| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Neumann, W. Patrick, et al.
(author)
-
Innovation and employee injury risk in automotive disassembly operations
- 2018
-
In: International Journal of Production Research. - : Taylor & Francis. - 0020-7543 .- 1366-588X. ; 56:9, s. 3188-3203
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Engineering innovations in car disassembly systems are studied for affects on system operators’ risk of repetitive strain injury (RSI). Objective instrumented measures of injury risk factors with synchronized video-based task analyses were used to examine changes in operators’ RSI risk during two cases of engineering innovation: 1) a shift in industrial model from traditional extracting saleable parts to line-based full material recovery, and 2) the prospective effects of a simulated “Lean” inspired process improvement in the line system.Both cases of innovation showed significantly increased movement speeds and reduced muscular recovery opportunities, implying increased RSI risk. This case study reveals a mechanism by which innovation may increase RSI risks for operators. Managers responsible for engineering innovation should ensure their teams have the tools and mandate necessary to control injury hazards as part of the development and design process. These cases suggest how failure to manage RSI hazards in the innovation process may allow increases of injury risks that can compromise operational performance. This “innovation pitfall” has implications for operator health and organizational sustainability. Alternative pathways are discussed.
|
|
| 4. |
- Schiefer, Christoph, et al.
(author)
-
PEPPA - Exchange Platform for Measurements of Occupational Physical Activity and Physical Workload
- 2022
-
In: Proceedings of the 21st Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, IEA 2021 : Methods and Approaches - Methods and Approaches. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 2367-3389 .- 2367-3370. - 9783030746131 ; 223 LNNS, s. 175-182, s. 175-182
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Technical measurements allow an objective assessment of MSD risk factors at work. There is a need for common standards regarding data collection and processing, as well as an exchange platform storing measurement data of occupational physical activity and workload for further analysis. Several research institutes started a feasibility study to work on developing standards for assessment of risk factors and implement them in an exchange platform prototype. The first prototype already demonstrates a technical feasibility. Coordination and structure of the contents, as well as estimates of costs and efforts needed for further development need more examination in order to arrive at a final platform with good feasibility.
|
|
| 5. |
- Takala, Esa-Pekka, et al.
(author)
-
Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work
- 2010
-
In: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health. - : Finnish Institute of Occupational Health; National Research Centre for the  . - 0355-3140 .- 1795-990X. ; 36:1, s. 3-24
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: This systematic review aimed to identify published observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures in occupational settings and evaluate them with reference to the needs of different users.Methods: We searched scientific databases and the internet for material from 1965 to September 2008. Methods were included if they were primarily based on the systematic observation of work, the observation target was the human body, and the method was clearly described in the literature. A systematic evaluation procedure was developed to assess concurrent and predictive validity, repeatability, and aspects related to utility. At least two evaluators independently carried out this evaluation.Results: We identified 30 eligible observational methods. Of these, 19 had been compared with some other method(s), varying from expert evaluation to data obtained from video recordings or through the use of technical instruments. Generally, the observations showed moderate-to-good agreement with the corresponding assessments made from video recordings; agreement was the best for large-scale body postures and work actions. Postures of wrist and hand as well as trunk rotation seemed to be more difficult to observe correctly. Intra- and inter-observer repeatability were reported for 7 and 17 methods, respectively, and were judged mostly to be moderate or good.Conclusions: With training, observers can reach consistent results on clearly visible body postures and work activities. Many observational tools exist, but none evaluated in this study appeared to be generally superior. When selecting a method, users should define their needs and assess how results will influence decision-making
|
|
