988368
سه شنبه 6 آذر 1403
دوره 16، شماره 1 - ( March 1396 )
جلد 16 شماره 1 صفحات 16-11 |
برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khandan M, Vosoughi S, Poursadeghiyan M, Azizi F, Ahounbar E, Koohpaei A. Ergonomic Assessment of Posture Risk Factors Among Iranian Workers: An Alternative to Conventional Methods. Iranian Rehabilitation Journal 2018; 16 (1) :11-16
URL: http://irj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-739-fa.html
URL: http://irj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-739-fa.html
Ergonomic Assessment of Posture Risk Factors Among Iranian Workers: An Alternative to Conventional Methods. مجله انگلیسی زبان توانبخشی. 1396; 16 (1) :11-16
چکیده: (8517 مشاهده)
Objectives: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are a global problem which evolves at different workplaces such as industries, administrative, and agriculture sectors. In various studies, such disorders were assessed through multiple methods. It is necessary to evaluate different tools to use them in diverse communities. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the new ergonomic evaluating method of Novel Ergonomic Postural Assessment (NERPA) method in Iran.
Methods: The employees (n=455) of operational units of four companies (drug producers, printing and publishing houses, dairy, and drinks producers) were assessed in 2014. It was a cross-sectional and descriptive-analytical study. One of the researchers developed a questionnaire that was applied to collect demographic data. The NERPA, Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) methods were utilized to analyze posture risk factors. Spearman correlation and Kappa agreement were used to analyze the collected data through SPSS V22.
Results: Findings indicated that printing company had the best and pharmaceutical industries had the worst state regarding RULA’s results. The risk levels between NERPA and REBA were not statistically significant (P>0.05), however, that was significant with RULA’s outcome. Also, the results of NERPA and other two methods were correlated significantly (P<0.05). Pain in the lumbar area was implied to be the most prevalent problem (35.1%).
Discussion: Data of the present study suggest that NERPA method was a valid tool compared to RULA. The NERPA method could be used to evaluate standing tasks among industrial workers. However, the concurrent validity of NERPA method compared with results of REBA, as a widely used method, were not verified.
Methods: The employees (n=455) of operational units of four companies (drug producers, printing and publishing houses, dairy, and drinks producers) were assessed in 2014. It was a cross-sectional and descriptive-analytical study. One of the researchers developed a questionnaire that was applied to collect demographic data. The NERPA, Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) methods were utilized to analyze posture risk factors. Spearman correlation and Kappa agreement were used to analyze the collected data through SPSS V22.
Results: Findings indicated that printing company had the best and pharmaceutical industries had the worst state regarding RULA’s results. The risk levels between NERPA and REBA were not statistically significant (P>0.05), however, that was significant with RULA’s outcome. Also, the results of NERPA and other two methods were correlated significantly (P<0.05). Pain in the lumbar area was implied to be the most prevalent problem (35.1%).
Discussion: Data of the present study suggest that NERPA method was a valid tool compared to RULA. The NERPA method could be used to evaluate standing tasks among industrial workers. However, the concurrent validity of NERPA method compared with results of REBA, as a widely used method, were not verified.
