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
Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland.
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland,.
Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Lund, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2010 (English)In: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, ISSN 0355-3140, E-ISSN 1795-990X, Vol. 36, no 1, p. 3-24Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to identify published observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures in occupational settings and evaluate them with reference to the needs of different users.

Methods: We searched scientific databases and the internet for material from 1965 to September 2008. Methods were included if they were primarily based on the systematic observation of work, the observation target was the human body, and the method was clearly described in the literature. A systematic evaluation procedure was developed to assess concurrent and predictive validity, repeatability, and aspects related to utility. At least two evaluators independently carried out this evaluation.

Results: We identified 30 eligible observational methods. Of these, 19 had been compared with some other method(s), varying from expert evaluation to data obtained from video recordings or through the use of technical instruments. Generally, the observations showed moderate-to-good agreement with the corresponding assessments made from video recordings; agreement was the best for large-scale body postures and work actions. Postures of wrist and hand as well as trunk rotation seemed to be more difficult to observe correctly. Intra- and inter-observer repeatability were reported for 7 and 17 methods, respectively, and were judged mostly to be moderate or good.

Conclusions: With training, observers can reach consistent results on clearly visible body postures and work activities. Many observational tools exist, but none evaluated in this study appeared to be generally superior. When selecting a method, users should define their needs and assess how results will influence decision-making

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 36, no 1, p. 3-24
Keywords [en]
posture, review, risk assessment, workload
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-5814ISI: 000273439100002PubMedID: 19953213Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-77949899304OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-5814DiVA, id: diva2:275615
Funder
Nordic Council of Ministers, 411040 - 70107Available from: 2009-11-06 Created: 2009-11-06 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

PubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Mathiassen, Svend Erik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mathiassen, Svend Erik
By organisation
CBFCentre for Musculoskeletal Research
In the same journal
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health
Occupational Health and Environmental Health

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 1157 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