Evaluation of two working methods for screed floor layers on musculoskeletal complaints, work demands and workload

Abstract

Screed floors are bound by sand–cement (SF) or by anhydrite (AF). Sand–cement floors are levelled manually and anhydrite floors are self-levelling and therefore differences in work demands and prevalences of musculoskeletal complaints might occur. The objective was to assess among SF layers and AF layers (1) the prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints and (2) the physical work demands, energetic workload, perceived workload and discomfort. A questionnaire survey and an observational field study were performed. Compared with AF layers (n = 35), SF layers (n = 203) had higher, however, not statistically significant different, prevalences of neck (20% vs. 7%), shoulder (27% vs. 13%), low back (39% vs. 26%) and ankles/feet (9% vs. 0%) complaints. Sand–cement-bound screed floor layers (n = 18) bent and kneeled significantly longer (Δ77 min and Δ94 min; respectively), whereas AF layers (n = 18) stood significantly longer (Δ60 min). The work demands of SF layers exceeded exposure criteria for low back and knee complaints and therefore new working measures should be developed and implemented. Practitioner Summary: In comparison with anhydrite-bound screed floor layers, sand–cement-bound screed floor layers exceeded exposure criteria for work-related low back and knee complaints. New working methods and measures for sand–cement-bound screed floor layers should be developed and implemented to reduce the risk for work-related musculoskeletal complaints.