hig.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Zetterberg, Camilla, PhDORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-2919-3921
Alternative names
Publications (5 of 5) Show all publications
Zetterberg, C., Heiden, M., Lindberg, P., Nylén, P. & Hemphälä, H. (2019). Reliability of a new risk assessment method for visual ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 72, 71-79
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Reliability of a new risk assessment method for visual ergonomics
Show others...
2019 (English)In: International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, ISSN 0169-8141, E-ISSN 1872-8219, Vol. 72, p. 71-79Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction

The Visual Ergonomics Risk Assessment Method (VERAM) is a newly developed and validated method to assess visual ergonomics at workplaces. VERAM consists of a questionnaire and an objective evaluation.

Objective

To evaluate reliability of VERAM by assessing test-retest reliability of the questionnaire, and intra- and inter-rater reliability of the objective evaluation.

Methods

Forty-eight trained evaluators used VERAM to evaluate visual ergonomics at 174 workstations. The time interval for test-retest and intra-rater evaluations was 2–3 weeks, and the time interval for inter-rater evaluations was 0–2 days. Test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation (ICC), the standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC). Intra- and inter-rater reliability were assessed with weighted kappa coefficients and absolute agreement. Systematic changes were analysed with repeated measures analyses of variance and Wilcoxon sign rank test.

Results

The ICC of the questionnaire indices ranged from 0.69 to 0.87, while SEM ranged from 7.21 to 10.19 on a scale from 1 to 100, and SDC from 14.42 to 20.37. Intra-rater reliability of objective evaluations ranged from 0.57 to 0.85 (kappa coefficients) and the agreement from 69 to 91%. Inter-rater reliability of objective evaluations ranged from 0.37 to 0.72 (kappa coefficients) and the agreement from 52 to 87%.

Conclusion

VERAM is a reliable instrument for assessing risks in visual work environments. However, the reliability might increase further by improving the quality of training for evaluators. Complementary evaluations of VERAM's sensitivity to changes in the visual environment are needed.

Relevance to industry

It is advantageous to set up a work environment for maximal visual comfort to avoid negative effects on work postures and movements and thus prevent visual- and musculoskeletal symptoms. This method, VERAM, satisfies the need of a valid and reliable tool for determining risks associated with the visual work environment.

Keywords
eyestrain, musculoskeletal, lighting, illuminance, glare, flicker
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28745 (URN)10.1016/j.ergon.2019.04.002 (DOI)2-s2.0-85064888978 (Scopus ID)
Funder
AFA Insurance, 130166
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2019-09-30Bibliographically approved
Heiden, M., Zetterberg, C. & Mathiassen, S. E. (2019). Trunk and upper arm postures in paper mill work. Applied Ergonomics, 70, 90-96
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Trunk and upper arm postures in paper mill work
2019 (English)In: Applied Ergonomics, ISSN 0003-6870, E-ISSN 1872-9126, Vol. 70, p. 90-96Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this study was to assess postures andmovements of the trunk and upper arm during paper mill work, and to determinethe extent to which they differ depending on method of assessment. For each oftwenty-eight paper mill workers, postures and movements were assessed duringthree full shifts using inclinometer registration and observation from video. Summary metrics for each shift, e.g.,10th, 50th, and 90th posture percentile, were averagedacross shifts and across workers. In addition, the standard deviation between workers,and the standard deviation between shifts within worker were computed. The resultsshowed that trunk and arm postures during paper mill work were similar to otheroccupations involving manual materials handling, but the velocity of armmovements were lower. While postures determined by inclinometry and observationwere similar on a group level, substantial differences were found betweenresults obtained by the two methods for individual workers, particularly for extremepostures. Thus, measurements by either method on individuals or small groupsshould be interpreted with caution.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019
Keywords
exposure, inclinometry, observation
National Category
Other Health Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-26535 (URN)10.1016/j.apergo.2018.12.004 (DOI)000457665400011 ()30642529 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85058455988 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2010-0748Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2009-1761
Available from: 2018-05-03 Created: 2018-05-03 Last updated: 2019-08-16Bibliographically approved
Heiden, M., Zetterberg, C., Lindberg, P., Nylén, P. & Hemphälä, H. (2019). Validity of a computer-based risk assessment method for visual ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 72, 180-187
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Validity of a computer-based risk assessment method for visual ergonomics
Show others...
2019 (English)In: International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, ISSN 0169-8141, E-ISSN 1872-8219, Vol. 72, p. 180-187Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective

To describe the development of a computer-based risk assessment method for visual ergonomics, and assess its face validity, content validity, and internal consistency.

Methods

The 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.

Results

The 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.

Conclusion

Our 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 industry

Visual 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.

Keywords
eyestrain, musculoskeletal, lighting, illuminance, glare, flicker
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28726 (URN)10.1016/j.ergon.2019.05.006 (DOI)2-s2.0-85065916273 (Scopus ID)
Funder
AFA Insurance, 130166
Available from: 2018-11-30 Created: 2018-11-30 Last updated: 2019-08-20Bibliographically approved
Zetterberg, C., Heiden, M., Lindberg, P., Nylén, P. & Hemphälä, H. (2018). Intra-rater reliability of the Visual Ergonomics Risk Assessment Method (VERAM). In: : . Paper presented at IEA 2018 - The 20th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, 26-30 August 2018, Florence, Italy.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Intra-rater reliability of the Visual Ergonomics Risk Assessment Method (VERAM)
Show others...
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Introduction: Visually demanding near work can cause eye discomfort, and eye and neck/shoulder discomfort during, e.g., computer work are associated. Apart from visual demands and dryness a number of environmental factors including design of the work station, lighting, glare, and the quality of the computer screen might exert an impact on eye-related symptoms. To date, there is a lack of valid and reliable instruments assessing factors associated with eye- or visual symptoms. Therefore, a new method to assess visual ergonomics at workplaces was developed in Sweden between 2014 and 2016, the Visual Ergonomics Risk Assessment Method - VERAM. A first version of the method was drafted by the researchers mainly from existing checklists and instruments, and tested in the field by trained visual ergonomists. The method was then revised and used in the field to collect data for validity and reliability analyses. The final version of VERAM includes both a questionnaire for the employee, and an expert evaluation of the employee’s workplace. The questionnaire consists of subjective ratings in six domains: eye discomfort (frequency and intensity), musculoskeletal discomfort (frequency and intensity), ratings of visual symptoms (e.g. blurred and double vision) and ratings of the visual environment (e.g. illumination levels, glare and reflexes from a work object or a computer screen). The expert evaluation consists of both objective measurements and subjective assessments resulting in an overall expert risk assessment (no risk, low risk or high risk) of eight factors: daylight, lighting, illuminance, glare, flicker, work space, work object and work posture.

Aim: At the IEA conference 2018 the new VERAM method will be presented together with results from intra-rater reliability analyses.

Results: Intra-rater reliability was evaluated with a re-test interval of minimum two and maximum three weeks. 99 employees were included in the analyses and 32 visual ergonomists performed the corresponding expert evaluations. The Intraclass Correlations (ICC) were between 0.70 and 0.87 for the six subjective domains, and there were no significant systematic differences between the first and second rating for any of the subjective domains (rmANOVA, p > 0.05, α = 0.008). For the eight environmental factors the expert estimated the risk equally during the first and the second assessment in 69-92% of the cases, and, as seen for the subjective domains, there were no significant systematic differences for any of the eight factors (Wilcoxon sign rank test, p > 0.014, α = 0.006). To control for multiple comparisons the Bonferroni method was used.

Conclusion: The Visual Ergonomics Risk Assessment Method – VERAM showed good intra-rater reliability, both for the subjective questionnaire for the employee, and for the expert evaluation of the employee’s workplace when performed by a trained visual ergonomist.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28758 (URN)
Conference
IEA 2018 - The 20th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, 26-30 August 2018, Florence, Italy
Funder
AFA Insurance, 130166
Available from: 2018-12-04 Created: 2018-12-04 Last updated: 2018-12-06Bibliographically approved
Jahncke, H., Edvinsson, J., Bjärntoft, S., Hallman, D., Mathiassen, S. E., Larsson, J. & Zetterberg, C. (2018). Symposium: Återhämtning och ledarskap i flexibla arbeten: resultat från ett forskningsprojekt på Trafikverket. In: Lindberg, Per (Ed.), FALF KONFERENS 2018 Arbetet – problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?   10-12 juni 2018 Gävle: Program och abstracts. Paper presented at FALF 2018 konferens 'Arbetet - problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?', 10-12 juni 2018, Gävle (pp. 78). Gävle: Gävle University Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Symposium: Återhämtning och ledarskap i flexibla arbeten: resultat från ett forskningsprojekt på Trafikverket
Show others...
2018 (Swedish)In: FALF KONFERENS 2018 Arbetet – problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?   10-12 juni 2018 Gävle: Program och abstracts / [ed] Lindberg, Per, Gävle: Gävle University Press , 2018, p. 78-Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [sv]

Introduktion

Den stressrelaterade ohälsan ökar i samhället i stort och det är möjligt att bristande återhämtning kan vara bidragande. Det finns dock ännu inte några tydliga svar på hur ett gynnsamt mönster av arbete och återhämtning bör se ut. Frågan om balansen mellan krav i arbetet och möjligheter till återhämtning är särskilt aktuell i yrken där digital teknik möjliggör flexibelt arbete, dvs. ett arbete där de anställda till stor del själva kan styra över sin arbetstid, sitt arbetsställe och/eller sitt arbetssätt. Möjligheten att arbeta flexibelt kan innebära både för- och nackdelar för såväl individen som organisationen och medföra nya utmaningar för chefer när det gäller hur de ska leda sina medarbetare på ett hälsofrämjande sätt. Samtidigt kan flexibiliteten underlätta för medarbetare att få ihop livspusslet och att anpassa arbetsinsatsen utifrån arbetstoppar, vilket kan gynna organisationens produktivitet. Risken är dock att den stressrelaterade ohälsan ökar om balansen mellan arbete och återhämtning rubbas genom t.ex. övertidsarbete och ständig tillgänglighet till arbetet på ogynnsamma tider.

Det här symposiet presenterar resultat från ett forskningsprojekt som undersökt flexibelt arbete på Trafikverket. I ett första steg genomfördes en kartläggning av arbetsvillkor, återhämtning och hälsa med hjälp av en webbaserad enkät till 4926 anställda. Resultaten från kartläggningen har sedan legat till grund för fokusgruppsdiskussioner med chefer och medarbetare, där åtgärdsförslag har tagits fram i syfte att förstärka fördelarna och reducera riskerna med flexibelt arbete. Även åtgärdsförslagen från fokusgrupperna kommer att presenteras vid symposiet.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Gävle: Gävle University Press, 2018
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28864 (URN)978-91-88145-28-4 (ISBN)
Conference
FALF 2018 konferens 'Arbetet - problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?', 10-12 juni 2018, Gävle
Note

Symposiebidrag:

1. Flexibelt arbete och återhämtningHelena Jahncke, Johanna Edvinsson, Sofie Bjärntoft, David Hallman, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Johan Larsson, Camilla Zetterberg

2.Ledarskap vid flexibelt arbeteJohan Larsson, Camilla Zetterberg, Sofie Bjärntoft, Johanna Edvinsson, David Hallman, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Helena Jahncke

3.Bestämningsfaktorer i flexibelt arbete som bidrar till upplevd balans mellan arbete och fritidSofie Bjärntoft, David Hallman, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Johan Larsson, Johanna Edvinsson, Camilla Zetterberg, Helena Jahncke

4.Åtgärder för att främja god arbetsmiljö och hälsa vid flexibelt arbeteCamilla Zetterberg, Sofie Bjärntoft, Johan Larsson, Johanna Edvinsson, Helena Jahncke

Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2018-12-17Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-2919-3921

Search in DiVA

Show all publications