Literature DB >> 17362654

A comparison of three observational techniques for assessing postural loads in industry.

Dohyung Kee1, Waldemar Karwowski.   

Abstract

This study aims to compare 3 observational techniques for assessing postural load, namely, OWAS, RULA, and REBA. The comparison was based on the evaluation results generated by the classification techniques using 301 working postures. All postures were sampled from the iron and steel, electronics, automotive, and chemical industries, and a general hospital. While only about 21% of the 301 postures were classified at the action category/level 3 or 4 by both OWAS and REBA, about 56% of the postures were classified into action level 3 or 4 by RULA. The inter-method reliability for postural load category between OWAS and RULA was just 29.2%, and the reliability between RULA and REBA was 48.2%. These results showed that compared to RULA, OWAS, and REBA generally underestimated postural loads for the analyzed postures, irrespective of industry, work type, and whether or not the body postures were in a balanced state.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17362654     DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2007.11076704

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Occup Saf Ergon        ISSN: 1080-3548


  14 in total

1.  Evaluation of ergonomic physical risk factors in a truck manufacturing plant: case study in SCANIA Production Angers.

Authors:  Mohsen Zare; Agnes Malinge-Oudenot; Robert Höglund; Sophie Biau; Yves Roquelaure
Journal:  Ind Health       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 2.179

Review 2.  Musculoskeletal disorders: OWAS review.

Authors:  Marta Gómez-Galán; José Pérez-Alonso; Ángel-Jesús Callejón-Ferre; Javier López-Martínez
Journal:  Ind Health       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 2.179

3.  Risk Assessment for Musculoskeletal Disorders in Forestry: A Comparison between RULA and REBA in the Manual Feeding of a Wood-Chipper.

Authors:  Margherita Micheletti Cremasco; Ambra Giustetto; Federica Caffaro; Andrea Colantoni; Eugenio Cavallo; Stefano Grigolato
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Measuring Biomechanical Risk in Lifting Load Tasks Through Wearable System and Machine-Learning Approach.

Authors:  Ilaria Conforti; Ilaria Mileti; Zaccaria Del Prete; Eduardo Palermo
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 3.576

5.  Evaluation of ergonomic factors and postures that cause muscle pains in dentistry students' bodies.

Authors:  Masoumeh Shirzaei; Ramazan Mirzaei; Ali Khaje-Alizade; Mahdi Mohammadi
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2015-07-01

6.  Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods.

Authors:  Danuta Roman-Liu; Anna Groborz; Tomasz Tokarski
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Comparing the Effectiveness of Three Ergonomic Risk Assessment Methods-RULA, LUBA, and NERPA-to Predict the Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders.

Authors:  Saeid Yazdanirad; Amir Hossein Khoshakhlagh; Ehsanollah Habibi; Asma Zare; Mohammad Zeinodini; Fatemeh Dehghani
Journal:  Indian J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2018 Jan-Apr

Review 8.  An Overview of REBA Method Applications in the World.

Authors:  Manuel Hita-Gutiérrez; Marta Gómez-Galán; Manuel Díaz-Pérez; Ángel-Jesús Callejón-Ferre
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-04-12       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders and Postural Stress of the Women Cultivators Engaged in Uprooting Job of Rice Cultivation.

Authors:  Amitava Pal; Prakash C Dhara
Journal:  Indian J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2018 Sep-Dec

10.  Application of AULA Risk Assessment Tool by Comparison with Other Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools.

Authors:  Kyeong-Hee Choi; Dae-Min Kim; Min-Uk Cho; Chae-Won Park; Seoung-Yeon Kim; Min-Jung Kim; Yong-Ku Kong
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-05       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.