Volume 20, Issue 2 (2024)
ioh 2024, 20(2): 253-279 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Kouhnavard B, Khosravi Danesh M, Mazloumi A, Shamsipour M. Investigation general and specific methods of assessing ergonomic risk factors related to musculoskeletal disorders - a systematic review. ioh 2024; 20 (2) :253-279
URL: http://ioh.iums.ac.ir/article-1-3484-en.html
URL: http://ioh.iums.ac.ir/article-1-3484-en.html
Tehran University of Medical Sciences , karateka411@gmail.com
Abstract: (1085 Views)
Background and aims: Musculoskeletal disorders related to work are one of the most common causes of absenteeism. In order to reduce the damage caused by these disorders, first, we should try to identify the risk factors and the factors affecting it, and in the next step, evaluate them. The purpose of this article is a systematic review of the methods of risk assessment of ergonomic factors related to musculoskeletal disorders.
Methods: In this review, all articles published in Farsi and English in the field of ergonomic risk factor evaluation methods related to musculoskeletal disorders (March 2015 to December 2022) (last search date) were investigated. For this purpose, a systematic search of articles using Persian keywords (methodology, hand carrying loads, observational methods, instrumental methods, self-report methods, physical condition, questionnaire, musculoskeletal disorders, upper limb, lower limb, evaluation risk, ergonomic assessment, posture assessment) and their English equivalents were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of science, Cochrane library, Embase, SID, Scopus, Magiran Iran Medex databases. Unrelated articles were removed using PRISMA statement guidelines, and finally articles that were completely related to the study were examined. GraySource and BASE databases were used to find gray sources.
Results: Initially, 1176 articles were identified from different databases and a total of 82 articles were selected for final review. In some reliable sources, the risk assessment methods of ergonomic factors related to musculoskeletal disorders are classified into three categories: observational (42 articles), instrumental (11 articles) and self-report (29 articles). Pen-paper-based observational methods were among the most common methods used in ergonomic evaluations. Among the investigated individual reporting methods, the Nordic questionnaire was the most widely used tool (87% of the articles), followed by the Cornell questionnaire (13% of the articles). Some occupations, such as nurses, also have specific methods for assessing ergonomic risk factors (MAPO, DINO).
Conclusion: It is suggested that the ergonomic risk assessment methods of musculoskeletal disorders should be multi-factorial (individual, occupational and psycho-social) and specific methods should be developed for jobs with high diversity in job duties.
Methods: In this review, all articles published in Farsi and English in the field of ergonomic risk factor evaluation methods related to musculoskeletal disorders (March 2015 to December 2022) (last search date) were investigated. For this purpose, a systematic search of articles using Persian keywords (methodology, hand carrying loads, observational methods, instrumental methods, self-report methods, physical condition, questionnaire, musculoskeletal disorders, upper limb, lower limb, evaluation risk, ergonomic assessment, posture assessment) and their English equivalents were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of science, Cochrane library, Embase, SID, Scopus, Magiran Iran Medex databases. Unrelated articles were removed using PRISMA statement guidelines, and finally articles that were completely related to the study were examined. GraySource and BASE databases were used to find gray sources.
Results: Initially, 1176 articles were identified from different databases and a total of 82 articles were selected for final review. In some reliable sources, the risk assessment methods of ergonomic factors related to musculoskeletal disorders are classified into three categories: observational (42 articles), instrumental (11 articles) and self-report (29 articles). Pen-paper-based observational methods were among the most common methods used in ergonomic evaluations. Among the investigated individual reporting methods, the Nordic questionnaire was the most widely used tool (87% of the articles), followed by the Cornell questionnaire (13% of the articles). Some occupations, such as nurses, also have specific methods for assessing ergonomic risk factors (MAPO, DINO).
Conclusion: It is suggested that the ergonomic risk assessment methods of musculoskeletal disorders should be multi-factorial (individual, occupational and psycho-social) and specific methods should be developed for jobs with high diversity in job duties.
Keywords: assessment, musculoskeletal disorders, measurement, risk factor, posture, tools, methodology
Type of Study: Review Article |
Subject:
Ergonomics
Received: 2023/01/26 | Accepted: 2023/11/28 | Published: 2023/12/31
Received: 2023/01/26 | Accepted: 2023/11/28 | Published: 2023/12/31
References
1. Younessi S, jalali M, saremi M. Investigating the body postures and the prevalence of musculoskeletal discomfort in fruit pickers. ioh 2020; 17 (1) :358-369
2. Akbari J, Kazemi M, Mazareie A, Moradirad R, Razavi A. The Ergonomic assessment of exposure to risk factors that cause musculoskeletal disorders in Office workers by using ROSA. Scientific journal of Ilam University of medical sciences. 2017 Jul 10; 25(2):8-17. [DOI:10.29252/sjimu.25.2.8]
3. Das D, Kumar A, Sharma M. A systematic review of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among handicraft workers. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2020; 26(1):55-70. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2018.1458487]
4. Widanarko B, et al. The combined effect of physical, psychosocial/organisational and/or environmental risk factors on the presence of work-related musculoskeletal symptoms and its consequences. Appl Ergon. 2014; 45(6):1610-21. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2014.05.018]
5. Daneshmandi H, et al. An ergonomic intervention to relieve musculoskeletal symptoms of assembly line workers at an electronic parts manufacturer in Iran. Work. 2019; 61(4):515-21. [DOI:10.3233/WOR-182822]
6. Lietz J, Kozak A, Nienhaus A. Prevalence and occupational risk factors of musculoskeletal diseases and pain among dental professionals in Western countries: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018; 13(12):e0208628. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0208628]
7. Sheikhmozafari M J, Mohammad Alizadeh P, Ahmadi O, Rashidi N, Jafari D. Risk Assessment of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Its Correlation with Job Factors: Validating of an Assessment Questionnaire. IJMPP 2022; 7 (2):708-719.
8. Monjezi N. Analysis of occupational risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries in the sugarcane workers using QEC and Nordic questionnaire. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Soil Science and Agricultural Mechanization,(Scientific Journal of Agriculture). 2019;42(3):97-112.
9. Dagne D, Abebe SM, Getachew A. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders and associated factors among bank workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a crosssectional study. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 2020. 2020: 25:33. [DOI:10.1186/s12199-020-00866-5]
10. Tajvar A, Daneshmandi H, Seif M, Parsaei H, Choobineh A. Developing a Decision Aid Tool for selecting pen-paper observational ergonomics techniques: a quasi-experimental study. Med Lav. 2022 Oct 24;113(5)
11. Lowe BD, Dempsey PG, Jones EM. Ergonomics assessment methods used by ergonomics professionals. Appl Ergon. 2019; 81:102882. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102882]
12. Beese NO, Rodriguez FS, Spilski J, Lachmann T. Development of a Digital Video-Based Occupational Risk Assessment Method. Front Public Health. 2021 Jun 10; 9:683850. [DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2021.683850]
13. Alberto R, Draicchio F, Varrecchia T, Silvetti A, Iavicoli S. Wearable Monitoring Devices for Biomechanical Risk Assessment at Work: Current Status and Future Challenges-A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Sep 13; 15(9):2001. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph15092001]
14. Marras WS, Fathallah FA, Miller RJ, Davis SW, Mirka GA. Accuracy of a three-dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992;9(1):75-87. [DOI:10.1016/0169-8141(92)90078-E]
15. Lee S, Heo S, Lee JY. A pilot study to assess a risk of a high-risk group of low back pain membership in workers who perform the manual material handling tasks. Ann Occup Environ Med. 2021 Nov 17; 33:e34. [DOI:10.35371/aoem.2021.33.e34]
16. McKinnon CD, Ehmke S, Kociolek AM, Callaghan JP, Keir PJ. Wrist Posture Estimation Differences and Reliability Between Video Analysis and Electrogoniometer Methods. Hum Factors. 2021 Nov;63(7):1284-1294. [DOI:10.1177/0018720820923839]
17. Garosi E, Mazloumi A, Jafari A H, Keihani A, Sharifnezhad A, Shamsipour M et al . The effect of using cervical exoskeleton on the neck and shoulder muscles electrical activity during overhead work. J Health Saf Work 2022; 12 (2) :259-273
18. Aqmar Yazuli Z, Mohamad Jamil P A S, Mohammad Yusof N A D, Karuppiah K, Kumar Perimal E, Sadeghi Naeini H, et al . Effect of Anti-Fatigue Mat on Leg Muscle Discomfort and Muscle Activity Due to Prolonged Work in Upright Position among Production Workers. J Health Saf Work 2022; 12 (3) :483-498.
19. V A E Baadjou, J A M C F Verbunt, M D F van Eijsden-Besseling, R A de Bie, O Girard, J W R Twisk, R J E M Smeets, Preventing musculoskeletal complaints in music students: a randomized controlled trial, Occupational Medicine, Volume 68, Issue 7, October 2018, Pages 469-477. [DOI:10.1093/occmed/kqy105]
20. Roy JS, MacDermid JC, Woodhouse LJ. Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum. 2009 May 15;61(5):623-32. [DOI:10.1002/art.24396]
21. St-Pierre C, Desmeules F, Dionne CE, Frémont P, MacDermid JC, Roy JS. Psychometric properties of self-reported questionnaires for the evaluation of symptoms and functional limitations in individuals with rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(2):103-22. [DOI:10.3109/09638288.2015.1027004]
22. Dubé MO, Langevin P, Roy JS. Measurement properties of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire in populations with musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review. Pain Rep. 2021 Dec 21;6(4):e972. [DOI:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000972]
23. Adachi T, Enomoto K, Yamada K, Inoue D, Nakanishi M, Takahashi N, Nishigami T, Shibata M. Evaluating the psychometric properties of two-item and four-item short forms of the Japanese Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire: a cross-sectional study. J Anesth 2019;33:58-66 [DOI:10.1007/s00540-018-2583-8]
24. Navidi S F, Safari Variani A, Varmazyar S. The Effect of Eight Weeks of Corrective Exercises Intervention on Reducing the Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders in Computer Users of Gas Company. J Health Saf Work 2021; 11 (2) :353-367
25. Kaydani N, Zarea K, Soltanzadeh A. Analysis of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Nursing Occupation: A Comparative Assessment between Shift and Day Workers. johe 2022; 8 (4) :22-29 [DOI:10.52547/johe.8.4.22]
26. Kreuzfeld S, Seibt R, Kumar M, Rieger A, Stoll R. German version of the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ): translation and validation. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2016 Mar 25;11:13. [DOI:10.1186/s12995-016-0100-2]
27. Tamene A, Mulugeta H, Ashenafi T, Thygerson SM. Musculoskeletal Disorders and Associated Factors among Vehicle Repair Workers in Hawassa City, Southern Ethiopia. J Environ Public Health. 2020 May 7;2020:9472357. [DOI:10.1155/2020/9472357]
28. Algarni FS, Alotaibi AN, Altowaijri AM, Al-Sobayel H. Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Arabic Version of Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ-Ar). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(14):5168. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17145168]
29. Gómez-Rodríguez R, Díaz-Pulido B, Gutiérrez-Ortega C, Sánchez-Sánchez B, Torres-Lacomba M. Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Standardised Nordic Questionnaire Spanish Version in Musicians. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jan 19;17(2):653. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17020653]
30. Toomingas A, Theorell T, Michélsen H, Nordemar R, Stockholm MUSIC 1 Study Group: Association between self-rated psychosocial work conditions and musculoskeletal symptoms and signs. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997, 23: 130-139. [DOI:10.5271/sjweh.190]
31. Tahmasebi R, Motamedzade M, Torkashvand S, Anbarian M, Olfatifar M, Sarvi F, Farhadian M. Validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Dutch musculoskeletal questionnaire. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2019 Apr 4;33:27. [DOI:10.47176/mjiri.33.27]
32. Franchignoni F, Vercelli S, Giordano A, Sartorio F, Bravini E, Ferriero G. Minimal clinically important difference of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure (DASH) and its shortened version (QuickDASH). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Jan;44(1):30-9. [DOI:10.2519/jospt.2014.4893]
33. Yagnik GP, Santos ED, Rothfeld AA, Uribe JW, Cohn TM. Spanish translation and cross-language validation of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2021 Jan;30(1):151-157. [DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2020.05.020]
34. Mohan V, Inbaraj LR, George CE, Norman G. Prevalence of complaints of arm, neck, and shoulders among computer professionals in Bangalore: A cross-sectional study. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019 Jan;8(1):171-177. [DOI:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_253_18]
35. Bekiari EI, Lyrakos GN, Damigos D, Mavreas V, Chanopoulos K, Dimoliatis ID. A validation study and psychometrical evaluation of the Maastricht Upper Extremity Questionnaire (MUEQ) for the Greek-speaking population. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2011 Mar;11(1):52-76.
36. Drinkaus P, Sesek R, Bloswick D, Bernard T, Walton B, Joseph B, Reeve G, Counts JH. Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment outputs from Rapid Upper Limb Assessment and the Strain Index for tasks in automotive assembly plants. Work. 2003;21(2):165-72.
37. Bao S, Howard N, Spielholz P, Silverstein B. Quantifying repetitive hand activity for epidemiological research on musculoskeletal disorders--part II: comparison of different methods of measuring force level and repetitiveness. Ergonomics. 2006 Mar 15;49(4):381-92. [DOI:10.1080/00140130600555938]
38. Jones T, Kumar S. Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment output in a repetitive sawmill occupation: trim-saw operator. Work. 2008;31(4):367-76.
39. Motamedzade M, Ashuri MR, Golmohammadi R, Mahjub H. Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment outputs from rapid entire body assessment and quick exposure check in an engine oil company. J Res Health Sci. 2011 Jun 13;11(1):26-32.
40. Marie-Ève Chiasson. Comparing the results of eight methods used to evaluate risk factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders. International journal of industrial ergonomics. 2012;42(5):478-488. [DOI:10.1016/j.ergon.2012.07.003]
41. Roman-Liu D, Groborz A, Tokarski T. Comparison of risk assessment procedures used in OCRA and ULRA methods. Ergonomics. 2013;56(10):1584-98. [DOI:10.1080/00140139.2013.829923]
42. Zare M, Biau S, Croq M, Roquelaure Y. Development of a Biomechanical Method for Ergonomic Evaluation: Comparison with Observational Methods. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Social, Human Science and Engineering, 2014, 8, pp.223-7.
43. Mukhopadhyay P, Khan A. The evaluation of ergonomic risk factors among meat cutters working in Jabalpur, India. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2015 Jul-Sep; 21(3):192-8. [DOI:10.1179/2049396714Y.0000000064]
44. Hussain, Amjad, Keith Case, Russell Marshall, and Steve Summerskill. 2019. "Using Ergonomic Risk Assessment Methods for Designing Inclusive Work Practices - a Case Study". figshare. https://hdl.handle.net/2134/19463.
45. Kong YK, Lee SY, Lee KS, Kim DM. Comparisons of ergonomic evaluation tools (ALLA, RULA, REBA and OWAS) for farm work. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2018 Jun;24(2):218-223. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2017.1306960]
46. Sain MK, Meena M. Identifying musculoskeletal issues and associated risk factors among clay brick kiln workers. Ind Health. 2019 Jun 4;57(3):381-391. [DOI:10.2486/indhealth.2018-0096]
47. Hellig T, Rick V, Mertens A, Nitsch V, Brandl C. Investigation of observational methods assessing workload of static working postures based on surface electromyography.
48. Besharati A, Daneshmandi H, Zareh K, Fakherpour A, Zoaktafi M. Work-related musculoskeletal problems and associated factors among office workers. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2020 Sep;26(3):632-638. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2018.1501238]
49. Baird BJ, Tynan MA, Tracy LF, Heaton JT, Burns JA. Surgeon Positioning During Awake Laryngeal Surgery: An Ergonomic Analysis. Laryngoscope. 2021 Dec; 131(12):2752-2758. [DOI:10.1002/lary.29717]
50. Bashtani, A., Amouzadeh, E., Yazdani Cherati, J., Etemadinezhad, S., Kalateh Arabi, H., Haji Omid, K. Investigating the effect of ergonomic interventions on work postures by REBA method in small workshops of Sabzevar city. Journal of Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, 2022; 28(6): 874-884.
51. Yazdanirad S, Khoshakhlagh AH, Habibi E, Zare A, Zeinodini M, Dehghani F. Comparing the Effectiveness of Three Ergonomic Risk Assessment Methods-RULA, LUBA, and NERPA-to Predict the Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2018 Jan-Apr; 22(1):17-21. [DOI:10.4103/ijoem.IJOEM_23_18]
52. Van Rijn RM, Huisstede BM, Koes BW, Burdorf A. Associations between work-related factors and specific disorders of the shoulder-A systematic review of the literature. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2010; 3:189-201. [DOI:10.5271/sjweh.2895]
53. Khandan M, Vosoughi S, Poursadeghiyan M, Azizi F, Ahounbar E, Koohpaei A. Ergonomic Assessment of Posture Risk Factors Among Iranian Workers: An Alternative to Conventional Methods. Iranian Rehabil J. 2018; 16:11-6. [DOI:10.29252/nrip.irj.16.1.11]
54. Hasheminejad N, Choobineh A, Mostafavi R, Tahernejad S, Rostami M. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders, ergonomics risk assessment and implementation of participatory ergonomics program for pistachio farm workers. Med Lav. 2021 Aug 26; 112(4):292-305.
55. Abd Rahman MN, RANI MRA, Rohani JM. WERA: an observational tool develop to investigate the physical risk factor associated with WMSDs. J Hum Ergol. 2011; 40(1-2):19-36.
56. Seidel DH, Ditchen DM, Hoehne-Hückstädt UM, Rieger MA, Steinhilber B. Quantitative measures of physical risk factors associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the elbow: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(1):130. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph16010130]
57. Hita-Gutiérrez M, Gómez-Galán M, Díaz-Pérez M, Callejón-Ferre Á-J. An overview of REBA method applications in the world. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(8):2635. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17082635]
58. Kong Y-K, Lee S-y, Lee K-S, Kim D-M. Comparisons of ergonomic evaluation tools (ALLA, RULA, REBA and OWAS) for farm work. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2018;24(2):218-23. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2017.1306960]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
