Workers' assessments of manual lifting tasks: cognitive strategies and validation with respect to objective indices and musculoskeletal symptoms

ObjectivesTo determine the different cognitive strategies adopted by workers in assessing the effects of lifting-task parameters on effort, and to validate workers' assessments.MethodsQuestionnaires were administered to 217 male workers with varied levels of experience in manual handling. Workers were asked to assess the effects of lifting on perceived effort, using linguistic descriptors (e.g., light, heavy), and to determine the physical meaning of such descriptors. In addition, each worker assessed on-the-job effort, perceived risk of injury and work dissatisfaction, and musculoskeletal outcomes in a cross-sectional design.ResultsPerceived physical effort was significantly associated with lifting variables. Results indicated that the three-cluster strategy is the best performer. Weight of load emerged as the most influential factor that impacted on effort in the most dominant cluster (close to 50% of the observations). The second cluster (25% of the observations) demonstrated that weight, horizontal distance, and twisting angle, contributed equally to effort, and the third cluster had weight and vertical travel distance as the most important variables (with travel distance being more important). Perceived effort was significantly associated with objective indices (i.e., biomechanical lifting equivalent and NIOSH lifting index), and musculoskeletal symptoms in eight body parts.ConclusionsCognitive reasoning of experienced workers may be used as an active device for the evaluation of strenuous physical activities such as lifting tasks. Lifting activities are significantly associated with musculoskeletal symptoms, not only in the lower-back region, but also in seven other body parts; and effort may integrate the effects of both physical (lifting tasks) and non-physical (i.e., work dissatisfaction) factors, as well as perception of risk.

[1]  M M Ayoub,et al.  An Ergonomics Approach for the Design of Manual Materials-Handling Tasks , 1983, Human factors.

[2]  M Hagberg,et al.  Self‐Reported Physical Exertion in Geriatric Care: A Risk Indicator for Low Back Symptoms? , 1996, Spine.

[3]  Ash Genaidy,et al.  Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Symptoms in Single and Multiple Body Regions and Effects of Perceived Risk of Injury Among Manual Handling Workers , 2002, Spine.

[4]  W S Marras,et al.  A literature review of low back disorder surveillance measures and risk factors. , 1997, Clinical biomechanics.

[5]  B. Jonsson,et al.  Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. , 1987, Applied ergonomics.

[6]  S. Snook,et al.  A study of three preventive approaches to low back injury. , 1978, Journal of occupational medicine. : official publication of the Industrial Medical Association.

[7]  Waldemar Karwowski,et al.  An expert cognitive approach to evaluate physical effort and injury risk in manual lifting—A brief report of a pilot study , 2002 .

[8]  A. Burton,et al.  Back Injury and Work Loss: Biomechanical and Psychosocial Influences , 1997, Spine.

[9]  R. Norman,et al.  Disability Resulting From Occupational Low Back Pain: Part II: What Do We Know About Secondary Prevention? A Review of the Scientific Evidence on Prevention After Disability Begins , 1996, Spine.

[10]  E. R. Tichauer,et al.  Book Review: The Biomechanical Basis of Ergonomics: Anatomy Applied to the Design of Work Situations , 1978 .

[11]  D Coggon,et al.  Low back pain in Hong Kong: prevalence and characteristics compared with Britain. , 1995, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[12]  Yoji Hattori,et al.  Associations of self estimated workloads with musculoskeletal symptoms among hospital nurses , 2000, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[13]  D B Chaffin,et al.  A longitudinal study of low-back pain as associated with occupational weight lifting factors. , 1973, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[14]  Waldemar Karwowski,et al.  Use of human expertise in the evaluation of manual lifting activities , 1999 .

[15]  N. Hadler,et al.  Back pain in the workplace. What you lift or how you lift matters far less than whether you lift or when. , 1997, Spine.

[16]  K Ohlsson,et al.  Questionnaire-based mechanical exposure indices for large population studies--reliability, internal consistency and predictive validity. , 2001, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[17]  T. Waters,et al.  Evaluation of the revised NIOSH lifting equation. A cross-sectional epidemiologic study. , 1999, Spine.

[18]  A. Genaidy,et al.  Reliability and validity of self-reported assessment of exposure and outcome variables for manual lifting tasks: a preliminary investigation. , 2002, Applied ergonomics.

[19]  G. Borg Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. , 1982, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[20]  P. Buckle,et al.  Epidemiological study to investigate potential interaction between physical and psychosocial factors at work that may increase the risk of symptoms of musculoskeletal disorder of the neck and upper limb , 2002, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[21]  W. G. Allread,et al.  The Role of Dynamic Three-Dimensional Trunk Motion in Occupationally-Related Low Back Disorders: The Effects of Workplace Factors, Trunk Position, and Trunk Motion Characteristics on Risk of Injury , 1993, Spine.

[22]  A Garg,et al.  Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. , 1993, Ergonomics.

[23]  Thomas R. Waters,et al.  Applications manual for the revised NIOSH lifting equation , 1994 .

[24]  R. Norman,et al.  A comparison of peak vs cumulative physical work exposure risk factors for the reporting of low back pain in the automotive industry. , 1998, Clinical biomechanics.

[25]  T B Leamon,et al.  Research to reality: a critical review of the validity of various criteria for the prevention of occupationally induced low back pain disability. , 1994, Ergonomics.