Measurement Consistency Among Observational Job Analysis Methods During an Intervention Study

Joseph, Caroline; Imbeau, Daniel; Nastasia, Iuliana

doi:10.1080/10803548.2011.11076884

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Drinkaus et al (2003), Russell et al (2007), and van der Beek et al (2005) also found differences between the methods. Also Joseph, Imbeau, and Nastasia (2011) showed that OCRA was fairly consistent in describing the exposure. Those results, like the results of this study, suggest that proper workstation assessment may require using more than one method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to analyse the convergence of two methods by comparing exposure and the assessed risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders at 18 repetitive task workstations. The already established occupational repetitive actions (OCRA) and the recently developed upper limb risk assessment (ULRA) produce correlated results (R = 0.84, p = 0.0001). A discussion of the factors that influence the values of the OCRA index and ULRA's repetitive task indicator shows that both similarities and differences in the results produced by the two methods can arise from the concepts that underlie them. The assessment procedure and mathematical calculations that the basic parameters are subjected to are crucial to the results of risk assessment. The way the basic parameters are defined influences the assessment of exposure and risk assessment to a lesser degree. The analysis also proved that not always do great differences in load indicator values result in differences in risk zones.Practitioner Summary: We focused on comparing methods that, even though based on different concepts, serve the same purpose. The results proved that different methods with different assumptions can produce similar assessment of upper limb load; sharp criteria in risk assessment are not the best solution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research showed REBA's convenience for postural assessment of jobs in several occupational settings, including industrial and health care jobs (Kee and Karwowski, 2007;Chiasson et al, 2012;Janowitz et al, 2006), construction (Shanahan et al, 2013), sawmill tasks (Jones and Kumar, 2007;, supermarket industry (Coyle, 2005), food industry (Joseph et al, 2011), computer based jobs (Pillastrini et al, 2007), packaging (Lasota, 2014), school workshop (Hashim et al, 2012), odontological services (De Sa et al, 2006) and for firefighters and emergency medical technicians (Gentzler and Stader, 2010).…”

Section: Uses and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Entire Body Assessment: A Literature Review

Madani¹,

Dababneh²

2016

American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this review is to provide a summary of one of the observational postural analysis ergonomic assessment tools; Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) in terms of its development, applications, validity and limitations. Research showed REBA's convenience for postural assessment of jobs in numerous professional settings, including industrial and health care jobs, construction, sawmill tasks, supermarket industry, food industry, computer based jobs, packaging, school workshop, odontological services and for firefighters and emergency medical technicians. Face validity is established in two stages. In terms of concurrent validity, several studies used REBA to compare the results with other observational and direct methods so that the level of conformity between the two is determined. The limitations discussed in this review did not hold the method's implementation back, on the contrary, it is currently used and remains a rapid to use tool with computerized checklist and tables available in public domain.

show abstract

“…However, the selection of a method and the tools to be used in the analysis often becomes an obstacle to professionals in the field of workers' health due to the large variety of techniques and instruments available, work characteristics, and the resources available for data collection and analysis 12 . In this sense, some studies have been conducted with the purpose of comparing the results obtained by the methods of direct measurement, observational protocols, and questionnaires [13][14][15][16][17][18] . The latter are the most used in clinical practice, because, besides the low cost, they enable the evaluation of various occupational activities and a large number of workers 12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avaliação do risco ergonômico em trabalhadores da indústria têxtil por dois instrumentos: quick exposure check e job factors questionnaire

Comper

Padula

2013

Fisioter. Pesqui.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A análise dos fatores de risco ergonômicos presentes em indústrias têxteis auxilia no planejamento de estratégias que contribuem para a melhora das condições de trabalho e redução dos distúrbios osteomusculares. Este estudo se propôs a mensurar os níveis de exposição aos fatores de risco ergonômicos em trabalhadores de dois setores de produção de uma indústria têxtil. Para tanto, os instrumentos Job Factors Questionnaire (JFQ) e o Quick Exposure Check (QEC) foram aplicados em 107 trabalhadores. Os resultados foram analisados por estatística descritiva. O teste de Mann-Whitney foi utilizado para comparação dos resultados obtidos entre os setores de produção. O diagnóstico do nível de exposição ao risco ergonômico, obtido por ambos os instrumentos, foi moderado. Os fatores de risco considerados pelo JFQ como mais criticos estão relacionados à temperatura ambiental; postura mantida em longos períodos de tempo; posturas inadequadas para coluna e continuar trabalhando quando está com alguma dor ou com alguma lesão. O QEC identificou as regiões de coluna lombar e punhos/mãos como expostas ao alto risco. Não houveram diferenças estatisticamente significante entre os setores.

show abstract

Measurement Consistency Among Observational Job Analysis Methods During an Intervention Study

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods

Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods

Rapid Entire Body Assessment: A Literature Review

Avaliação do risco ergonômico em trabalhadores da indústria têxtil por dois instrumentos: quick exposure check e job factors questionnaire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About