HARM overview and its application: some practical examples

Douwes, M.; Kraker, H. de

doi:10.3233/wor-2012-0700-4004

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was also important for the ergonomists that the method chosen could be executed quickly. The tools used were: Quick Exposure Check (QEC) [ 33 ], Hand Activity Level (HAL) [ 30 – 32 ], Hand Arm Risk Assessment method (HARM) [ 38 , 39 ], Assessment of Repetitive Task of the upper limbs (ART) [ 40 ], Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) [ 41 ], Key Indicator Method I (KIM I) [ 42 ], Key Indicator Method III (KIM III) [ 43 ], and Comprehensive Workplace Risk Assessments [ 44 ]. The ergonomists pointed out that the exposure assessment was facilitated if they could video record the work tasks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ergonomists’ experiences of executing occupational health surveillance for workers exposed to hand-intensive work: a qualitative exploration

Eliasson

Fjellman‐Wiklund

Dahlgren

et al. 2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In order to reduce work-related upper limb disorders, the Swedish Work Environment Authority introduced an occupational health surveillance targeting hand-intensive work. A process model, aimed at supporting the employers as well as the occupational health service provider (i.e., ergonomist) in the work process with the occupational health surveillance, was developed. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore ergonomists’ experiences of the execution of occupational health surveillance for hand-intensive work when following the novel process model as well as factors influencing the execution. Methods Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with ten ergonomists on one occasion regarding their experience of following the work process. Qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach was used for analyzing the data. Results The ergonomists’ experiences were summarized in one theme “A joint roadmap supporting a participatory process” and two categories “Clear structure provided by the components” and “The process influenced by collaboration and context”. The ergonomists valued being guided by the systematics of the model, which provided structure and clarity in their work. Factors affecting the execution were related to communication deficiencies and uncertainties regarding expectations between different roles and functions (e.g., ergonomists and contact person, lack of information to workers). Additional factors, for instance, companies’ routines and the ergonomist’s intra-organizational support, such as access to IT-resources, could also affect the process. Conclusions The findings reveal that this process model facilitates the ergonomists’ work and cooperation with a client company. However, the process model needs to be developed and accompanied by a guideline with information related to the process, including e.g., description of a start-up meeting and of the roles/functions of the involved parties.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ergonomists’ experiences of executing occupational health surveillance for workers exposed to hand-intensive work: a qualitative exploration

Eliasson

Fjellman‐Wiklund

Dahlgren

et al. 2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Assessment of repetitive tasks (ART) [36] • Hand-arm risk assessment method (HARM) [37,38] • Occupational repetitive actions checklist (OCRA) [39] • Quick exposure checklist (QEC) [40] • Strain index (SI) [41] • Repetitive work model (Physical ergonomics: provisions of the Swedish Work Environment Authority [SWEA-AFS]) [42]…”

Section: Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring ergonomists’ experiences after participation in a theoretical and practical research project on observational risk assessment tools

Eliasson

Forsman

Nyman

2021

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this qualitative study was to explore how ergonomists experienced an e-learning concept as a tool for knowledge translation; furthermore, to explore what, if any, impact the knowledge translation had regarding the ergonomists' work with risk assessments. Methods. Twelve Swedish ergonomists employed in the occupational health service (OHS) participated in a research project, which included an e-learning program in risk assessment training. Focus group interviews and individual interviews were used for data collection. Results. The ergonomists appreciated the e-learning concept, e.g., its flexibility enabled them to decide when and where to practice. The concept was considered feasible within the context of the OHS. The ergonomists experienced an increased knowledge of different observation-based risk assessment tools, which expanded their professional toolboxes. Additionally, they began to reflect more regarding the reliability of risk assessment tools and how to enhance quality in risk assessment assignments. Conclusion. This study showed that e-learning may comprise an efficient knowledge translation for improved risk assessments in the OHS. The program contributed to changes in ergonomists' risk assessment procedures, e.g., in the selection of tools, increasing the number of observers, employing a participatory approach and more often actively involving stakeholders during the risk assessment process.

show abstract

“…For the assessment of hand intensive and repetitive work, some of the more well-known and more commonly used methods are the Assessment of repetitive tasks of the upper limbs (ART) [ 24 ], the Hand Arm Risk Assessment Method (HARM) [ 25 ], the Occupational Repetitive Actions Checklist (OCRA) [ 26 ], the Quick Exposure Check (QEC) [ 27 ] and the Strain Index (SI) [ 28 ]. These methods have all been shown to have a reasonably good predictive ability, either in direct studies, or indirectly, for the methods that are based on another method or on epidemiologically documented risk factors [ 22 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Validity of Six Selected Observational Methods for Risk Assessment of Hand Intensive and Repetitive Work

Nyman

Rhén

Johansson

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk assessments of hand-intensive and repetitive work are commonly done using observational methods, and it is important that the methods are reliable and valid. However, comparisons of the reliability and validity of methods are hampered by differences in studies, e.g., regarding the background and competence of the observers, the complexity of the observed work tasks and the statistical methodology. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate six risk assessment methods, concerning inter- and intra-observer reliability and concurrent validity, using the same methodological design and statistical parameters in the analyses. Twelve experienced ergonomists were recruited to perform risk assessments of ten video-recorded work tasks twice, and consensus assessments for the concurrent validity were carried out by three experts. All methods’ total-risk linearly weighted kappa values for inter-observer reliability (when all tasks were set to the same duration) were lower than 0.5 (0.15–0.45). Moreover, the concurrent validity values were in the same range with regards to total-risk linearly weighted kappa (0.31–0.54). Although these levels are often considered as being fair to substantial, they denote agreements lower than 50% when the expected agreement by chance has been compensated for. Hence, the risk of misclassification is substantial. The intra-observer reliability was only somewhat higher (0.16–0.58). Regarding the methods ART (Assessment of repetitive tasks of the upper limbs) and HARM (Hand Arm Risk Assessment Method), it is worth noting that the work task duration has a high impact in the risk level calculation, which needs to be taken into account in studies of reliability. This study indicates that when experienced ergonomists use systematic methods, the reliability is low. As seen in other studies, especially assessments of hand/wrist postures were difficult to rate. In light of these results, complementing observational risk assessments with technical methods should be considered, especially when evaluating the effects of ergonomic interventions.

show abstract

HARM overview and its application: some practical examples

Cited by 10 publications

References 1 publication

Ergonomists’ experiences of executing occupational health surveillance for workers exposed to hand-intensive work: a qualitative exploration

Ergonomists’ experiences of executing occupational health surveillance for workers exposed to hand-intensive work: a qualitative exploration

Exploring ergonomists’ experiences after participation in a theoretical and practical research project on observational risk assessment tools

Reliability and Validity of Six Selected Observational Methods for Risk Assessment of Hand Intensive and Repetitive Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About