SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Forsman Mikael) ;pers:(Kjellberg Katarina)"

Sökning: WFRF:(Forsman Mikael) > Kjellberg Katarina

  • Resultat 1-10 av 10
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  • Forsman, Mikael, et al. (författare)
  • Inter-ergonomist Reliability in Rating Risk Level - without any Specific Method - in Ten Video Recorded Work Tasks
  • 2014
  • Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
    • 1.  IntroductionRecently, 30 observational methods for assessment of biomechanical exposures at work were evaluated through a literature review (Takala et al., 2010). It was found that several methods are insufficiently tested in terms of validity and reliability. In only in a few cases have estimates of the components of the methods been validated against technical measurements. Also comparisons between methods' resulting risk levels are rare. Swedish Work Environment Authority has recently increased the demands on ergonomic risk assessments. These assessments are usually made by ergonomists in occupational health services (OHS).This study is included in a larger on-going project, with the overall purpose to evaluate six observational methods for assessment of biomechanical exposures of repetitive work in respect of validity, reliability and usability, as well as provide information on which of the methods are best suited for practitioners in risk assessment of repetitive work. The methods' resulting risk levels are compared not only to each other, but also to ergonomists’ “own” risk estimates (i.e., done without any specific method). The specific aim of this sub-study was to investigate the inter-observer reliability of ergonomists’ own risk estimates.2.  MethodsNine OHS-ergonomists, all with more than 5 years of experience of general ergonomic risk assessments, made risk assessments of 10 different video-recorded (2-6 minutes) work-tasks (supermarket work, meat cutting and packing, engine assembly, cleaning, post sorting and hairdressing). Video sequences of two or three camera angles were synchronized and showed together. For each work-task, the ergonomists were given data of the work task length (see Table 1), pause- and rests schedules, weights of handled goods, physical factors, and the employees own ratings of discomfort, work demands and own control.The ergonomist could pause the playback as needed, the maximum allocated time per work-task assessment was 20 minutes. The risk of musculoskeletal disorders and need for improvements was rated into green (no risk), yellow (investigate further), and red (immediate risk) categories. Ratings were done for 8 specific body regions: neck, lower back, right and left shoulders, -arms/elbows, and -wrists/hands), and for one over-all risk level.The agreement of the ratings (in percent), and Light’s multi-observer kappa (i.e. Cohen’s pairwise kappa averaged over all pairs; Light, 1971; Cohen, 1960) were calculated per body region and for the over-all risk assessment.3.  ResultsFor the 720 (9 ergonomists, 8 body regions, 10 work tasks) risk assessments of the separate body regions, 37% were green, 44% yellow and 19% red. For over-all risk assessments (Table 1), 14% were green, 50% yellow and 36% red.Table 1. Work tasks, hours per work task per work day, and the ergonomists ratings of over risk            As seen in Table 1, the consistency between the observers differed markedly.  For three of the work tasks all three categories were represented, only in one task all ergonomists rated the over-all risk equally. The average agreement of the ratings were 48% regarding the body regions, and 57% regarding the over-all risk assessments, Light’s kappa was 0.18 and 0.30, respectively.4.  DiscussionThe results showed fair inter-observer reliability according to Altman’s table for interpretation of kappa (kappa between 0.21 and 0.40; Altman, 1991). These kappa values will, in the major project, be compared to those of six systematic observation methods.5.  ReferencesAltman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall.Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960;20(1):37–46.Light RJ. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: Some generalizations and alternatives. Psychological Bulletin. 1971;76(5):365–377.Takala EP et al. 2010. Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work. Scand J Work E
  •  
2.
  •  
3.
  • Forsman, Mikael, et al. (författare)
  • Reliability in twelve ergonomists’ three-category risk ratings in ten video recorded work tasks.
  • 2015
  • Ingår i: Proceedings 19<sup>th</sup> Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015.
  • Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
    • The Swedish Work Environment Authority has recently increased the demands on ergonomic risk assessments. These assessments are usually made by ergonomists in occupational health services (OHS). Although they are many observational methods that may be used (Takala, Pehkonen et al. 2010), the ergonomists often do risk assessment by sole observation, based on his/her own knowledge and experience, without the use of any specific method.This study is included in a larger on-going OBS project, with the overall purpose to evaluate six observational methods for assessment of biomechanical exposures of repetitive work in respect of validity, reliability and usability, as well as provide information on which of the methods are best suited for practitioners in risk assessment of repetitive work. The methods' resulting risk levels will be compared not only to each other, but also to the ergonomists’ “own” assessments (without any specific method) of the risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders.The specific aim of this sub-study was to investigate the inter-observer reliability of ergonomists’ own risk assessments without any specific method
  •  
4.
  •  
5.
  • Grooten, Wilhelmus Johannes Andreas, et al. (författare)
  • Health risk appraisals in Swedish occupational health services
  • 2016
  • Ingår i: Work. - : IOS Press. - 1051-9815 .- 1875-9270. ; 55:4, s. 849-859
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Background: Health risk appraisals (HRAs) in occupational health services (OHS) in Sweden are very commonly used for health promotion issues, but not much research has explored the extent and nature of individual feedback that is provided.Objectives: This study aimed to describe and explore HRAs in OHS regarding the content of the feedback in relation to the individual status and overall employee satisfaction.Methods: Feedback (evaluation and advice) and employee satisfaction with HRA were studied in employees that participated in health risk appraisals with a specific feedback session (HRA-F) (n = 272) and employees that participated in a single session (HRA-S) (n = 104). Associations between feedback and individual status concerning life style were assessed with Cohen's kappa (k).Results: The employees received mainly information and advice for improvement on health and lifestyle issues (89-100%), while advice for improvement of working conditions was less common (15-59%). The feedback provided on life style was not based on individual status (k < 0.4), except for smoking and risky alcohol consumption (k > 0.55). A great majority of employees reported good overall satisfaction with their HRAs.Conclusions: The evaluation and feedback given to employees after HRAs should be based more on HRA-results and advice could be focused more on work-related factors.
  •  
6.
  • Grooten, Wilhelmus Johannes Andreas, et al. (författare)
  • Non-participation in initial and repeated health risk appraisals : a drop-out analysis based on a health project
  • 2019
  • Ingår i: BMC Health Services Research. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1472-6963. ; 19:1
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • BACKGROUND: Health risk assessment (HRAs) are commonly used by occupational health services (OHS) to aid workplaces in keeping their employees healthy, but for unknown reasons, many employees choose not to participate in the HRAs. The aim of the study was to explore whether demographic, lifestyle and health-related factors in employees are associated with non-participation in initial and repeated HRAs.METHODS: In an OHS-based health project, 2022 municipal employees were asked to participate in three repeated HRAs. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used so as to determine associations between non-participating and demographic, lifestyle and health-related factors (e.g. biomarkers).RESULTS: Among the employees who were asked to participate in the health project, more than half did not participate in any HRA and among those who did, more than one third did not participate in repeated HRAs. Young age, male sex and being employed in the Technical department or Health and Social Care department in comparison with being employed in the department for Childcare and Education were factors significantly associated with non-participation in the initial HRA. These factors, together with being on sick leave and having unhealthy dietary habits, were factors associated with non-participation in repeated HRAs.CONCLUSIONS: Among the non-participators in initial HRAs and in repeated HRAs younger men and those already related to ill-health were overrepresented. This implicates that health care providers to a higher extent should focus on "those most needed" and that employers should be more engaged in results of repeated HRA's. Future studies should focus on modifiable variables that could make the HRAs more attractive and inclusive.
  •  
7.
  • Kjellberg, Katarina, et al. (författare)
  • Comparisons of six observational methods for risk assessment of repetitive work - results from a consensus assessment
  • 2015
  • Ingår i: Proceedings 19<sup>th</sup> Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015.
  • Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
    • During last decades several risk assessment methods for physical ergonomics have been developed. In a literature review 30 observational methods for assessment of biomechanical exposures at work were evaluated (1). It was found that several methods are insufficiently tested in terms of validity and reliability. Comparisons between methods' resulting risk levels are rare. The Swedish Work Environment Authority has recently emphasized the demands on risk assessments of musculoskeletal disorders (2). Practitioners mostly use observational methods to assess biomechanical risks(1). Despite a recent study comparing eight methods evaluating risk factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders (3), there is a lack of knowledge and guidance on which methods are the most effective and valid.This study is part of a larger on-going project, the OBS-project, with the overall purpose to evaluate six observational methods for assessment of biomechanical exposures of repetitive work in respect of validity, reliability and usability. A further purpose is to provide information on which of the methods are best suited for practitioners in risk assessment of repetitive work. The specific aim of this sub-study was to investigate the agreement between six observational methods for risk assessment of repetitive work by comparing the risk levels as assessed by a group of experts.
  •  
8.
  • Nyman, Teresia, et al. (författare)
  • A Web-Based Model for Teaching Risk Assessment Methods
  • 2014
  • Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
    • 1.  IntroductionDuring the last decades many risk assessment methods for physical ergonomics have been developed. However, recent studies have shown that the knowledge about these methods is very limited among ergonomists in the occupational health services. Although there are both shorter courses and full Master programs on ergonomics on advanced level within the regular educational system (university level), there is a lack of more informal, easy-to-access educational material on different risk assessment methods.2.  MethodsAs a part of a larger ongoing project investigating the validity, reliability and usability of six observational methods for risk assessment of repetitive work, a web-based pedagogical model aimed at facilitating the teaching and the dissemination of risk assessment methods has been developed.The web-based model consists of recorded lectures and self-supported training using a video library of different work tasks. The model uses a web-based platform originally developed for student-teacher communication in a university setting. The platform supports group discussions and possibilities for interaction with teachers.As a part of the project, the model are now being tested, by letting 12 ergonomists from the occupational health services with more than 5 years of experience of ergonomic risk assessments learn six different observational methods for risk assessment of repetitive work. The six methods are:Occupational Repetitive Actions (OCRA) checklistQuick exposure checklist Quick Exposure Check (QEC)Strain Index (SI)Assessment of Repetitive Tasks (ART)Hand Arm Risk-assessment Method (HARM)Model for assessment of repetitive work by the Swedish Work Environment AuthorityAfter learning the six different methods, the ergonomists are given an evaluation questionnaire, specific for each method. The questionnaires are then used for designing group interviews concerning both the usability of the methods, as well as the web-based pedagogical model.3.  ResultsPreliminary questionnaire analyses and interviews indicate that the ergonomists are mainly positive to the present web-based pedagogical model. Group interviews are carried out during spring 2014, and further results will be presented at the conference.
  •  
9.
  •  
10.
  • Nyman, Teresia, et al. (författare)
  • Reliability and Validity of Six Selected Observational Methods for Risk Assessment of Hand Intensive and Repetitive Work
  • 2023
  • Ingår i: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. - : MDPI. - 1661-7827 .- 1660-4601. ; 20:8, s. 5505-
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • 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.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-10 av 10

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy