNowrouzi-Kia,35BehzadBashiri,97BrandonVance,62,85BrentLievers,92BruceOddson,92,101
C
CalebLeduc,62CarolineDignard,35CarolynKnight,73CarolynnKallitsis,64CarrieTaylor,58CatherineTrask,16,97CélineLarivière,35SamuelCharbonneau,31ChristinaCort,56ClarissaSawyer,106ClarkR.Dickerson,42,94ClémentBouet,51ColinD.McKinnon,94CoreyBouwmeester,101CourtneyLessel,35CourtneyNickel,73CyrusLee,110
D
DanielViggiani,49DianaDeCarvalho,75
E
EliseHuet,71
EmmaTung,42EricPoon,40EricWill,49ErikaZiraldo,37,71
G
ChantalGauvin,31GiberingMougnol,47GrahamMayberry,53,90GulerArasan,40
H
HannahArthurs,71HarrisonKloke,40HarwinderSingh,87HeatherKahle,83,106
J
JackP.Callaghan,42,49,53,90,94JacquelineToner,69Jean-FrancoisMauger,44JeffM.Barrett,49JennyColman,83,106JessieLeith,71JimR.Potvin,66JoanneHodder,64JoshuaLange,51JosieBlake,117JudyVillage,22
K
KatherineGregersen,108KathrynE.Sinden,77KatieA.Goggins,92KaylaFewster,53,90KevinGillespie,81KitGalvin,108KristinaZucchiatti,58
L
LakhwinderPalSingh,87LisaSchutt,35LucyHart,26
M
MallorieLeduc,62,96,99
122
MamikoNoguchi,90DenisMarchand,31MargaretHughes,108MariaNegrete,108MariaTchong-French,108MariahMartinShein,51MarieLaberge,11MartySmets,60MathieuTremblay,47MatthewBarrett,75MaximeMcGrath,47MichelLarivière,35MicheleOliver,37,71MikeGlinka,90MohammadAbdoli-Eramaki,40,110MonaFrey,75MonikaTiszberger,35
N
NancyL.Black,47NancyLightfoot,99NatalieCarscadden,25NeilMansfield,7NicholasLaDelfa,115NicholasPatrick,60
O
OrnwipaThamsuwan,108
P
PabloPalmandez,108PamelaKengne,47PascalImbeault,44PatrickNeumann,22,23PegScherzinger,104PeterW.Johnson,108
R
RachelWhittaker,115RaishamShahzad,110
RatvinderGrewal,113ReganBolduc,77RichardGasaway,6,15RichardWells,27RonHouse,99RyanGraham,44RyanSmiley,119
S
SandraDorman,62SaraSayed,77SarbjitSingh,87SashaBrown,83StephanMilosavljevic,97StevenFischer,60
T
TammyEger,35,62,92TanyaMorose,24TiannaBeharriel,44TomBigda-Peyton,106TrevorSchell,29LudovicTuduri,31
U
UshaKuruganti,69
V
VanceMcPherson,25VarinderSingh,87
W
WantuirJunior,44WayneAlbert,69
Z
IgorZovile,31
Top Related