Within and between Individual Variability of Exposure to Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorder Risk Factors

Industrial companies indicate a tendency to eliminate variations in operator strategies, particularly following implementation of the lean principle. Companies believe when the operators perform the same prescribed tasks, they have to execute them in the same manner (completing the same gestures and being exposed to the same risk factors). They attempt to achieve better product quality by standardizing and reducing operational leeway. However, operators adjust and modify ways of performing tasks to balance between their abilities and the requirements of the job. This study aims to investigate the variability of exposure to physical risk factors within and between operators when executing the same prescribed tasks. The Ergonomic Standard method was used to evaluate two workstations. Seven operators were observed thirty times between repeated cycle times at those workstations. The results revealed the variability of exposure to risk factors between and within operators in the repeated execution of the same tasks. Individual characteristics and operators’ strategies might generate the variability of exposure to risk factors that may be an opportunity to reduce the risks of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WR-MSDs). However, sometimes operators’ strategies may cause overexposure to risk factors; operators most often adopt such strategies to undertake their tasks while reducing the workload.

[1]  Allard J van der Beek,et al.  The effectiveness of physical and organisational ergonomic interventions on low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review , 2010, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[2]  M A Gilles,et al.  Intrinsic movement variability at work. How long is the path from motor control to design engineering? , 2016, Applied ergonomics.

[3]  Nicole Vézina,et al.  Élaboration d’un cadre de référence pour l’étude des stratégies : analyse de l’activité et étude de cas multiples dans deux usines de crabe , 2011 .

[4]  S. Mathiassen,et al.  Motor variability in occupational health and performance. , 2012, Clinical biomechanics.

[5]  Mohsen Zare,et al.  Evaluation of ergonomic physical risk factors in a truck manufacturing plant: case study in SCANIA Production Angers , 2016, Industrial health.

[6]  Divya Srinivasan,et al.  Between- and within-subject variance of motor variability metrics in females performing repetitive upper-extremity precision work. , 2015, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[7]  Quan Nha Hong,et al.  Economic evaluations of ergonomic interventions preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of organizational-level interventions , 2017, BMC Public Health.

[8]  Nicole Vézina,et al.  Analysis of worker strategies: A comprehensive understanding for the prevention of work related musculoskeletal disorders , 2015 .

[9]  Theoni Koukoulaki,et al.  The impact of lean production on musculoskeletal and psychosocial risks: an examination of sociotechnical trends over 20 years. , 2014, Applied ergonomics.

[10]  Mohsen Zare,et al.  Operational leeway in work situations: do ergonomic risk assessment tools consider operational leeway for job analysis? , 2019, International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics : JOSE.

[11]  Monique H W Frings-Dresen,et al.  Effects of job rotation on musculoskeletal complaints and related work exposures: a systematic literature review , 2015, Ergonomics.

[12]  U. Lundberg,et al.  Psychophysiological stress reactions, trapezius muscle activity, and neck and shoulder pain among female cashiers before and after introduction of job rotation , 2002 .

[13]  Sandrine Caroly,et al.  Marge de manœuvre situationnelle et pouvoir d’agir : des concepts à l’intervention ergonomique , 2015 .

[14]  Clément Beaucage,et al.  Are work organization interventions effective in preventing or reducing work-related musculoskeletal disorders? A systematic review of the literature. , 2017, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[15]  Svend Erik Mathiassen,et al.  Diversity and variation in biomechanical exposure: what is it, and why would we like to know? , 2006, Applied ergonomics.

[16]  Marina Heiden,et al.  Differences in motor variability among individuals performing a standardized short-cycle manual task. , 2017, Human movement science.

[17]  Tim Bosch,et al.  The influence of task variation on manifestation of fatigue is ambiguous – a literature review , 2014, Ergonomics.

[18]  N. Vézina,et al.  Comprendre la marge de manœuvre situationnelle : une question de retour durable au travail , 2016 .

[19]  Svend Erik Mathiassen,et al.  The size of cycle-to-cycle variability in biomechanical exposure among butchers performing a standardised cutting task , 2008, Ergonomics.

[20]  G. Schöner,et al.  Effects of varying task constraints on solutions to joint coordination in a sit-to-stand task , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[21]  M. de Looze,et al.  Is rotating between static and dynamic work beneficial for our fatigue state? , 2016, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.