The Comparison of Risk Factors Caused by Musculoskeletal Disorders in Female Assembly Workers utilizing MFA and NERPA Methods

سال انتشار: 1399
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 251

فایل این مقاله در 9 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_AOH-4-2_008

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 2 اسفند 1399

چکیده مقاله:

Background: Occupational injuries and work-related disabilities are among the most factors contributing to the creation of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in industry. Improper workstation and poor posture increase fatigue load and, eventually, the appearance of MSDs. In addition to reducing physical strength, MSDs mitigate accuracy, augment the accidents, and reduce job productivity. Hence, the purpose of this research was to assess the risk factors for MSDs in electrical devices assembly workers utilizing Muscle Fatigue Assessment (MFA) and Novel Ergonomic Pos­tural Assessment (NERPA). Methods: This study was one cross-sectional descriptive study in the year … and was conducted in one electrical device manufacturing workshop in Khuzestan province along with 84 female workers. 13 jobs and 32 postures were selected in this workshop. Nordic Questionnaire was used to determine the frequency of MSDs. Then, the risk levels were specified in the studied individuals with the use of MFA and NERPA. The obtained data were analyzed in SPSS software version 16. The statistical methods applied in this study were mean, standard deviation, frequency, frequency percentage, t-test of two independent samples, and correlation coefficient assessment. Furthermore, the significance level of statistical tests was considered to be P<0.05. Results: Findings obtained from MFA exhibited that the right wrist and waist were with 66.7%, neck and right shoulder were with 60% of workers and NERPA method results mentioned that the right wrist with 67.3% and the waist with 65.4% and neck with 61.3% and the right shoulder with 60.8% were at “very high” level of corrective actions priority, which these actions must be taken immediately. Also, statistical results indicated that there was a significant correlation between the results of Nordic, MFA, and NERPA questionnaires (P<0.05). Conclusion: Concerning the kind of activity and misuse of support, the highest percentage of risk was evident in the right wrist, waist, and neck. So, a proper design of workstation and implementation of managerial actions were proposed to minimize muscle fatigue. These two methods also had similarities. MFA method was preferred when it was required to assess all body parts. On the other hand, NERPA was applied to determine more details.

نویسندگان

Ameneh Golbaghi

MSc, Department of Occupational Health Engineering and Work Safety, Faculty of Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

Leila Nematpour

MSc, Department of Occupational Health Engineering and Work Safety, Faculty of Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

Behzad Fouladi dehaghi

Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Health Engineering and Work Safety, Faculty of Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran,Environmental Technologies Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Scienc

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • 1. Dale AM, Harris-Adamson C, Rempel D, Gerr F, Hegmann ...
  • 2. Ribeiro T, Serranheira F, Loureiro H. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders ...
  • 3. Khandan M, Sakhaei Z, Koohpaei A. Surveying the relationship between ...
  • 4. Haghshenas Z, Mahdavi S, Rokrok A, Almasian M. An Investigation ...
  • 5. Sadeghi F, Asilian H, Barati L. Evaluation of the body ...
  • 6. Kee D, Karwowski W. LUBA: an assessment technique for postural ...
  • 7. Mirmohamadi M, Nasl Seraji J, Shahtaheri J, Lahmi M, ...
  • 8. Habibi EA, Karimi S, Hasanzadeh A. Evaluation of ergonomic ...
  • 9. Karwowski W, Marras WS. Fundamentals and assessment tools for occupational ...
  • 10. Abdoli A. Body Mechanic and principle of work station ...
  • 11. Yektaee T, Tabatabaee Ghomshe F, Piri L. The effect ...
  • 12. Chubineh A. Posture analysis methods in occupational ergonomics. Tehran: ...
  • 13. Dillaton C, Sanders M. Diagnosis of work-related musculoskeletal disorders ...
  • 14. Ding J, Wexler AS, Binder-Macleod SA. A predictive model ...
  • 15. Lomond KV, Côté JN. Shoulder functional assessments in persons ...
  • 16. Nussbaum MA, Clark LL, Lanza MA, Rice KM. Fatigue ...
  • 17. Otto A, Scholl A. Incorporating ergonomic risks into assembly ...
  • 18. Cheshmehgaz HR, Haron H, Kazemipour F, Desa MI. Accumulated ...
  • 19. Bernardes JM, Wanderck C, Moro ARP. Participatory ergonomic intervention ...
  • 20. Choobineh A, Tabatabaei SH, Tozihian M, Ghadami F. Musculoskeletal ...
  • 21. Dehghan N, Choobineh A, Hasanzadeh J. Interventional ergonomic study ...
  • 22. Moghaddam AAK. Ergonomics Assessment Methods (physical assessment methods). : ...
  • 23. Kromark K, Dulon M, Beck B-B, Nienhaus A. Back ...
  • 24. Choobineh A, Lahmi M, Shahnavaz H, Khani Jazani R, ...
  • 25. Mokhtarinia HR, Shafiee A, Pashmdarfard M. Translation and localization ...
  • 26. Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A, Vinterberg H, Biering-Sørensen ...
  • 27. Stanton NA, Hedge A, Brookhuis K, Salas E, Hendrick ...
  • 28. Sanchez-Lite A, Garcia M, Domingo R, Sebastian MA. Novel ...
  • 29. Hedge A, Salas E, Stanton NA, Brookhuis K, Hendrick ...
  • 30. Motamedzade M, Saedpanah K, Eskandarian T, Salimi K. Risk ...
  • 31. Rodgers SH. Job evaluation in worker fitness determination. Occupational ...
  • 32. Ranganathan M. Ergonomic workplace analysis in an elevator manufacturing ...
  • 33. Jabari Z, honarbakhsh M, Zamanian Z. Survey of muscle ...
  • 34. Gheibi L, Ranjbarian M, Hatami H, Khodakarim S. The ...
  • 35. Habibi E, Haghshenas B, Zare M, Khakkar S. Risk ...
  • 36. Zokaei M, Flahati M, Jalilian H, Faghih M, Normohammadi ...
  • 37. Khandan M, Vosoughi S, Poursadeghiyan M, Azizi F, Ahounbar ...
  • 38. Habibi E, Sadeghi N, Mansouri F, Sadeghi M, Ranjbar ...
  • 39. Hafezi R, Mirmohammadi SJ, Mehrparvar AH, Akbari H, Akbari ...
  • 40. Motamedzade M, Hassan Beigi MR, Choobineh AR, Mahjoob H. ...
  • 41. Sadeghi F, Mazlomi A, Kazemi Z. Anthropometric survey among ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع