Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools Research Articles

Validation of computer vision-based ergonomic risk assessment tools for real manufacturing environments.

This study contributes to understanding semi-automated ergonomic risk assessments in industrial manufacturing environments, proposing a practical tool for enhancing worker safety and operational efficiency. In the Industry 5.0 era, the human-centric approach in manufacturing is crucial, especially considering the aging workforce and the dynamic nature of the entire modern industrial sector, today integrating digital technology, automation, and sustainable practices to enhance productivity and environmental responsibility. This approach aims to adapt work conditions to individual capabilities, addressing the high incidence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). The traditional, subjective methods of ergonomic assessment are inadequate for dynamic settings, highlighting the need for affordable, automatic tools for continuous monitoring of workers' postures to evaluate ergonomic risks effectively during tasks. To enable this perspective, 2D RGB Motion Capture (MoCap) systems based on computer vision currently seem the technologies of choice, given their low intrusiveness, cost, and implementation effort. However, the reliability and applicability of these systems in the dynamic and varied manufacturing environment remain uncertain. This research benchmarks various literature proposed MoCap tools and examines the viability of MoCap systems for ergonomic risk assessments in Industry 5.0 by exploiting one of the benchmarked semi-automated, low-cost and non-intrusive 2D RGB MoCap system, capable of continuously monitoring and analysing workers' postures. By conducting experiments across varied manufacturing environments, this research evaluates the system's effectiveness in assessing ergonomic risks and its adaptability to different production lines. Results reveal that the accuracy of risk assessments varies by specific environmental conditions and workstation setups. Although these systems are not yet optimized for expert-level risk certification, they offer significant potential for enhancing workplace safety and efficiency by providing continuous posture monitoring. Future improvements could explore advanced computational techniques like machine learning to refine ergonomic assessments further.

Ergonomic Risk Assessment for Manual Handling Activities in Automotive Workshop

Ergonomic risk assessment tools are tools that have been designed to solve the problem of ergonomics in the workplace from manual material handling activities. The objective of this study is to investigate Musculoskeletal Discomfort among workers related to manual handling activities using Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaires (CMDQ); to assess an ergonomics risk factor among workers related to manual handling activities using Manual Handling Assessment Chart (MAC), NIOSH Lifting Equation(NLE), and Key Indicator Method for Manual Handling Operation (KIM-MHO) method and; to compare the results between CMDQ and assessment tools. This case study was conducted in Parit Raja, Johor, Malaysia involving 34 male mechanics workers. The tools used are as stated in the objective with the help of measurement tools such as a goniometer. The result of the CMDQ reveals that the body part with the highest discomfort level among the workers in the lower back, shoulder right and shoulder left with the percentage from the total discomfort score of 20.91%, 13.57%, and 13.36% respectively. From the result of the assessments, it is concluded that the highest risk factor contributing to the MSDs is the bad posture of the worker during the manual handling operation followed by the frequency of lifting and the weight of the load. By comparing assessment tools, the first comparison is made between the CMDQ versus KIM-MHO, MAC Tools and NLE. In this comparison that, it is highlighted the result type from CMDQ are different from the KIM-MHO, MAC Tools and NLE as its questionnaire result shows us the discomforts levels on the body of workers and the body parts affected on their body for the last seven days but the assessment tools results show us the risk factor that contributes to the MSDs. For the comparison between the three assessment tools, it can be said that the tools that have the highest correlation with CMDQ are MAC Tools. In conclusion, most workers suffer from MSDs in their lower back due to their bad posture during manual handling. KIM-MHO is the best assessment tool among the three as it has the highest significance value while being the easiest tool to be used.

Engineering ergonomic risk assessment of karate choku zuki straight punch

This study utilizes the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) technique to evaluate suggested improvements aimed at enhancing the safety and efficacy of the Choku Zuki (Straight Punch), a high-risk karate exercise. The primary objective is to identify and address potential musculoskeletal issues associated with this technique. Given the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries in sports, particularly in activities with high intensity like karate, the need for reliable ergonomic risk assessment tools such as RULA is paramount. By applying RULA to analyze the ergonomic aspects of the Choku Zuki punch, this study provides crucial insights into potential areas of concern. It identifies specific postures and movements that may predispose practitioners to injury, allowing for the development of targeted interventions to mitigate risks and enhance safety. Furthermore, this research underscores the importance of integrating ergonomic considerations into sports training regimens to optimize performance and minimize injury risks. Beyond its implications for karate training, the study emphasizes the broader significance of ergonomic assessments in sports science and engineering. It showcases how engineering methodologies can be leveraged to improve the safety, efficiency, and overall performance of sporting activities, fostering collaboration between sports scientists, engineers, athletes, coaches, and healthcare professionals to advance sports performance and safety standards.lities.

Engineering Ergonomic Risk Assessment of Karate Choku Zuki Straight Punch

This study utilizes the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) technique to evaluate suggested improvements aimed at enhancing the safety and efficacy of the Choku Zuki (Straight Punch), a high-risk karate exercise. The primary objective is to identify and address potential musculoskeletal issues associated with this technique. Given the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries in sports, particularly in activities with high intensity like karate, the need for reliable ergonomic risk assessment tools such as RULA is paramount. By applying RULA to analyze the ergonomic aspects of the Choku Zuki punch, this study provides crucial insights into potential areas of concern. It identifies specific postures and movements that may predispose practitioners to injury, allowing for the development of targeted interventions to mitigate risks and enhance safety. Furthermore, this research underscores the importance of integrating ergonomic considerations into sports training regimens to optimize performance and minimize injury risks. Beyond its implications for karate training, the study emphasizes the broader significance of ergonomic assessments in sports science and engineering. It showcases how engineering methodologies can be leveraged to improve the safety, efficiency, and overall performance of sporting activities, fostering collaboration between sports scientists, engineers, athletes, coaches, and healthcare professionals to advance sports performance and safety standards.lities.

Comparison of ten widely-use ergonomic risk assessment tools based on evaluations of various manual materials handling activities

Comparison of ten widely-use ergonomic risk assessment tools based on evaluations of various manual materials handling activities

An ergonomic evaluation using a deep learning approach for assessing postural risks in a virtual reality-based smart manufacturing context

This study proposes an integrated ergonomic evaluation designed to identify unsafe postures, whereby postural risks during industrial work are assessed in the context of virtual reality-based smart manufacturing. Unsafe postures were recognised by identifying the displacements of the centre of mass (COM) of body keypoints using a computer vision-based deep learning (DL) convolutional neural network approach. The risk levels for the identified unsafe postures were calculated using ergonomic risk assessment tools rapid upper limb assessment and rapid whole-body assessment. An analysis of variance was conducted to determine significant differences between the vertical and horizontal directions of postural movements associated with the most unsafe postures. The findings assess the ergonomic risk levels and identify the most unsafe postures during industrial work in smart manufacturing using DL method. The identified postural risks can help industry managers and researchers acquire a better understanding of unsafe postures.

Assessing Musculoskeletal Disorder Risks in an Automobile Part Manufacturing Factory: A Comparison Study of Biomechanical and Ergonomic Tools

Background: Various tools and methods are available to assess the risk of musculoskeletal injuries in occupational settings, each considering different assessment criteria. While these methods have been previously studied, further comparative investigations are still needed. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in workers performing various tasks using different ergonomic and biomechanical risk assessment tools and to compare the outcomes of these tools. Methods: This analytical and cross-sectional study was conducted in a sector of the SAIPA Automobile Part Manufacturing Factory in Iran. A total of 33 workers engaged in lifting, grinding, pushing, and lowering activities participated. Lifting activities involved handling parts weighing 36, 7.9, and 3.4 kg at three workstations. In total, six tasks were examined, and workers' discomfort levels were evaluated using the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaires (CMDQ). Fourteen biomechanical and ergonomic risk assessment tools were utilized and compared. Kendall's tau-b correlation coefficient and Cohen's kappa agreement coefficient were applied to determine relationships between different tools and to match the measurement of risk levels, respectively. Additionally, the mean and standard deviation of the data were calculated. Results: There was a high positive correlation between the outcomes of three biomechanical tools [3D static strength prediction programTM (3DSSPP), hand-calculation back compressive force (HCBCF), and JACK], with 3DSSPP and HCBCF being interchangeable for estimating lumbar spine loads. Ergonomic assessment tools showed a suitable correlation in assessing load-carrying tasks. Manual handling assessment charts (MAC) had perfect agreement with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and SNOOK with Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA). Among body posture evaluation methods, rapid upper limb assessment (RULA) and rapid entire body assessment (REBA) had the highest correlation. Lifting fatigue failure tool (LiFFT) correlated well with manual handling methods, and survival chance correlated better with body posture evaluation methods. Lowering activities were identified as the most hazardous. Conclusions: Ease of use and accuracy are key considerations when selecting biomechanical risk assessment tools. Experienced assessors can effectively utilize JACK, 3DSSPP, and HCBCF. The MAC and NIOSH, as well as RULA and REBA tools, are interchangeable. Selecting appropriate tools requires consideration of their limitations and advantages.

Managing ergonomic risk assessment among assembly operators in the small‐scale fabrication sector

AbstractIn the small‐scale fabrication sector, employee health and safety are the most important aspects for improving productivity and quality. There is a lack of risk assessment and limited information on human handling and ergonomic approaches in the working environment of the small‐scale fabrication sector. This study aims to analyze the association of human handling risk factors with work‐related musculoskeletal disorder (WMSD) symptoms among assembly operators and to evaluate the proposed ergonomic intervention for a high‐risk work task using ergonomic risk assessment tools such as Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). A questionnaire survey and observation were conducted across seven work categories. The analysis using RULA and REBA revealed that cleaning, fitting, and assembling have a high‐risk level that requires ergonomic intervention. The virtual design of the proposed ergonomic workstation for high‐risk work tasks was created using CATIA software and evaluated using RULA and REBA analyses. Job and organizational factors were found to be the main contributors to WMSD, while individual factors, awareness levels, and ergonomic risk assessment had insignificant effects on WMSD. Based on RULA and REBA scores, the proposed ergonomic intervention significantly reduces risk by 30%–47%, improving overall health and safety for operators in diverse work activities.

Ergonomic Risk Assessment of Manufacturing Works in Virtual Reality Context

Industry 4.0 is potentially innovative in the workers’ role, which is becoming increasingly involved in smart activities. In this situation, it is necessary to improve highly repetitive uncomfortable working postures to reduce physical risks. This study intends to assess physical risks during VR interaction for manufacturing work. Posture-related physical risk levels were calculated using ergonomic risk assessment tools RULA, REBA, and OWAS. Three task conditions were considered for the experiment in a VR-based car-assembly environment. An analysis of variance was applied to investigate significant differences between task conditions, and it suggested that a higher risk level was obtained while working in the overhead position for RULA and REBA, whereas the squatting position obtained a higher risk level for OWAS. Sensitivity analysis identified that the upper arm and neck were responsible for the highest risk level for RULA, the upper arm, neck, and trunk for REBA, and the back posture parameter for OWAS.

Recent advances in the ergonomic risk assessment of small-scale industry workers

Industrial workers' work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) cause muscle, tendon, and nerve injury. These injuries affect the health of the industrial worker. These injuries have an impact on the health of the industrial worker. The risk of WMSD in the workplace must be investigated and minimised. The risk level of WMSD is investigated using ergonomic risk assessment tools. The objective of this study is to observe recent advancements in the ergonomic risk assessment of industry workers between 2007 and 2022. The literature was collected from standard ergonomic publications by searching abstracts and titles for keywords such as 'ergonomic risk assessment methods', 'ergonomic evaluation', 'ergonomic intervention', and 'musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) '. Over the last 15 years, recent developments in the ergonomic risk assessment of industry workers have been reviewed. Each risk assessment tool described above is essential in determining the risk of MSD among employees.

Development of an educational protocol for ergonomic risk assessment of working postures to enhance the competence of occupational health nurses.

To develop a protocol and provide a valid, evidence-based procedure for identifying the ergonomic risk of working postures by occupational health nurses. Although ergonomic risk assessment tools have been used for the early detection of risky working postures, their operational procedures and validations do not target the competence of occupational nursing personnel. This study developed and validated an educational protocol, comprised of 13 procedures in five stages. First, the number of work tasks in the workplace is determined. Second, the working postures are confirmed. Third, the raters are trained to use the assessment tools. Fourth, high-risk postures are identified and categorized. Fifth, the inter-rater reliability of the tool is reported. The content of the protocol is validated by experts, with a validity value of 0.87. The protocol was created through review of literature published from 1991 to 2021, protocol development (between 2018 to 2020) and expert validation (2020). The protocol can be applied to educate occupational health nurses and increase their competence in detecting workers' ergonomic risks. It can be used as a reference in occupational health nursing education to evaluate work tasks and detect risky postures.

A data analytic end-to-end framework for the automated quantification of ergonomic risk factors across multiple tasks using a single wearable sensor

Existing ergonomic risk assessment tools require monitoring of multiple risk factors. To eliminate the direct observation, we investigated the effectiveness of an end-to-end framework that works with the data from a single wearable sensor. The framework is used to identify the performed task as the major contextual risk factor, and then estimate the task duration and number of repetitions as two main indicators of task intensity. For evaluation of the framework, we recruited 37 participants to complete 10 simulated work tasks in a laboratory setting. In testing, we achieved an average accuracy of 92% for task identification, 7.3% error in estimation of task duration, and 7.1% error for counting the number of task repetitions. Moreover, we showed the utility of the framework outputs in two ergonomic tools to estimate the risk of injury. Overall, we indicated the feasibility of using data from wearable sensors to automate the ergonomic risk assessment in workplaces.

Ergonomic Risk Assessment during an Informal Hand-Made Cookware Operation: Extending an Existing Model.

The work conducted in the informal sector is highly variable within and between days. Characterizing ergonomic exposures remains a challenge because of unstructured work settings and schedules. The existing ergonomic risk assessment tools have been widely used in formal work settings with a narrow range of exposure, and for predefined tasks that primarily constitute a daily routine. There is limited information in the literature on how they have been applied in informal workplaces. The aim of this study was to extend an existing risk assessment tool and to evaluate the applicability of the extended tool by assessing ergonomic exposure related to hand-made cookware operations. Eighteen hand-made cookware makers were recruited from six sites. A walkthrough risk assessment questionnaire was used to collect information on workers, tasks, work stations and workplace structures. The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) screening tool was extended by including duration and vibration. An action priority matrix was used to guide intervention. According to the RULA action levels, the workers required investigation and changes soon, and immediate investigation and changes. The use of an action priority matrix was appropriate, and indicated that all the workers assessed were within the high to very high exposure domain and required immediate corrective measures. The methodology used proved to be an effective and reliable strategy for identifying ergonomic exposure among hand-made cookware makers.

Combining Ergonomic Risk Assessment (RULA) with Inertial Motion Capture Technology in Dentistry-Using the Benefits from Two Worlds.

Traditional ergonomic risk assessment tools such as the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) are often not sensitive enough to evaluate well-optimized work routines. An implementation of kinematic data captured by inertial sensors is applied to compare two work routines in dentistry. The surgical dental treatment was performed in two different conditions, which were recorded by means of inertial sensors (Xsens MVN Link). For this purpose, 15 (12 males/3 females) oral and maxillofacial surgeons took part in the study. Data were post processed with costume written MATLAB® routines, including a full implementation of RULA (slightly adjusted to dentistry). For an in-depth comparison, five newly introduced levels of complexity of the RULA analysis were applied, i.e., from lowest complexity to highest: (1) RULA score, (2) relative RULA score distribution, (3) RULA steps score, (4) relative RULA steps score occurrence, and (5) relative angle distribution. With increasing complexity, the number of variables times (the number of resolvable units per variable) increased. In our example, only significant differences between the treatment concepts were observed at levels that are more complex: the relative RULA step score occurrence and the relative angle distribution (level 4 + 5). With the presented approach, an objective and detailed ergonomic analysis is possible. The data-driven approach adds significant additional context to the RULA score evaluation. The presented method captures data, evaluates the full task cycle, and allows different levels of analysis. These points are a clear benefit to a standard, manual assessment of one main body position during a working task.

Assessment tools analysis of work-related musculoskeletal disorders: strengths and limitations

Musculoskeletal disorders are one of the most common occupational diseases, affecting millions of workers in the European Union and costing employers billions of euros. Researching the relationships and possibilities of optimal mutual adaptation, under given conditions, both of human to his work and of work to humans, in order to increase the technical-economic efficiency, to optimize the conditions of satisfaction, motivation and work results, while maintaining the worker’s state of health also involves, as a basic stage, the assessment of the risks of osteomuscular-articular overload. Starting from a statistical synthesis on the incidence of MSD and the characteristic types of demands, the paper systematizes in a unitary vision the categories of methods, techniques and tools available for recording and evaluating the factors of physical and postural stress of workers. The pointed description of three of the most commonly applied ergonomic risk assessment tools, aimed at developing a synthesis of Strengths-Weaknesses type, which highlights the advantages of methods in counterbalance with their limitations, providing a first basis for selection in order to apply them in the practice of companies that are aware that investing in safety means investing in profit and not losing financial resources and implicitly human, material ones.

Application of AULA Risk Assessment Tool by Comparison with Other Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools.

Agricultural upper limb assessment (AULA), which was developed for evaluating upper limb body postures, was compared with the existing assessment tools such as rapid upper limb assessment (RULA), rapid entire body assessment (REBA), and ovako working posture analysis system (OWAS) based on the results of experts’ assessments of 196 farm tasks in this study. The expert group consisted of ergonomists, industrial medicine experts, and agricultural experts. As a result of the hit rate analysis, the hit rate (average: 48.6%) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (RULA: 33.3%, REBA: 30.1%, and OWAS: 34.4%). The quadratic weighted kappa analysis also showed that the kappa value (0.718) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (0.599, 0.578, and 0.538 for RULA, REBA, and OWAS, respectively). Based on the results, AULA showed a better agreement with expert evaluation results than other evaluation tools. In general, other assessment tools tended to underestimate the risk of upper limb posture in this study. AULA would be an appropriate evaluation tool to assess the risk of various upper limb postures.

ERGONOMIC ENGINEERING INTERVENTION OF BATIK STAMPING WORK TO REDUCE LIFTING LOAD

One of the common health problems for small and medium enterprise such as batik production is work-related musculoskeletal disorder (WMSD). This health problem may contribute to long-term medical effect on the production workers. For batik stamping workers, the load of the copper block that need to be used repetitively can reach up to 2kg. This study aims to reduce WMSD effect by reducing the lifting load of the cooper block handled by the batik stamping worker. The worker’s working load is observed before the intervention process by using one of the ergonomic risk assessment tools, Rapid Upper Limb Asssessment (RULA). The ergonomic intervention designed in this study is from the engineering approach by modifying tools. It is found out that the intervention done were able to eliminate the lifting load handled by the worker to avoid discomfort or further health complication. This outcome are hoped to be able to improve workers’ health and increase batik stamping work productivity that eventually increased company’s revenue.

CERA, An Integrated Tool for Ergonomic Risk Assessment

Despite decades of efforts the rate of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) is still very high. In case of WMSD the solution should be prevention that requires both safe machinery/equipment design and risk management at the workplace. To identify WMSD risk factors a wide range of ergonomic methods are available internationally, starting with simple check lists for hazard identification through paper and pencil based or spread sheet implemented software for screening or for risk assessment, ending with the now maturing computer technology with motion capture based imagining techniques. Although various collections exist that contain hundreds of ergonomic risk assessment tools very few of these are generally accepted and widely applied. The difficulty in particular is that a ’universal tool’ cannot be chosen because each method is valid for different situations some are for special activities others for distinct body parts, therefore selecting the appropriate method is an additional issue. At University of Obuda R&D project aims the development of a complex Ergonomics Risk Assessment methodology based on the EN 1005 standard series that allows the composite ergonomic risk assessment of workplaces regarding position, force, manual handling and repetitive motion. The newly invented methodology called CERA is for occupational safety and health practitioners with basic knowledge to apply it several versions according to different application conditions. For basic evaluation a paper and pencil method and for more detailed analysis a spread sheet is provided in which, all assessments of the EN 1005 standard series are included.

Effectiveness of Three Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools, Namely NERPA, RULA, and REBA, for Screening Musculoskeletal Disorders

Effectiveness of Three Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools, Namely NERPA, RULA, and REBA, for Screening Musculoskeletal Disorders

An improved physical demand analysis framework based on ergonomic risk assessment tools for the manufacturing industry

Most of the operational tasks in the manufacturing process entail numerous physical involvements, despite the introduction of automated equipment. Due to this high physical demand in manufacturing, the need for proactive risk assessment to decrease potential injury cannot be ignored. Physical Demand Analysis (PDA) is a widely used tool recommended to all manufactures by the Canadian Workers’ Compensation Board to document the physical, cognitive, and environmental demands of essential tasks. However, limitations exist in utilizing the content generated in current PDA practice to conduct risk identification and risk assessment, and it has limited functionality for providing modified work to proactively mitigate risk. This paper summarizes the input requirements of risk assessment tools and proposes an improved PDA form with an integrated framework to facilitate the comprehensive and intelligent use of PDA. This paper focuses on three aspects of PDA implementation—risk identification, risk evaluation, and risk mitigation—targeting the development of modified work for the manufacturing industry. The framework is implemented in a window and door manufacturing facility, and a case study of a window glazing station is described in this paper in order to assess awkward body postures. Four main ergonomic risk assessments and identifications are recommended.