hig.sePublikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Reliability testing of two ergonomic risk assessment tools
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Umeå University and Hospital, Sweden .
Högskolan i Gävle, Akademin för hälsa och arbetsliv, Avdelningen för arbets- och folkhälsovetenskap, CBF. Högskolan i Gävle, Centrum för belastningsskadeforskning.ORCID-id: 0000-0002-2091-6396
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Umeå University and Hospital, Sweden .
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Umeå University and Hospital, Sweden .
2012 (Engelska)Konferensbidrag, Poster (med eller utan abstract) (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
Abstract [en]

INTRODUCTION

Quick Exposure Check (QEC¹) and Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA²) are two ergonomic risk assessment tools that have been designed to be useful for ergonomists assessing musculoskeletal risk factors in upper extremities at workplaces.

AIM

The aim was to describe the variation between and within ergonomists assessments using QEC and RULA, and to compare the two tools regarding within-observer agreement.

SUBJECTS & METHODS

Twenty ergonomists observed five different work tasks twice with three weeks in between, watching video clips. They made ergonomic risk assessments using both QEC and RULA.

The observed work tasks were: Window replacement, nailing a wooden pallet, toilet cleaning, instrumentation in an operating theatre, and sorting post.

For the statistical analyses, percent agreement and kappa value was used.

RESULTS

There was a variation in assessments between the ergonomists in all positions and movements both when using QEC and RULA, except from assessing armposition when observing window replacement using QEC, where all ergonomists assessed the same position (figure 1).

The ergonomists had higher percent agreement between observation one and two using QEC compared with RULA (table 1).

CONCLUSION

There was a variation when assessing positions and movements in different worktasks both between ergonomists and within the same ergonomist using both QEC and RULA. However the agreement between two observations within observers was higher for QEC.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
2012.
Nyckelord [sv]
belastningsergonomi, observationsmetod, QEC, RULA, reliabilitet
Nationell ämneskategori
Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-12688OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-12688DiVA, id: diva2:547380
Konferens
NES2012 - Nordic Ergonomics Society Conference, Stockholm, 19-22 augusti 2012
Tillgänglig från: 2012-08-27 Skapad: 2012-08-27 Senast uppdaterad: 2018-03-13Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltext saknas i DiVA

Personposter BETA

Lindberg, Per

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Lindberg, Per
Av organisationen
CBFCentrum för belastningsskadeforskning
Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

urn-nbn
Totalt: 1342 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf