| Literature DB >> 35526069 |
Farnaz Bagherifard1, Hadi Daneshmandi2, Mansour Ziaei3, Haleh Ghaem4, Ruhollah Khoshbakht5, Omid Jaberi5, Alireza Choobineh6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Assessing physical workload is the most important step in deciding whether a workload is high and adopting appropriate control strategies to reduce physical workload. This study aimed to compare physical workload and Physical Work Capacity (PWC) among municipality cleaners in Shiraz to determine the number of workers needed to counterbalance physical workload.Entities:
Keywords: Cleaners; Maximum aerobic capacity; Physical work capacity; Physical workload
Year: 2022 PMID: 35526069 PMCID: PMC9080208 DOI: 10.1186/s13102-022-00476-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil ISSN: 2052-1847
Demographic and occupational details of the study population (n = 97)
| Quantitative variable | Mean ± standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 38.16 ± 7.65 | 25 | 65 |
| Work experience (years) | 9.99 ± 5.82 | 1 | 29 |
| Exercise hours per week | 0.99 ± 3 | 0 | 22 |
| Height (cm) | 172.90 ± 6.5 | 160 | 197 |
| Weight (kg) | 72.18 ± 12.68 | 47 | 107 |
| BMI (kg m−2) | 24.09 ± 3.74 | 16.9 | 34.16 |
BMI, Body Mass Index
Physiological parameters measured in the studied workers (n = 97)
| Variables in the laboratory | Mean ± Standard deviation |
|---|---|
| VO2-max (l min−1) | 2.60 ± 0.66 |
| PWC (kcal min−1) | 4.30 ± 1.09 |
PWC, Physical Work Capacity; RPE, Rating of Perceived Exertion
Number of workers needed to counterbalance physical workload for each municipality zone (n = 97)
| Municipality zone | Total number of workers in each zone | Number of the participant in each zone a | PWC (kcal min−1) | Energy expenditure | Number of participants with energy expenditure higher than PWC | Number of workers needed b | Percentage of required workers c | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | M | SD | ||||||
| 1 | 200 | 11 | 4.04 | 0.84 | 3.67 | 1.80 | 4 | 1.55 | 14.09 |
| 2 | 194 | 11 | 5.39 | 1.54 | 4.04 | 0.76 | 2 | 0.63 | 5.73 |
| 3 | 148 | 8 | 3.96 | 0.67 | 4.06 | 0.30 | 5 | 0.87 | 10.88 |
| 4 | 197 | 11 | 4.41 | 1.06 | 4.49 | 1.08 | 6 | 2.38 | 21.64 |
| 5 | 148 | 9 | 3.7 | 0.55 | 3.85 | 1.08 | 5 | 1.16 | 12.89 |
| 6 | 110 | 7 | 4.2 | 0.33 | 5 | 1.05 | 5 | 1.63 | 23.29 |
| 7 | 185 | 12 | 3.92 | 0.97 | 3.9 | 0.61 | 6 | 1.12 | 9.33 |
| 8 | 130 | 8 | 4.37 | 0.96 | 5.08 | 0.98 | 6 | 1.56 | 19.50 |
| 9 | 111 | 6 | 4.90 | 1.77 | 3.67 | 1.80 | 2 | 0.29 | 4.83 |
| 10 | 134 | 8 | 4.45 | 0.78 | 3.84 | 0.30 | 1 | 0.26 | 3.25 |
| 11 | 97 | 6 | 3.79 | 0.92 | 3.72 | 0.184 | 3 | 0.62 | 10.33 |
| Total | 1654 | 97 | 4.3 | 1.09 | 4.12 | 1.01 | 45 | 12.08 | 12.45 |
c = (b ÷ a) × 100
PWC, Physical Work Capacity
Fig. 1Percentage of workers with energy expenditure higher/lower than their PWC in “real condition” and “condition with added 12.45% workforce”