| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Bjärntoft, Sofie, et al.
(författare)
-
A participatory approach to identify key areas for sustainable work environment and health in employees with flexible work arrangements
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Sustainability. - : MDPI. - 2071-1050. ; 13:24
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Flexible work arrangements are common worldwide, but knowledge on how to achieve a sustainable work environment is sparse. The aim of this study was to use a participatory approach to identify concrete suggestions and key areas for improvement that were considered relevant, effective, and feasible for promoting good work environment and health at organizational, work group and individual level (O-G-I), among office employees with flexible work arrangements. Eight focus group interviews (including 45 employees) were conducted in a large Swedish government agency in 2017. By using a Tree diagram approach, employees made a total of 279 suggestions for improvements, which were sorted into O-G-I levels and mapped into 18 key areas. We found that 13 key areas addressed organizational level (e.g., improving leadership, policy, job demands, and work efficiency), two key areas addressed group level (create common rules of availability and activity-based working), and three key areas addressed individual level (e.g., individuals’ responsibility to clearly communicate their availability). The participatory process was effective in obtaining concrete suggestions and key areas in need of improvement, which may provide an action plan that can guide organizations in developing interventions to promote good work environment and health in flexible work.
|
|
| 6. |
- Glimne, Susanne, et al.
(författare)
-
Headaches in combination with visual ability, eye- and musculoskeletal strain in connection with visually demanding work tasks
- 2022
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Suboptimal visual ergonomics (i.e., the interaction between our vision, the light, the visual object, and the influence of other factors which impairs visibility) in work environment such as glare can cause headache in combination with eyestrain, visual ability, and musculoskeletal strain. Symptoms constituted to the syndrome of eyestrain has been well described among computer workers (see for example Han et al., 2013; Portello et al., 2012; Bhanderi et al., 2008; Mocci et al., 2001; Sanchez-Roman et al., 1996). However, research has not focused on investigating the presence of headaches associated with eye-related and musculoskeletal disorders among employees and visual related environmental factors.The purpose of presented research was to study the presence of headaches in combination with visual ability, eye- and musculoskeletal strain, and work ability in connection with visually demanding work. Trained assessors recruited study participants primarily from their regular clients in the OHS field. Evaluators were instructed to recruit participants with a variety of characteristics to ensure highly variable data, such as different work tasks, age, and gender. The participants mean age was 48.3 years (±10.3); 66% were women.A visual ergonomics risk assessment method (VERAM, Heiden et al. 2019; Zetterberg et al. 2017) was used to compile the participated workers subjective grading of headache, eye- and musculoskeletal strain using a questionnaire (n=430). At the same time, an evaluation of the visual environment was carried out, which established if there was a risk of glare associated with the implementation of work task (e.g., computer work and other related work such as industry, healthcare, and shipping industry). The frequency of headaches was divided into three categories; (1) no headache, (2) headache occasionally, and (3) headache a few times per week/almost every day. The measurements regarding evaluation of the visual environment used a photometer, an instrument which was available and that the assessors could use, usually a Hagner ScreenMaster or Hagner S1 / S2 / S3.About 65% of the workers reported headaches occasionally, a few times/week or almost every day. Among the workers with headaches reported about 29% of them that they experienced the headaches a few times/week or almost every day.Out of the workers with headaches reported 37% a severity of the headaches of more than 3 (on a scale of 1-10) and 5 % reported a severity of more than 6. About 40% of the workers also stated that the headaches affected their working ability. The headaches were mainly located around the eyes, forehead, or temples (70%) and came in the afternoon (69%). About 75% of the workers also reported that the headache disappeared or were reduced when they were off work for one night or over the weekend. The data collection showed that visual- related symptoms increased the higher the estimated headaches was.The musculoskeletal strain increased when the headache increased. When workers reported a high frequency of headaches 95% of them reported neck strain, 86% shoulder strain, 73% upper back strain, and 61% were reported arm strain.Moreover, only 8.2% of the workers rated their visual ability as bad or very bad, but at the same time, about 60% reported dim vision, 14% diplopia, and 59% problems changing focus at some time.Dividing the data into workers with experienced or unexperienced headaches this study has shown that there was a significant presence of headaches in combination with visual related symptoms regarding experienced photophobia (p=0.011), eye pain (p=0.015), diplopia (p=0.029), and arm strain (p=0.006). Further, the statistical analysis showed that there was a tendency of combination regarding headaches and visual ability (p=0.070).Dividing the data into workers with experienced or unexperienced headaches, our study showed that the frequency of headache increased due to high luminance levels within the visual field (p=0.044).This study concludes presence of headaches in combination with eye- and musculoskeletal strain performing work task such as computer work. Further, the presence of headaches is due to visual ability induced by high luminance levels within the visual field.
|
|
| 7. |
- Heiden, Marina, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
Validity of a computer-based risk assessment method for visual ergonomics
- 2019
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0169-8141 .- 1872-8219. ; 72, s. 180-187
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveTo describe the development of a computer-based risk assessment method for visual ergonomics, and assess its face validity, content validity, and internal consistency.MethodsThe risk assessment method contained a questionnaire for the worker, an evaluation form for the evaluator, a section of follow-up questions based on the worker's responses, and a section for recommended changes, including an overall risk assessment with respect to daylight, lighting, illuminance, glare, flicker, work space, work object and work postures, respectively. Forty-eight trained evaluators used the method to perform 224 workplace evaluations. Content validity of the method was assessed by the completeness and distribution of responses, and internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha, Spearman's rank correlation between items and indices, and exploratory factor analysis.ResultsThe proportion of missing values in items was generally low (questionnaire: 0–2.3%; evaluation form: 1.4–4.1%). In the questionnaire, items about double vision, migraine and corrective lenses had limited information content. Cronbach's alpha and item-index correlations for the indices frequency of eyestrain, intensity of eyestrain, visual symptoms, lighting conditions, frequency of musculoskeletal discomfort and intensity of musculoskeletal discomfort were satisfactory. Based on the factor analysis, suggestions for improving some of the indices were made.ConclusionOur findings suggest that this computer-based method is a valid instrument for assessing risks in the visual work environment. By incorporating subjective ratings by the worker as well as objective measurements of the work environment, it provides a good basis for recommendations with respect to daylight, lighting, work surfaces/material, and work object.Relevance to industryVisual environment factors, such as glare, can cause eyestrain, headache and musculoskeletal discomfort. This method satisfies the need of a valid tool for determining risks associated with the visual work environment. It contains both worker's ratings and objective measurements, and is designed to be used in different types of work.
|
|
| 8. |
- Hemphälä, Hillevi, et al.
(författare)
-
A method for assessing risks within visual ergonomics
- 2014
-
Ingår i: 11th International Symposium on Human Factors in Organisational Design and Management & 46th Annual Nordic Ergonomics Society Conference. - Santa Monica, CA, USA : The IEA PRESS. - 9788793130135 ; , s. 111-112
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- 1. IntroductionInsufficient visual ability can lead to strained work load for employees and can contribute to eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort, “the eye leads the body” (Anshel, 2005). An optimal visual environment provides physical conditions for work in the best possible way. Visually demanding work, such as computer work, is associated with eye discomfort, headaches and muscle pains in mainly the neck and shoulders (Rosenfield, 2011). For computer workers in North America studies show that 75-90 % of the workers reported subjective symptoms from the eyes (Anshel, 2005). The causality between eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort is not fully understood, but studies have shown that straining the eyes increases the musculoskeletal activity in neck and shoulders (trapezius), and a link between visually demanding work, eye problems, headache and/or muscle problems have been found (Aarås et al., 2001; Richter et al., 2008; Zetterlund et al., 2009; Zetterberg et al., 2013). A study of call-center workers in Sweden showed that 21% of workers have both eyes and neck problems (Wiholm et al., 2007). Ergonomic problems also exist for professions where computer work is not dominant. Surgeons and other surgical personnel, with subjective eye discomfort, reported twice the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders when compared with staff without eye symptoms (Hemphälä et al., 2011). In an intervention study among postmen the eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort decreased after visual ergonomic interventions including customized eyeglasses and optimal lighting conditions (Hemphälä et al., 2012). Apart from health and well-being being affected by a poor visual ergonomic work environment, the quality and productivity are also involved (Eklund, 2009).Lighting is an important factor; both the lighting quantity (strength) and quality (e.g. light distribution, direction, glare and contrast). Too low illumination makes it difficult to see clearly and may thus lower performance, high illuminance can cause glare and lead to increased eye fatigue and decreased productivity (IESNA, 2011).2. MethodsThere are several factors to consider when developing a method for visual ergonomics risk assessment of subjective symptoms and discomfort of the eyes (Colon et al. 1999; Børsting et al., 2008, Knave et al., 1985). There are also checklists used in eye exams or medical appointments (Sheedy and Shaw-McMinn, 2002; Wilson & Corlett, 2005). These will be used as basis in the presents the project intended to develop a risk assessment instrument for visual ergonomics.3. ResultsA preliminary version of a risk analysis method for Visual Ergonomics has been developed and will be presented, with a focus on discussing with the audience which factors should primarily be included. The factors included so far in the method are the objective measurements such as illuminance, luminance contrast, uniformity values, expert assessment of the risk for glare; indirect measurements such as subjective ratings of the visual ability, eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort. The goal is to develop a practical time efficient method that is easy to use. With such a tool, actions needed to reduce the visual load among the workers, the companies and the society’s negative consequences induced by work-related eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort can hopefully be identified.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hemphälä, Hillevi, et al.
(författare)
-
A method for risk assessment within Visual Ergonomics
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association. ; , s. nr 1203-
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- IntroductionInsufficient visual ability can lead to increased work load and contribute to eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort, since “the eye leads the body” (Anshel, 2005). It has been shown that visually demanding work, such as computer work, is associated with eye discomfort, headaches and muscle pains in mainly the neck and shoulders (Rosenfield, 2011).Although the relation between eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort is not fully understood, studies have shown that straining the eyes increases the musculoskeletal activity in neck and shoulders (trapezius), and an association between visually demanding work, eye problems, headache and/or muscle problems have been found (Aarås et al., 2001; IESNA, 2011, Richter et al., 2008; Zetterberg et al., 2013). Problems due to insufficient visual ergonomics not only exist in computer intensive jobs, but in other professions as well. For example, surgeons and other surgical personnel that report eyestrain also report twice as much musculoskeletal discomfort from the upper part of the body (Hemphälä et al., 2011). In an intervention study among postmen, both eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort decreased after a visual ergonomic intervention. The intervention included providing customized eyeglasses and optimal lighting conditions (Hemphälä et al., 2012). Apart from health and well-being being affected by a poor visual ergonomic work environment, quality and productivity may also be reduced (Eklund, 2009).The aim of this paper is to present the first version of a practical, easy-to-use, and time-efficient risk assessment method for visual ergonomics. The development of the method including the evaluation will also be described. With such a method, risk factors within the visual environment can hopefully be detected, and interventions implemented in order to reduce the prevalence of symptoms related to poor visual ergonomics among workers.MethodsA first version of the method has been developed, mainly based on existing checklists and instruments (Colon et al. 1999; Børsting et al., 2008, Knave et al., 1985, Sheedy and Shaw-McMinn, 2002; Wilson & Corlett, 2005). During spring 2015, 30 ergonomists will be updated about visual ergonomics and introduced to the risk assessment method. Each ergonomist will thereafter use the method in 10 workplaces, yielding data and practical experiences from 300 risk assessments. These data will then be used to test the validity and reliability of the method, and if necessary to further develop it.ResultsThe first version of the risk assessment method for Visual Ergonomics will be presented at IEA 2015, together with results from the approximately 300 risk assessments made by the ergonomists. So far, the factors included in the method are objective measurements such as illuminance, luminance contrast, uniformity values, expert assessment of the risk for glare, and subjective ratings of the visual ability, eyestrain and musculoskeletal discomfort.DiscussionThe presented method will be compared to other similar methods. The used method for development will be discussed in relation to validity and reliability. Finally the presented risk assessment method will be discussed in relation to usefulness in prevention of discomfort and work related disorders at work places.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hemphälä, Hillevi, et al.
(författare)
-
Objective risk assessment of glare and subjective rating of the frequency of glare ‐ a visual ergonomics risk assessment, VERAM
- 2022
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Insufficient lighting conditions and glare from luminaires in the visual environment can affect our visual ability and cause eyestrain, headache, and musculoskeletal strain. Knave et al. found that the frequency of reported glare was associated with more eyestrain. In this study a subjectively rated frequency of glare was compared to an objectively rated risk for glare made by trained assessors.A visual ergonomics risk assessment method (VERAM) was used to gather data at workplaces, mainly computer workstations (n=420). Trained assessors (ergonomists) measured the luminance ratio and assessed the risk for glare (objective risk for glare) divided into three categories high risk (red), low risk (yellow) and no risk (green).Workers rated the frequency of experienced glare at their workplaces (subjective assessment of glare) via questionnaires. The frequency of subjective strain was divided into three categories; no, never; occasionally; a few times a week/almost always.Workers rated the frequency of glare present more seldom than the trained assessors rated the presence for risk for glare, at the same workplaces. One factor behind this might be individuals’ ability to evaluate the visual environment such as risk for glare. A trained assessor can easier evaluate any risks in the visual environment.When the objective risk for glare was assessed to be high (red) or low (yellow) the percentage of individuals reporting strain, such as eyestrain and musculoskeletal strain, increased for most symptoms compared to when there was no risk (green). An objective risk assessment for glare needs to be performed together with a subjective rating of the frequency of glare to find the individuals with problems.
|
|
