Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment output in four sawmill jobs

73Citations
Citations of this article
160Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to examine the agreement between 5 ergonomic risk assessment methods calculated on the basis of quantitative exposure measures and to examine the ability of the methods to correctly classify 4 at risk jobs. Surface electromyography and electrogoniometry were used to record the physical exposures of 87 sawmill workers performing 4 repetitive jobs. Five ergonomic risk assessment tools (rapid upper limb assessment [RULA], rapid entire body assessment [REBA], American conference of governmental industrial hygienist’s threshold limit value for mono-task hand work [ACGIH TLV], strain index [SI], and concise exposure index [OCRA]) were calculated. Dichotomization of risk to no risk and at risk resulted in high agreement between methods. Percentage of perfect agreement between methods when 3 levels of risk were considered was moderate and varied by job. Of the methods examined, the RULA and SI were best (correct classification rates of 99 and 97% respectively). The quantitative ACGIH-TLV for mono-task hand work and Borg scale were worst (misclassification rates of 86 and 28% respectively). © 2010, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jones, T., & Kumar, S. (2010). Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment output in four sawmill jobs. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 16(1), 105–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2010.11076834

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free