Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Title
Manual Tasks Risk Ovako Working Posture Analysis
Concise Exposure Index Quick Exposure Checklist Rapid Entire Body Assessment
Assessment Tool V2.0 System
Manual task assessment tool. Upper limb assessment tool. Entire body assessment tool. Upper limb assessment checklist Entire body assessment checklist
Overview Intervention information Intervention information included. tool. Useful for comparison before tool. Intervention information
included. and after an intervention. included.
Type Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Checklist Risk Assessment
• To assess exposure to • The purpose of this index is to • A practical method for • User-friendly tool designed to • REBA was specifically designed
musculoskeletal risk classify diverse occupational identifying and evaluating poor assess worker exposure to risks to assess various unpredictable
factors associated with scenarios according to their working posture. for work-related working postures found in
manual tasks in workplace. exposure to WMSDs. musculoskeletal disorders of the health care and other service
• To prioritize tasks that upper limbs. industries. The Rapid Entire
must be changed due to a • Useful for comparison before Body Assessment (REBA) is
high risk. and after an intervention. similar to RULA, but it has been
• Incorporates assessment of modified to be more useful for
manual task risk levels, working postures found in the
related safety activity, health care and other service
organizational industries.
environment. • A postural analysis system that
is sensitive to musculoskeletal
Stated Purpose
Straker et al. Ergonomics
2004. risks in a variety of tasks.
• To assist inspectors in • The purpose of this index is to • To determine the loads caused • “Front line” assessment as part
auditing workplaces across quantify worker exposure to by the most common postures of of a broader ergonomic
all industries for tasks involving repetitive the back, arms and legs in assessment.
compliance with the movements of the upper limbs. different jobs.
Queensland Manual Tasks Grieco, Ergonomics, 1998. • Useful for directing
Advisory Standard. improvements in the working
ManTRA, V2.0 Cornell methods.
University Ergonomics Karwowski, W., and Marras,
Web. W. 1999. OWAS Methods in
The Occupational Ergonomics
Handbook. pp 447-459.
Upper Limb Assessment – Table B DRAFT 6 2
• Determine the maximum • Force required is considered by • The load or use of force is • The measurement of force • Force measurement is divided
force exerted within each determining the perceived effort characterized by the mass considers the maximum weight into different categories. The
region during the task of maintaining a posture using involved. handled in the task. This ranges different categories range from
relative to the maximal the Borg scale. from a light load of 5kg to a loads less than 5kg to loads
force which can be very heavy load of 20kg or greater than 10kg. The risk
Force
• Posture is measured by • The posture of each part of the • Back posture is identified by a • Back posture is considered by • The posture is evaluated by
considering deviations body is assessed by considering number indicating whether the determining if it is neutral, measuring joint angle are wrist,
from the mid range. the angle of flexion/extension of back is straight, bent or bent moderately or excessively lower arm, upper arm, leg, neck
• Postures combinations each segment. and twisted. flexed or twisted. and trunk posture.
such as twisting and • Arm posture is identified by a • Shoulder/arm posture is
bending are also number indicating whether one considered by determining
considered. or both arms are at or below movement frequency. This
shoulder level. assessment should be done
• Leg posture is identified by a when the shoulder/arm is most
Posture
• Total cycle time for each actions and the total number of tape, smaller intervals of 40 measured. It is rated depending device (such as a keyboard
region of the body is actions for repetitive tasks. The seconds are possible. on repetition time. and/or mouse) steadily for more
measured. recovery time is also considered than 4 hours daily.
• The typical time which the as well as the number of tasks
task is performed without per minute.
break is measured
Upper Limb Assessment – Table B DRAFT 6 3
• Vibration is measured. • Vibration, recovery time, • Other task components are • Hand hold on a tool or handle is
exposure to low temperatures, characterized. They include, rated.
use of gloves, effect of high vibration, visual demand of the • Activity level is rated including
precision work, intensity of work, the difficulty a worker has the size of the action and
exertion are considered. keeping up with the work, and whether it affects a small part of
Grieco, Ergonomics, 1998. the workers opinion of how the body or causes a large
stressful they find their job. posture change.
• The assessment is completed by
Other
maximum force possible. for the majority of healthy adult value of 2 is given to tasks • Also rated is the force due to a
Scoring scale ranges from working population. As this involving from 10 to 20 kg and load, the coupling of a hand and
minimal to maximal force. values changes, exposure is a value of 3 is given to tasks object and the activity level.
Risk Factors
• Cumulative risk score by comparing the number daily body part spends in a particular to determine the overall REBA
combines the scores of number of actions performed by position. The results of this score.
each individual part. Yields the upper limbs during determination are also used to
values between 5 and 25. repetitive tasks and the number determine the class of the job.
• Further action is required of recommended actions. This class may or may not
no matter what the require action depending on the
combined risk score is the value.
exertion factor is greater Karwowski, W., and Marras,
than 5, the sum of exertion W. 1999. OWAS Methods in
and awkwardness is The Occupational Ergonomics
greater than 8 and the Handbook. pp 447-459.
cumulative risk score is 15
or greater.
• Simple linear regression model • Based on the study by Burdorf, • Assessment validity was
provided a ‘satisfactory the OWAS system predicts back moderate due to a low level of
predictive performance’ of the pain based on the amount of agreement on back posture
risk of WMSDs based on index. time spent working in a harmful classifications.
posture. • The relationship between
Burdorf et al Ergonomics, exposure and work-related
1991. musculoskeletal disorders was
Validity not made.
• Preliminary validation of the • Improvements to aid with
degree of association of the assessing frequent body
index (OCRA) and the WMSDs movements is required.
detected. Li et al. Proceedings of the
Grieco, Ergonomics, 1998. Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society, 1998.
• Suggested thresholds help • The score is calculated and • Posture combinations and the • Risk factor values are combined • The final REBA score provides
to make judgments about classified as red, green or proportion of time spent in that to give overall exposure scores. an action level with an
Limit or the safety of the task. amber. Green indicates and posture are classified into 4 These scores are used to indication of urgency of
• Action is recommended if : acceptable frequency of motion. action categories indicating the compare tasks before and after intervention.
Guideline Level o The exertion score Amber indicates an area of urgency and priority for an intervention to determine the • Scores range from 1-15 and are
was 5 or greater for uncertainty, close monitoring is corrective measures. change in risk. grouped into 5 action
Proposed? any body region required. Red indicates a high • An action class of 1 indicates categories. These categories
o The sum of exertion risk of injury, the task must be that no action in required, 4 range from ‘no action
improved.
Upper Limb Assessment – Table B DRAFT 6 6
• No equipment required • Stopwatch • Video tape is useful to replay • Stopwatch • Camera, weight scale,
Equipment
beyond the assessment the task and increases the stopwatch useful but not
sheet. frequency of postural necessary
Required
observations that can be made.
Computer aided applications
increase the ease of assessment.
• Inter-observer reliability has • Inter-observer reliability: Most
been tested in many different agreement between observers
job industries. The reported for wrist/hand posture,
inter-observer reliability is high, wrist/hand movement, back
Measurement
averaging over 90%. Back posture, shoulder/arm posture,
posture is most difficult to shoulder/arm movement. Least
Characteristics distinguish.
Karwowski, W., and Marras,
agreement between back
movement.
W. 1999. OWAS Methods in • Increased reliability when
The Occupational Ergonomics assessment done by practitioners
Handbook. pp 447-459. with work experience.
Upper Limb Assessment – Table B DRAFT 6 7
Information for
was eight or greater of 1 indicates that no
for any region of intervention is required. An
Intervention? the body
o The cumulative risk
action class of 4 indicates
corrective action is needed
score (total of time, immediately.
exertion, Karwowski, W., and Marras,
awkwardness, W. 1999. OWAS Methods in
vibration and The Occupational Ergonomics
repetition) was 15 Handbook. pp 447-459.
or greater.
• Does not propose threshold • This method does not consider • The hand force exertion value is • Heavy focus on posture.
value as a standard. the proportion of time spent somewhat difficult to • No emphasis on the effect of
• Meant to identify jobs that using force or handling a load. determine. frequency and cumulative
require different levels of action Karwowski, W., and Marras, • No limit or guideline is loading.
W. 1999. OWAS Methods in proposed and there are no • Forces evaluator to use
The Occupational Ergonomics intervention instructions. This professional judgment to choose
Handbook. pp 447-459. method is generally used to a representative ‘snapshot’ of
compare before and after. the job
Other
Disorders risk factors among the
crew of the ports and shipping
References organization’s vessels. IEA
Ergonomics in the Digital Age,
Seoul Korea.
Example
Worksheet Worksheet Worksheet
Worksheet Worksheet and Computer Program
Comments