hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
An evaluation of methods assessing the physical demands of manual lifting in scaffolding.
University of Gävle, Belastningsskadecentrum.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1443-6211
2005 (English)In: Applied Ergonomics, ISSN 0003-6870, E-ISSN 1872-9126, Vol. 36, no 2, p. 213-222Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Four methods assessing the physical demands of manual lifting were compared. The scaffolding job was evaluated and three distinct scaffolding tasks were ranked using: (1) the revised NIOSH lifting equation (NIOSH method), (2) lifting guidelines for the Dutch construction industry (Arbouw method), (3) rapid appraisal of the NIOSH lifting equation (practitioners' method), and (4) systematic observations. For the three first-mentioned methods the same dataset was used; observation took place in a different setting in the same company. At job level, all methods indicated that ergonomic interventions are required to protect scaffolders from an increased risk for low back pain. The NIOSH, Arbouw and practitioners' method resulted in a similar ranking order of tasks (transport>construction>dismantlement). In contrast, the observational method gave transport the lowest ranking. The underlying cause was probably that the observational method is more sensitive to durations of tasks and lifting within tasks than the three other methods.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2005. Vol. 36, no 2, p. 213-222
Keywords [en]
Adult, Biomechanics, Human Engineering, Humans, Lifting, Male, Middle Aged, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Netherlands, Occupational Diseases etiology prevention & control, Task Performance and Analysis, United States
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-2874DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.012ISI: 000227108600012PubMedID: 15694076OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-2874DiVA, id: diva2:119536
Available from: 2007-11-28 Created: 2007-11-28 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedfulltext

Authority records BETA

Mathiassen, Svend Erik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mathiassen, Svend Erik
By organisation
Belastningsskadecentrum
In the same journal
Applied Ergonomics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 960 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf