No abstract

This study reviews and synthesizes the findings in recent literature addressing work-related musculoskeletal injuries and disorders (MSDs) and practical solutions in the construction industry. Seven construction occupations (carpenters, masons, electricians, sheet metal workers, roofers, ironworkers, plumbers) are included to identify trade-related MSD risk factors. Effective intervention requirements are identified to meet the challenges that construction contractors face in the field. Typical intervention strategies include site-specific ergonomics programs, engineering controls, ergonomic hand tools selection/design, and worksite stretching program. The "good practices" presented in this paper could be a valuable approach to reducing common MSDs including sprains and strains, pain and discomfort at back, neck/shoulders, wrists/hands, and knees, improving worker morale, lowering workers' compensation costs, while increasing productivity and profitability in the construction industry.

Weight of materials is an essential component of National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health’s (NIOSH) 1991 Revised Lifting Equations, its European (BS EN)/International (ISO) derivatives and other published extensions/modifications. Weighing materials is often difficult at construction work sites. NIOSH’s Lifting Equation and its variations might be used more frequently and effectively by Human Factors/Ergonomic (HFE) Practitioners if the weight of materials could be determined more easily at work sites. The Borchardt Factor (B Factor) concept would enable HFE Practitioners to “calculate” the weight of large, bulky or irregularly shaped materials at work sites. The B Factor is defined as: Weight (lbs or kg) per “easy to measure” unit of measurement.

This is the second of two panels to discuss pathways and barriers in moving promising ergonomic concepts from research to practice and in moving important ergonomic problems from practice to research. The panelists are from a variety of industry sectors and academia. The session will start with a 5-minute introductory statement from each panelist; therefore, most of the session will be a discussion between panelists and the audience on the topic. On the research side there is difficulty in conducting good research capable of demonstrating a safety or productivity value for promising ergonomic interventions. Problems include poor access to workplaces to conduct the research, lack of funding, difficulty obtaining a control group, etc. Some practitioners believe that well-designed research is not necessary for industry to make decisions on adoption. On the industry side barriers to adopting promising ergonomic interventions include lack of convincing data, cost, anticipation of reduced productivity, poor usability, poor acknowledgement of a problem, and history/legacy (“we have always done it this way and the process works”). Likewise, practitioners may have difficulty convincing academics to study ergonomic problems that they face daily in the workplace and they may perceive that academics study concepts that have little value for industry. Barriers for academics to take on these important topics may be related to funding, lack of clear design related solutions, limited impact, and research on a topic that is too applied or related to a proprietary idea. The goal is to improve understanding of different perspectives and generate ideas for improving the process of research to practice to research (RtPtR).

No abstract