1

ConferenceProceedings

ACE-CROSH2018

49thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists

(ACE)

6thConferenceoftheCentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth(CROSH)

Sudbury,ON

October15-18,2018

2

ConferenceOrganizingCommittee ConferenceScientificCommitteeNatalieCarscaddenRonCarscaddenDr.SandraDormanDr.TammyEgerDr.AlisonGodwinPatriciaHopeCalebLeducPegScherzingerBrandonVance

NatalieCarscaddenDr.SandraDormanDr.JanessaDrakeDr.TammyEgerDr.DominiqueGagnonDr.AlisonGodwinKatieGogginsDr.MikeHolmesPatriciaHopeHeatherJohnstonCalebLeducDr.MallorieLeducDr.BrentLieversTrevorSchellPegScherzingerDr.KathrynSindenBrandonVance

ReferenceforConferenceProceedingsAuthor(s).TitleofPaper.In:Proceedingsofthe49thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(ACE)and6thConferenceoftheCentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth(CROSH);2018Oct15-18;Sudbury,Ontario.

3

TableofContents

KEYNOTEPAPERS....................................................................................................................6Humanfactorsforthefutureworkforce-NeilMansfield....................................................................................7Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifiéesparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsd’apprentissage-MarieLaberge.........11WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?-RichardGasaway..........................................15Reapingwhatwesow:Engagingworkersandstakeholdersinagriculturalhealthresearch-CatherineTrask...................................................................................................................................................................16

WORKSHOPS...........................................................................................................................21Howtointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocess-JudyVillage&PatrickNeumann................................................................................................................................................................................22ApplyingforCertificationwithCCCPEandMaintainingCertification-TanyaMorose.......................24ApplyingAdultlearningPrinciples:EnsuringsuccesstoyourH&Seducationandtrainingsessions-NatalieCarscadden&VanceMcPherson..............................................................................................25OfficeErgonomics2018:UnpackingtheNewCSAZ412Standard-LucyHart......................................26DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario-RichardWells.............................................27MovingfromLabtoIndustry:Howtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptability-AllisonStephens.................................................................................................................................................................................28Canergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?-Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients-TrevorSchell.........................................................................................................................................................................29

PAPERSESSION1:PHYSIOLOGY......................................................................................30Évaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelative-IgorZovilé.................................................................31Contraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempératureambiante-DenisMarchand...............................................................................................................................................................................33TheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry-AlexieDennie..........................................................................................35

INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION..........................................................................................37Theevolutionofwearableassessmentdevicesinergonomics-MicheleOliver.....................................37

PAPERSESSION2:MANUALMATERIALSHANDLING................................................39Balancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategy-HarrisonKloke....................................................40Theeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasks-AlisonMcDonald................................................................................................................................................................................42Physiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitude-TiannaBeharriell...............................................................................................................................................................................44

PAPERSESSION3:OFFICEERGONOMICS......................................................................46ChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealOfficeenvironments:Impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariations-NancyBlack...................................................................................................................................47

4

Automatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensors-DanielViggiani....................................................................................................................................................................49MatchingPosturalStateSequenceswithFatigueandPainExperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandSit-StandWorkstations-NancyBlack.......................................................................51Anevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemands-KaylaFewster.........................53

PAPERSESSION4:APPLIEDCASESTUDIES..................................................................55DoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?-AllisonStephens....................................56Oneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers–isachairtheanswer?-KristinaZucchiatti.58DevelopingPhysicalDemandsDescriptionsFromJobSimulations-NicholasPatrick.......................60

INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION..........................................................................................62AppliedFieldResearchUsingField-Lab-Field(F2L2F)Approach-SandraDorman...........................62

PAPERSESSION5:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE....................................................63Estimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudy-CarolynnKallitsis......................................................................................................................64Caregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices-JimPotvin...............................................................................................................................................................................66

PAPERSESSION6:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–UNDERGRADUATEANDMASTERS..................................................................................................................................68Theimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstroller-JacquelineToner...................................................................................................................................69Designandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandling-ErikaZiraldo................................................................71Eliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearch-CourtneyNickel..................................73CanSeatPanDesignMitigateLowerLimbSwellingandBackPain?-MatthewBarrett....................75CareerFirefighters’real-timephysiologicalResponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:Implicationsforinjuryprevention-SaraSayed...................................................................................................77

INTERACTIVELECTURE......................................................................................................79Flawedsituationalawareness:astealthkillerintheworkplace-RichardGasaway...........................79

PAPERSESSION7:MOBILEEQUIPMENT.......................................................................80ForensicErgonomics:LineofSightandVisibilityAssessmentinCriticalInjuryandFatality‘Struck-by’Investigations;ACaseStudy-KevinGillespie.................................................................................81Efficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perception&safety-HeatherKahle..................................................83Documentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies-AlyssaBrunton.................................................................................................................................................85InvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod-AmandeepSingh..................................................................................................................................................................87

PAPERSESSION8:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–PHDANDPOST-DOCTORALFELLOWS..................................................................................................................................89Chairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstanding-MikeGlinka............................................................................................................................................................................90

5

Anatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudediffferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposure-KatieGoggins.................................................................................................................................................92Theinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks-ColinMcKinnon.............................................................................................................94

PAPERSESSION9:GENERALERGONOMICS..................................................................96Egresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffalls-BehzadBashiri...............................97Vibrationtoolkit:developmentandevaluationofanoccupationalhealtheducationinterventionfocusedonvibrationexposureinmining-MallorieLeduc..............................................................................99TheEffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort-CoreyBouwmeester........................................................................................................................................................101

PAPERSESSION10:GENERALERGONOMICS............................................................103Ergonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladders-PegScherzinger......................................................................................104‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustry-HeatherKahle.....................................106Field-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchards-OrnwipaThamsuwan.....................................................................................................................................108Evaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones-CyrusLee.................................................................................................110

PAPERSESSION11:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE..............................................112Medicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorperceptions-AmyDoan..............................................113Quantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresduringmanualpillcrushing-NicholasLaDelfa............................115Thefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)-JosieBlake...........................................................................................................................................................................117Casestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation-RyanSmiley................................119

INDEXOFAUTHORS..........................................................................................................121

6

KEYNOTEPAPERSDay2–Oct16th

09:00-10:15

KeynoteLecture:“HumanFactorsfortheFutureWorkforce”**Prof.NeilMansfield,PhDHeadofEngineering,NottinghamTrentUniversityPresident,CharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactors

13:00-14:15

KeynoteLecture:“Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifié.esparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsd’apprentissage”**Dr.MarieLaberge,PhDProfesseureagrégée,Écolederéadaptationdel’UniversitédeMontréalChercheuserégulièreCINBIOSE|CHUSte-Justine

Day3–Oct17th

08:45-10:00

KeynoteLecture:“WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?”Dr.RichardGasaway,PhDPresident&PrincipalConsultant,GasawayConsultingGroup,LLCChiefScientist,SituationalAwarenessMattersResidentInstructor,ExecutiveFireOfficerProgram,NationalFireAcademy

Day4–Oct18

09:00-10:15

KeynoteLecture:“Reapingwhatwesow-EngagingWorkersandStakeholdersinAgriculturalHealthResearch”Dr.CatherineTrask,PhDCanadaResearchChairinErgonomicsandMusculoskeletalHealthAssociateProfessor,CanadianCentreforHealthandSafetyinAgricultureUniversityofSaskatchewan

7

Humanfactorsforthefutureworkforce

NeilMansfield1,21HeadofEngineering,NottinghamTrentUniversity,UK

2President,CharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactors

IntroductionTheUK-basedCharteredInstituteofErgonomicsandHumanFactorswillcelebrateits70thyearin2019.Throughthose7decadestheorganizationhasrebrandeditself(TheErgonomicsResearchSociety,toErgonomicsSociety,toInstitute)andbeenattheforefrontofdevelopingthedisciplineofErgonomicsandHumanFactors.Despitethelong-establishedlegacy,thereisnoindicationthattheworkofergonomistsisfinished.

TheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(1)definesergonomicsas: ‘…thescientificdisciplineconcernedwiththeinteractionsbetweenhumansandotherelementsofasystem(environment,peopleandobjects)withthegoalofoptimizinghumanwellbeingandoverallsystemperformance.’Thismeansthatinordertoachievethegoalofoptimization,anunderstandingoftheenvironment,thepeopleandtheobjectsarerequired.Oneofthereasonswhytherewillremainanongoingneedforprofessionalergonomistsisthatenvironmentsdevelop,peoplechange,andnewobjectsareinventedrelentlessly.Thesecharacteristicsareattheverycoreofmodernsociety.

Projectingforwardsthereisaneedtoconsiderfutureusersoffutureproducts.Thereisanincreasingdemandforconsiderationofproductconsequencesfarfurtherintothefuturethatoncewasthecase.Forexample,manycountriesarefacedwithlegacycostsofdecommissioningnuclearplantsthatexceedinitialbuildcosts,havedurationslongerthantheservicelife,arenotdesignedfordeconstructionandhavenaturallydeterioratedovertheyears(2).Theseissuesarenotuniquetonuclear(3),andarebecomingincreasinglychallengedattheconceptphase.Couldsuchlegacyissuesoccurforproducts,largeandsmall,beingconceivedtoday?

LegacyofHistoricalTechnologies

Throughouthistorynewtechnologieshavebeendrivenbyuserneeds,userdesires,andnewpossibilities.Behindthesewerepeoplegeneratingideasandwiththedriveandknowledgetotakethemtomarket.Oneexampleisinthepocketwatchofthe16thcentury(4).TheearliestknowndepictionofthepocketwatchappearsinaportraitofCosimoIdeMedici,DukeofFlorence,c.1560.Theobjectwasdevelopedontheuserneedforatimepiece,butthedesirabilitywassuchthattheinfluentialDukechosetobedepictedwithitinasignificantportrait.Itcouldonlybemanufacturedduetonewtechnologiesinmaterials,miniaturization,andademandfromthemarketforthedevelopmentofcomplexengineering.Theinaccuracywassuchthatitdidnotneedaminutehand.

Watchmakerswereanearlyexampleofergonomicadaptationfortheworkplace,providingmagnifyinglenses,adjustableworkstations,precisiontoolsandsupportforwristsandhands(Figure1).Theserepresentedsomeofthehighestlevelsofcomplexityandprecisionoftheirdayandrequirednewworkplaceconceptsinordertoachievetherequiredlevelsofperformance.

8

Modern‘smart’watcheshavebeendrivenbyuserneeds(e.g.informationconnection),userdesires(e.g.fashionandself-identificationasa‘smart’person),andnewpossibilities(e.g.battery,screen,electronics).However,likethe16thcenturypocketwatch,someelementsarenotparticularlyaccurate.Heartrateandenergyexpenditurefeaturesinparticularcanproveunreliable,particularlyforshorthigh-intensityboutsofexercise(5).Thereisanacceptancethatthefeatureisa‘workinprogress’butisusefulnonetheless.

Commonsystemscanallowuserstodevelopastereotypewhichcanoftenbeuseful.Forexample,modernacceptediconographyfordigitalsystemsrefertoextinctorrareobjectsrangingfromfoldersandfloppydiscs,throughtotelephonehandsetsorclipboards.However,theprocessesrepresentedarestillrelevantandtheiconstapintothecoreuserneedsanduserdesires,butexploitnewtechnologicalpossibilities.

Industry4.0/Cyber-PhysicalSystems

Thereisacurrentmovetowardsindustrialdigitization,wheredigitalsystemswillbecomeubiquitousacrossallindustrialapplications.Thishasbeenexpressedintermsofthe‘4thIndustrialRevolution’,orIndustry4.0.Industrialdevelopmenthasbeenclassifiedthus:

• 1stIndustrialRevolution Mechanization,waterpower,steampower• 2ndIndustrialRevolution Massproduction,assemblylines,electricity• 3rdIndustrialRevolution Computercontrolandautomation• 4thIndustrialRevolution Cyber-physicalsystems,AI,InternetofIndustrialThings

Themovetowardscyber-physicalsystemsintheworkplacemeansthatrobotswillbecomemoreintelligentandpotentiallyadaptableusingAI/deeplearning.Theywillbemorecapableofcarryingoutmorecomplextasksforsmallervolumeprocessestherebyincreasingtheirversatility.Bybeingcloudnetworked,datastreamscanbeaccessedfromanywhereandproductioncontrolmanipulatedremotely.Maier(CEO,SiemensUK)stated:EmergingtechnologybreakthroughsinfieldssuchasAI,robotics,andtheInternetofThingsaresignificantintheirownright.However,itistheconvergenceoftheseIndustrialDigitalTechnologiesthatreallyturbo-chargestheirimpact(6).Hence,Industry4.0isabouttheintegrationofothertechnologiesincludingtheinternet,computing,robotics,bigdata,neuralnetworks,andergonomics/humanfactors.

Thefearthatjobswillbe‘takenaway’fromthefutureindustrialworkerisnaïve,althoughitistruethatsomeexistingmanualtaskswill,infuture,becompletedbymachinesandindividualcasesofhumanredundancywillinevitablyprovecontroversial.Futurejobswillcontinuetoevolve,astheyhavethroughoutthecenturies.Futureworkerswillbeemployedinanenvironmentwhereallbusinesseswillbecomeincreasinglydigitized.Coboticswillbecomethenormwherebyhumanswillworkalongsiderobots.Cobotshavealreadybeenintroducedinsomewarehousestoassistwithpickingandtransport(e.g.Nextclothing;Arlamilk)andthereisamovetowardsincludingrobotsinmanufacturing.ThispresentsachallengeofsituationawarenessbothforthehumanandfortheAIoftherobot.

Figure1Watchmakerusingtraditionaltools(image:1949,ElginNationalWatchCompany,GFDLlicense)

9

SituationAwarenessconcernstheabilityofthehumantohaveacoherentcognitivemodeloftheworldaroundthemnow,andprojectthatmodelintothefuture(7).Undernormaloperationthebehaviorsofrobotsareusuallyeasytopredictforanexperiencedobserver,butthiswillbecomeincreasinglydifficultasAImakesthemachinesmoreadaptableandresponsive(8).Experimentalcobots,suchasthe‘Baxter’(Figure2)havemethodsofprovidingcuestoauser,suchasascreenshowing‘eyes’thatcantracktothenexttarget,andsafetysystemstoensurethatitcanfeedbackobstacle(i.e.human)collision.WithAIanddeeplearning,itispossibleforindividualrobotstodeveloptheirownbehavioralpersonalitytraitsinresponsetotheindividualbehaviorsofthoseinteractingwiththem.Infuture,notonlywillthehumansneedtobetrainedtoworkwiththerobotsbuttherobotAIwillneedtobetrainedtoworkwiththehumans.

Wearablesarebecomingmoreacceptedintheworkplace.Althoughlocationandbasicphysiologicalmonitoringaregrowinginpopularity,thelongertermcouldseeanormalizationof‘bodyhacking’whereimplantsareplacedinthebodyorundertheskinforconvenience,ratherthanmedicaluses.Thisopensupnewpossibilitiesininterfacedesignaswellastrustandsecurity.

Futuresociety,valuesandneeds

Ergonomistshavebeenadaptingworkspacestoaccommodateaworkforcethatisgettingolderandhavingtoadaptdesigntoolstobeappropriateforthischangingpopulation(9).Thereisanincreasingneedforthrough-lifetraininginordertokeepupwithtechnologicaladvancesandtobuildtheskillsbase.TheshapeofeducationandCPDwillneedtoadapttomeetthisskillscrisis(10).Takingextremesofageandexperiencestereotypes/personae,a‘digitalnative’serviceengineercouldbeadeptatoperatingatablet-typeinterfacebutwithlittleunderstandingofunderlyingmechanics,whereasanexperiencedserviceengineerapproachingretirementcouldhaveafarclearerunderstandingoftheitembeingservicedbutlessadeptwiththeinterface.HumanFactorsprincipleswillbevitalinensuringthat‘DigitalTwin’modelsandaugmentedrealitysystemsareusablebythosewiththevaluablefieldexperience.

Formajorprojectswithlongdesign/implementation/reuse/removalcyclespresentasignificantchallengetohumanfactors.Thereareinfrastructureprojectswithalegacythatwillextendbeyondthelifeofthosewhodesignthemandmayrunintohundredsorthousandsofyears.Dodesignershavearesponsibilitytoconsidertheworkersusingtheobjectin1,10,100,1000,10000years’time?Thereareimmediateissuesrelatingtore-useofcomponentsinawashingmachine,butissuesincreaseincomplexityinconsideringdesignfordeconstructionthroughmobilephones,aircraftcarriers,powerstations,dams,cathedrals,andnuclearwastestores.

Whilstitisspeculationtopredictthedetailsoffuturetechnologiesandtheshapeoffuturesocieties1000yearsintothefuture,itispossibletoprojectsomeaspectsoffuturevalueandfutureneeds.Theoldestinstitutionsintheworldincludeeducationalandreligiousestablishments,andthese

Figure2Theauthorwitha'Baxter'robotdesignedtoworkcloselywithhumans.

10

continuetohaverelevanceasjudgedbynumberofmembers.Prehistoricartdepictshumansstrivingformeaningandsurvival,andlivingincommunities.Theoldesttextsrefertofamilyandcommunitygroups.Today’ssocialnetworking,foundedonhumaninteraction,attractsasignificantminorityoftheworldpopulationwith2.2,1.5,and1.0billionmonthlyusersofFacebook,WhatsApp,andWeChatrespectively.Socialvalues,relationships,dealingwithbirthanddeath,andthedriveforknowledgeandnoveltyarethereforelikelytoremainapriorityforhumans.Humanphysiologywilladaptslowly,althoughdifferencesinnutritionandhealthcarecouldalterhowthatphysiologyismanifested.

Waystocommunicate10,000yearsintothefuturehavebeenconsideredinthecontextofsignageforburiedhazardouswastethatcouldbeforgotten,lostandthenrediscoveredbyafuturesociety(11).Howcouldthisfutureculturebewarnedofhazards?Amongstsuggestionswerethecreationofamythorareligionthatcouldportraytheriskoverthegenerations,asthesecanhavemorelongevitythanculture,languageorpoliticalframeworks(12).Thehumanfactorsofsignageforworkersfromunknownculturesisafascinatingchallenge.

ConclusionHumanfactorsexpertsandergonomistshavearesponsibilitytoconsiderthebreadthofpopulationforwhomtheydesign.Theyneedtoconsiderchangesintheworkplaceandtheworkingpopulationthatarepredictable;thereisadebatetobehadoverhowmanygenerationsintothefuturetheyshouldbedesigningfor.

References1. https://ace-ergocanada.ca/about/about_ergonomics/ergonomics.html(accessed150718)2. Walker,G.,Cooper,M.,Thompson,P.andJenkins,D.,Practitionerversusanalystmethods:a

nucleardecommissioningcasestudy.AppliedErgonomics.2014;45:1622-1633.3. AbdoH,MangenaM,NeedhamG,HuntD.Provisionsforoilandgasdecommissioningcosts:

compliancewithdisclosurerequirementsbyoilandgascompanieslistedintheUK.ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonAccountingStudies(ICAS)2017,Putrajaya,Malaysia,18-20September2017.ISBN9789670910482

4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8313893.stm(accessed06/18)5. BunnJA,NavaltaJW,FountaineCJ,ReeceJD.CurrentStateofCommercialWearableTechnology

inPhysicalActivityMonitoring2015–2017.Int.JournalofExerciseScience.2018;11(7):503.6. MaierJ.MadeSmarterReview.2017.UKDeptforBusiness,Energy&IndustrialStrategy.7. KeyCE,MorrisAP,MansfieldNJ.Situationawareness:itsproficiencyamongstolderand

youngerdrivers,anditsusefulnessforperceivinghazards.TransportationResearchpartF:TrafficPsychologyandBehaviour.2016Jul1;40:156-68.

8. RakicevicN,KormushevP.Efficientrobottasklearningandtransferviainformedsearchinmovementparameterspace.InNIPS2017WorkshoponActingandInteractingintheRealWorld:ChallengesinRobotLearning,31stConferenceonNeuralInformationProcessingSystems(NIPS),California,USA2017Dec.

9. CaseK,HussainA,MarshallR,SummerskillS,GyiDE.Digitalhumanmodellingandtheageingworkforce.ProcediaManufacturing,3,pp.36943701

10. WhysallZ,OwtramM,BrittainS.Transformingengineeringtalentpipelines.2017.KiddyandPartners.

11. PosnerR.MitteilungenandieferneZukunft.Hintergrund,Anlaß,ProblemstellungundResultateeinerUmfrage.1984.ZeitschriftfürSemiotik.

12. SebeokT.DieBüchsederPandoraundihreSicherung:EinRelaissysteminderObhuteinerAtompriesterschaft.1984.ZeitschriftfürSemiotik.

11

Préventionéquitabledel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesadolescentesetadolescentsfaiblementqualifiéesparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitants

d’apprentissage

MarieLaberge,PhD.ProfesseureagrégéeÉcolederéadaptationdel’UniversitédeMontréalChercheuserégulièreCINBIOSE|CHUSte-Justine

Ilestplusdifficilepourlesadolescentesetlesadolescentsquiéprouventdesdifficultésd’apprentissagedeterminerleursétudesavecundiplôme(RousseauetBergeron,2017).Ilestégalementreconnuquelesjeunesadultessansdiplômeseretrouventplussouventsansemploiqueleurspairsdiplômés(EPA,2015).Cetécartdutauxd’emploientrelesdiplômésetlesnondiplômésestplusélevépourlesfemmes(tauxd’emploi2,6foissupérieurpourleshommesdiplôméset4foissupérieurpourlesfemmes).Orlapossibilitédetravailleràl’âgeadulteestunemesureimportantederéductiondesécartsdepauvretéetd’inclusionsociale(Carcilloetal.,2017).Parailleurs,lesjeunesfaiblementqualifiéssontplusàrisquedesubirunelésionprofessionnelle,cequiajouteunfacteurdecomorbiditéquantauxpossibilitésd’insertionprofessionnelledurablepourcettepopulation(Saundersetal.,2017;Layetal.,2017,Breslinetal.,2017).Lanaturedel’emploietlesconditionsdetravaildanslesmétierspeuspécialisésexpliquentlesrisquesaccrusdeseblesser(emploimanuel,cumuldecontraintesphysiquesetorganisationnelles).Letypedelésionsprofessionnellesauxquellescesjeunessontexposésestdifférenteentrelesjeuneshommesetfemmes(Labergeetal.,2010;Labergeetal.,2012).DanslaprovincedeQuébec,unParcoursdeFormationAxéesurl’Emploi(PFAE)aétémissurpieden2008pouraiderlesélèveshandicapésouquiéprouventdesdifficultésd’apprentissageetd’adaptation(HDAA)àdévelopperleuremployabilité.Ceparcourss’adresseauxélèvesde15à21ansquisontenéchecscolaireetquinepeuventpoursuivreleurcheminementrégulieraudeuxièmecycledusecondaire(MELS,programmedeformationàl’écolequébécoise,2008).L’offreduPFAErépondàunedemandedediversificationdesparcourspoursoutenirlaréussitedesélèvesHDAA(Québec,politiquedel’adaptationscolaire,1999),enpermettantàcesélèvesderéussirautrementetdedévelopperdescompétencesquileurpermettrad’accéderaumarchédutravail.Dansceparcours,lesmodalitéspédagogiquesprivilégiéessontbaséessurl’alternanceétudes–travailetsurladifférenciationpédagogique(plandeformationadaptéauxbesoinsindividualisésdechaquepersonne).Àcesujet,ilexisteunelittératureabondanterecenséeparMlynaryketal.(2017)quidémontreque,pourlespersonnesavecincapacité,lapossibilitéderéaliserdesstagesdepré-emploiestunemesurefavorisantl’intégrationaumarchédutravail.LeministèreproposeunplandeformationauxjeunesquiempruntentlePFAEpourplusde130métierssemi-spécialisés.Entre10,000et15,000jeunessontinscritschaqueannéedanslePFAE.Lapopulationestmajoritairementmasculine,avecenvironlesdeuxtiersd’élèvesinscritsquisontdeshommes.Toutefois,leprogrammeproposeuneapprochededifférenciationetdanscetteoptique,ilnousapparaîtopportundefavoriserdesinterventionssensiblesaugenre.L’objectifdelaconférenceestdeprésenterquelquesrésultatsdécoulantd’uneprogrammationderecherchequisedéploiedepuis10ansquiportesurlapréventiondel’incapacitédetravailauprèsdesélèvesduPFAE.Laprogrammationtientcomptedusexeetdugenredesélèvesetdesacteursdusystèmedeformation.Elles’estamorcéeaumomentdelamiseenplaceduPFAEen2007.Elles’estcentréedèsledépartsurlaconduitederecherches-interventionvisantlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitantsadaptésàcetteclientèle,selondeuxgrandsvolets:1)lapréventiondeslésionsprofessionnelleset2)ledéveloppementdescompétencesprofessionnellesenvued’accroitrelespossibilitésd’emploi.Lesinterventionsdéveloppéesvisentlesjeunes,toutautant

12

quelesacteursquilesaccompagnentdansleurdémarched’insertionprofessionnelle,soitlesenseignantsresponsablesdesstagesetlesmilieuxdetravailquilesaccueillent.Lesthématiquesderechercheetledéveloppementd’interventionss’estfaitencollaborationavecdesacteursclés,réunisencomitédesuividepuisledémarragedelaprogrammation(ministèredel’Éducation,FédérationdescommissionsscolairesduQuébec,Fédérationdessyndicatsdel’enseignement,Institutdestroublesd’apprentissage).Ladémarchemisedel’avants’inspiredel’ergonomieconstructive.Ils’agitd’unefilièredel’ergonomiequis’intéresseaudéveloppementdespersonnesetdesorganisationsparlaconceptiond’environnementscapacitants(Falzon,2013).Cettedisciplines’appuiesurleconceptde«capabilité»proposéparAmartyaSen(2001)quisoutientquepourqu’unepersonneréussisse,ilnesuffitpasqu’elleaitapprisunetâche,maisquel’activitémiseenœuvredanscettetâcheluipermettentdedéveloppersonpotentieletdepréserversasanté.Unenvironnementcapacitantpermetaussiauxorganisationsdesedévelopperetd’êtreperformante.Danscecourant,l’ergonomenes’intéressedoncpasseulementauxsituationsdetravailactuelles,maisaucheminementdespersonnesetauxparcoursprofessionnels,toutautantqu’auxprospectionsdel’étatdesantéquiévolueraenfonctiondecesparcours.Pourqu’unenvironnementsoitcapacitant,ildoit1)prendreencomptelesdifférencesentrelespersonnes,hommesetfemmeset2)compenserpourlesdéficiencesindividuelles(parexempleliéesauxincapacités).Lesméthodesderecherchequiontétémisesdel’avantpourréaliserlaprogrammationderecherchesontissuesdudomainedel’ergonomiedel’activité.Ellesmisentsurlacollectededonnéesdesourcesmultiplesvisantàcaractériserl’activitédetravailetsesdéterminants.Ellessontdenaturetantqualitativequequantitative,avecunepréférencepourlesdonnéesdeterrain(observationsdutravailensituationréelle,mesuresdesparamètresdel’activité,verbalisationssurletravail,entretiensd’autoconfrontation).Laconférenceaborderalesdifférentsdéfisquiontétésoulevésaucoursdes10dernièresannéesderecherche,enmettantenlumièrelespréoccupationsdespartenaires,lesrecherchesréalisées,ainsiquelesrecommandationsquienontdécoulé.Parmilesrésultatsprésentés,desexemplesd’outilspédagogiquesquipermettentladifférenciationpédagogiqueenmilieudetravailserontprésentés.Cesoutilsontétédéveloppésenprenantenconsidérationuncadreconceptueld’analysedel’activitédetravailutiliséenergonomie:lemodèlederégulationd’unepersonneenactivité(Vézina,2001;St-Vincentetal.,2011).Lorsdelaconférence,troisciblesd’actionpourmieuxtenircomptedesparcoursd’insertiondeshommesetdesfemmesauPFAEserontdiscutés.Eneffet,malgréqu’ellessoientmoinsnombreusesauPFAE,desdéfisd’insertionprofessionnellespécifiquesseposentpourlesjeunesfemmes.DéfairelespréconceptionsliéesauxfacteursderisquedelésionselonlegenreAuPFAE,lamajoritédesmétiersproposésparleministèresontplutôtassociésàdesintérêtstypiquesmasculins(ex:installateurdepneus,ouvrierdansunatelierdebois,manutentionnaire,etc.)(Labergeetal.,2010,ERA,2015).Enoutre,lesdifférentespersonnesimpliquéesdanslasupervisiondestagesentretiennentdespréjugésquantauxmécanismesdelésionpréférentiellementattribuésauxhommes,commelescaractéristiquescomportementalesliéesàlatéméritéoulaprisederisquevolontaire(Labergeetal.2012).Celasemanifestepardesdemandesrépétéesdelapartdespartenairesdeprioriserlapréventiondesaccidentsimminentsquipourraientsurvenirenstage,avecdesexemplestirésd’emploismasculins,etunintérêtpourledéveloppementd’interventionsdesensibilisationvisantsurtoutlesattitudesdesjeuneshommes.Pourmontrerl’importancedeconsidéreraussilesrisquesassociésauxmétiersplusféminins,nous

13

avonsréalisédesanalysesdifférenciéesselonlegenreetmontrél’existencedecertainesexigencesetconditionsdetravailpropresauxfemmes.Cesanalysesontpermisdefaireévoluerlaperceptiondesrisquespourlesmétierschoisisparlesjeunesfemmesetd’offrirdesactivitésd’apprentissageetdepréventionéquitables.Différencierlesactivitésd’apprentissageselonlegenredesélèvesDesenjeuxdifférenciésd’expositionauxfacteursderisquedelésionseposententrelesmétierschoisisparleshommes(ex.accidentsliésàlamanipulationd’outilsetmachinerie)etlesmétierschoisisparlesfemmes(ex.troublesmusculosquelettiquesetrisquespsychosociauxassociésautravailstatiqueourépétitifettravailaveclaclientèle)(Labergeetal.,2012).Enmontrantquelesjeuneshommesétaientmajoritairementexposésàdesrisquesd’accidentàcourttermeetquelesjeunesfemmesétaientplutôtexposéesàdesrisquesdetroublesmusculosquelettiques(TMS)àpluslongterme,notreéquipederechercheaproposéunedémarchedepréventioncomprenantledéveloppementd’uneculturedurabledeprévention.Desidéesdesituationsd’apprentissageliésàdescatégoriesvariéesdemétieretdefacteursderisqueontétéintégréesàauxrecommandationsetoutilsdéveloppés.Tenircomptedesrôlesetrapportssociauxliésàlasupervisiondestage:Genrescroisésdesenseignant.essuperviseursdestageetdesinterlocuteur.tricesenmilieudestageDansuneétudeportantsurlapriseenchargedelaSSTparlesenseignantesetenseignantsduPFAE,ilaétémontréquelesrôlessociauxdegenresemanifestaientaussilorsdelarelationtriangulairedesupervisionauPFAE(élève,enseignant.e,superviseurenentreprise).Eneffet,lesdynamiquessocialesdesupervisionsontmoduléesparlefaitquelamajoritédesinterlocuteursenentrepriseestunhomme,alorsquelamajoritédupersonnelenseignantaffectéàlasupervisiondesstagesestunefemme.Enoutre,ledomainedelapréventionenSSTaététraditionnellementplussouventportépardeshommes.Parconséquent,ilestfréquentquelacrédibilitédesenseignantesàcesujetsoitremiseenquestionparlesentreprises(Labergeetal.,2017).Plusieursaspectsliésaugenreontpuêtredécritsdansladynamiquedesupervision,dontlefaitquelesfemmesenseignantesontsouventl’impressiond’êtreimposteurlorsqu’ellesabordentlesujetdelaSSTaveclessuperviseursmasculinsauxquelsellesseréfèrentenentreprise.Cesrésultatsontmenéàdesrecommandationspourfavoriserlepouvoird’agiretlesentimentdecompétencedesenseignantessuperviseurdestagelorsqu’ellessouhaitentétablirundialoguesurlaSSTaveclesentreprisesdestage.Enrésumé,laconférenceseral’occasiondediscuterdesapportsdel’ergonomieaudéveloppementd’environnementscapacitantspourfavoriserunemeilleureintégrationprofessionnelleensantédesjeunesfaiblementqualifiés,avecunsoucipourl’équitéentreleshommesetlesfemmes.Lesproblématiquesderechercheetlesrésultatsobtenuspourronttrouveréchodansd’autrestypesdesituationquiconcernentlapréventiondeslésionsprofessionnelleschezlesjeunes,lesrelationstriangulairesd’emploi(ex.agencesdeplacement),ledéveloppementdel’employabilitéauprèsdespersonnesprésentantdesincapacitésetmême,ledéveloppementvocationnellorsdesituationsderéadaptationprofessionnellecomplexeavecpertedeliend’emploi.Bibliographie1. Breslin,F.C.etPole,J.D.(2009).«Workinjuryriskamongyoungpeoplewithlearningdisabilities

andattention-deficit/hyperactivitydisorderincanada».AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,99(8),p.1423-1430.

14

2. Breslin,F.C.,Lay,A.M.,Jetha,A.,Smith,P.(2017).“ExaminingoccupationalhealthandsafetyvulnerabilityamongCanadianworkerswithdisabilities.”DisabilityandRehabilitation,onlinefirst.Doi:10.1080/09638288.2017.1327985.

3. Carcillo,S.,Huillery,E.,L’Horty,Y.(2017).«Prévenirlapauvretéparl’emploi,l’éducationetlamobilité».Notesduconseild’analyseéconomique2017/4(n°40),p.1-12.Doi:10.3917/ncae.040.0001

4. Enquêtesurlapopulationactive(EPA)(2015).StatistiqueCanada.Tableau282-0004-estimationsselonleniveaudescolaritéatteint,lesexeetlegrouped'âge,annuel,CANSIM(basededonnées).Rapportproduitle20juin2016.Miseàjourdel’indicateurle8janvier2016.

5. Falzon,P.(2013).Ergonomieconstructive.Paris:PressesUniversitairesdeFrance.doi:10.3917/puf.falzo.2013.01.

6. Laberge,M.,Vézina,N.,Calvet,B.etLedoux,E.(2010).«LePFAE.QuellessontlesimplicationspourlaSST?».Travailetsanté,26(2),p.S7-13.

7. Laberge,M.,Vézina,N.,Saint-Charles,J.(2012).«Safeandhealthyintegrationintosemiskilledjobs:doesgendermatter?”Work41(Suppl.1),p.4642-4649.Doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-0102-4642

8. Laberge,M.,Tondoux,A.,CamiréTremblay,F.,MacEachen,E.(2017).“OccupationalHealthandSafetyinaVocationalTrainingProgram:HowGenderImpactsTeachers'StrategiesandPowerRelationships”.NEWSOLUTIONS:AJournalofEnvironmentalandOccupationalHealthPolicy,27(3),pp.382–402.

9. Lay,A.M.,Saunders,R.,Lifshen,M.,Breslin,F.C.,LaMontagne,A.D.,Tompa,E.,Smith,P.M.(2017).Therelationshipbetweenoccupationalhealthandsafetyvulnerabilityandworkplaceinjury.SafetyScience,94,p.85-93.

10. Mlynaryk,C.,Laberge,M.,Martin,M.(2017).“School-to-worktransitionforyouthwithseverephysicaldisabilities:Stakeholderperspectives”.Work58(4),p.427-438.Doi:10.3233/WOR-172645.

11. Québec,ministèredel’Éducation,duLoisiretduSport.(1999).Uneécoleadaptéeàtoussesélèves.Politiquedel’adaptationscolaire.Québec:LespublicationsduQuébec,37p.

12. Québec,ministèredel’Éducation,duLoisiretduSport.(2008).Programmedeformationdel’écolequébécoise.Enseignementsecondaire,deuxièmecycle.Formationpréparatoireautravailetformationmenantàl’exerciced’unmétiersemi-spécialisé.Québec:LespublicationsduQuébec,chap.1à5et10.

13. Rousseau,N.,Bergeron,L.(2017).«Leparcoursdeformationaxéesurl’emploi:laparoleauxjeunes».McGillJournalofEducation,52(1),135–148.Doi:10.7202/1040808ar.

14. Saunders,R.,Cardoso,S.,LePéousard,M.(2017).“AddressingessentialskillsgapsinanOHStrainingprogram:apilotstudy”.OpenPlenary,InstituteforWork&Health,November,28th2017

Sen,A.(2010).Theideaofjustice.London:Penguin.

15

WhatisSituationalAwarenessandwhydoesitmatter?RichardGasaway,PhD,EFO,CFO

Mostworkersknow,intuitively,thatstrongsituationalawarenessisanimportantaspectofworksitesafety.However,manydonotunderstandwhatsituationalawarenessis,howitisdevelopedandhowitcanerodewhileworkinginahighrisk,highconsequenceenvironment.Thistalkwilldiscusssituationalawarenessandexplainhowitisdeveloped.Specificexamplesofbarriersthatcanerodeawarenesswillbeshared.

16

Reapingwhatwesow:Engagingworkersandstakeholdersinagriculturalhealthresearch

CatherineTrask1*1UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada

Introduction

Musculoskeletaldisordersinagriculture:Scopeoftheissue

AccordingtotheILO’sProgrammeonOccupationalSafetyandHealth,agriculture“…isoneofthemosthazardousoccupationsworldwide”(1).AccordingtotheCanadianAgriculturalcensus,thereareover230,000farmsinCanadaand44,329oftheseresideinSaskatchewan,producingcommoditieslikegrain,oilseeds,andpulses,aswellaspoultry,dairy,beef,andpork(2).Operatingthesefarmsrequiresavarietyofworktasks:animalcare;operationofplantingandharvestingmachinery;equipmentandbuildingmaintenance.Thephysicalexposuresoffarmworkcombinewithauniqueemploymentcontextthatcandeliveralargecumulativelifetimedose.Farmworkoftenstartsataveryyoungageandcontinuesbeyondtypicalretirementage(3,4);morethanhalfofCanadianfarmoperatorsworkmorethan40hoursperweekontheirfarm,and48%alsoworkoffthefarm(2).

Unsurprisingly,theseworkexposuresareassociatedwithelevatedratesofmusculoskeletaldisorders(MSD).AsystematicreviewfoundprevalenceMSDisconsistentlyhigherinfarmersthannon-farmerpopulations,with12monthprevalenceashighas90%.Themajorityofsurveillancestudieshavefocusedonlowbackdisorders(LBD),which,asinotherindustries,representthebulkofMSDinfarming(3,5,6).Acrossstudiesofmanytypesoffarming,theaveragelifetimeprevalenceoflowbackpainwas75%(95%CI=67-82)andaverageone-yearprevalencewas48%(95%CI=42-55)(3).AmorerecentpublicationshowsSaskatchewanhasslightlyhigherestimatesbackpain:57%for12-monthprevalence(7).Theresultcanbemeasurednotonlyinhumansufferingandhealthcarecosts,butalsoineconomicproductivity;inastudyofworkersonintensiveCanadianswinefarms,58%ofrespondentsreportedhavingtheiractivitiesinterruptedbyMSDsymptoms(8).MSDarethemostcommoncauseofworkabsenceinself-employedfarmers,(9)andfarmincomehasbeenshowntobelowerwhenoperatorshaveMSD-relateddisability(10).AsurveyofIowafarmersshowedtheywere8timesmorelikelytomakemajorchangesintheirworkactivitiesasaresultoflowbackpainthanthegeneralworkingpopulation(11).

Challengesinagriculturalhealthresearch

Despitethedemonstratedneedforeffectiveintervention,researchinagricultureremainschallenging,withthegreatestchallengeslikelyaligningwiththemostunderstudiedpopulations(12).Theneedforpreventionresearchinagriculturehasbeenwidelyacknowledged(13,14),butfewergonomicinterventionshavebeensystematicallyevaluatedinagriculturalcontextsrelativetootherindustries.Partofthechallengeisthatthereisabroadvarietyofcommodities,farmpractices,topography,climate,tools,machinery,andworkenvironments(12)thatdefiesgeneralizingfindingsattheindustryorevenoccupationlevel.

InCanada,mostsmall-scale‘family’farmsdonotreachtheemploymentthresholdtorequireworkerscompensationboardinsurance,andsotheyelectnottopurchaseit.Thisleadstoalackofindustry-leveladministrativedataoninjuryrateandlimitsresearchsurveillance.EffortstoaddressthishaveresultedintheCanadianAgriculturalInjuryReport(CAIR)(15),aswellascohortstudiesusingpostalsurveystoinvestigatefarminjuryrates{McMillan,2015#1445}.

17

Despitetheseefforts,theadditionalchallengeofgeographicallydispersedfarmsmakeson-farmergonomicassessmentrare.Theaveragefarmsizeis1135acresinManitobaand1784acresinSaskatchewan,whichtranslatesintomanykilometersoftravelbetweenfarms.Thesefarmsalsotypicallyhavefewemployees,sotargetingtypicalresearchsamplesizesinvolvescommunication,trust-building,andrecruitmentwithmultipleworksites,followedbyextensivetravel.Thisisincontrasttothemoretypicaloccupationalresearchsamplingframeachievedbyapproachingasingleemployerorunionandaccessingalargegroupofpotentialparticipants.Lastly,therecanbeconsiderablechallengesforresearcherstogaincredibilitywithanoccupationalgroupwhoidentifiesstronglywiththehistoryandcultureoftheirvocation.Farmersoftenrefertotheirworkas‘morethanajob’and‘wayoflife’thatpermeatesallaspectsoffamilyandworklife,ofteninaninter-generationalway(16).Iffarmersconsiderexpertisetobeacquiredthroughexperience,the‘outsider’statusofresearchersmaynotbeseentooffermuchinthewayofunderstandingtheworkcontextordevelopingrealisticsolutions.

PhilosophyandApproachClearlytherearemultiplediversechallengesinaddressinghealthandsafetyinagriculture,andovercomingthesechallengesrequiresauniquesetofapproaches.Engagingpartnersinergonomicsresearchcantakemanyforms,andthese‘collaboration’strategiescomebymanynames:participatoryactionresearch,community-engagedresearch,andparticipatoryergonomics.TheprojectsundertakenbytheUniversityofSaskatchewanErgonomicsLabhaveusedCIHR’sintegratedknowledgetranslation(iKT)approach(17).Aswiththeotherapproachesabove,iKTcharacterizedbyengagingstakeholdersthroughouttheresearchprocess/project;thereiscollaborationofresearchersandknowledgeuserstoshapetheresearchprocessstartingwithresearchquestionsandmethodologythroughtointerpretinganddisseminatingresults.Formingsuccessfulpartnershipswithkeystakeholderstoconductthisresearchproducesresultsthataremorerelevantandmorelikelytobeputintopractice–animportantoutcomeinergonomicsresearchorprofessionalconsulting.ThemainmechanismforiKTEattheUniversityofSaskatchewanErgonomicsLabistheStakeholderAdvisoryGroup(SAG).EachindustryareaorresearchtopichasitsownSAGcomprisedofmemberswhowillhelpdirecttheresearchandinterpretfindings:inter-disciplinaryresearchers(usuallyco-investigatorsontheproject);OSHprofessionalsandNGOssuchasWorkSafeSaskatchewanandthePrairieAgriculturalMachineryInstitute(anon-profitappliedresearchinstitutewhosemandatetodetermineandpromotebestpracticesinagriculture);policymakerssuchasMinistriesofAgricultureandDepartmentofLabourRelationsandWorkplaceSafety;andindustrystakeholdersincludingrepresentativesfromtheUniversityofSaskatchewanResearchFarmsandproducersfromthesurroundingcommunity.Whilemanyofthesestakeholdersparticipateinthecourseoftheirusualwork,forfarmowners,agriculturalworkers,andotherproducerstheSAGinvolvestravel,reading,andmeetingactivitiesoutsideoftheirregularwork.Cultivatingrelationshipswithproducersrequiresbuildingtrustandmakingtheresearchrelevantandresponsivetotheirneedssothatthedemandsofparticipationareoutweighedbythebenefits.Italsorequiresconsiderationofsomeofthepotentialbarrierstoproducers’participation:avoidingschedulingduringbusygrowingseason,travelandparkingcosts,andthelesstangibleaspectoffeelingcomfortable,welcomed,valued,andincludedinresearchdiscussions.TheSAGsareengagedatkeystagesintheresearchprocess.Inadditiontosolicitingspecificinputfromspecificmembersduringdevelopmentofresearchquestionsandgrantproposals,wetypicallyplanatleasttwoin-personmeetingswithaSAG:1)apreliminarymeetingtodiscussandrefinedatacollectionprotocolsandspecificresearchquestions,2)aninterpretationmeetingoncedatahas

18

beencollected,processed,andsummarizedtodiscussthefindingsandbrainstormhowbesttodisseminateit.Throughoutthisprocess,workersandproducersshiftfrom‘subjects/participants’to‘researchpartners’;thiscaninvolveintellectualcontributionsthatsubstantiallyimpactthegoalsandmethodologyofthestudyandresultinco-authorship.

ResultsandDiscussionThissectiondescribessomeexamplesofergonomicsandoccupationalhealthprojectsthathaveusedanintegratedknowledgetranslationapproachtoconductresearch.

FarmersBackStudyLowerbackdisordersareanimportantpublichealthissueamongfarmers,andthisstudyaimedtomeasureexposuretobackpainriskfactorsonSaskatchewanfarms.Thisinvolvedvisiting54farmerson22farmsthroughoutthegrowingseasontomeasuremachineryvibration,manualhandling,andtrunkpostureduringregularworkdays.OntheadviceoftheSAG,wealsoconductedinterviewswithfarmerstolearnabouttheimpactofthepainanddisabilitythatlowerbackdisordershave,aswellasexaminingthepreventativemeasuresandsolutionsthatfarmersimplementtopreventlowerbackpain.TheSAGwasalsoinstrumentalinshapingthedisseminationplans,resultinginsummariesoftheinformationbeingsentoutto27,000SaskatchewanfarmsandpresentedatagriculturaleventsliketheFarmProgressShowandAgribition.Comprehensiveevaluationofneedle-lessinjectioninswinebarnsOverthepastseveralyears,theCanadianporkindustryhasrapidlydevelopedfromsmallfamilyfarmsintolarge-scale,modernizedproductionsystemsthatrequiredmajorprocesschangesandtechnologicaladvancements.Thesetechnologyandprocesschangesmayimpactworkerhealthandsafety,buttheseeffectscanbedifficulttoquantifyespeciallywhenneededtomakebusinessdecisionsonmitigationstrategies.Inordertoevaluateworkplacehealthandsafetyrelativetoimprovementsinproductivity,thisprojectconductedacomprehensiveevaluationofneedle-lessinjectiondevices;theneedle-lessdeviceswereevaluatedintermsofinjuryratespre-andpost-implementation,workerpreference,productivityandupperextremitybiomechanicscomparedtotraditionalneedles,andoverallcost.OntheadviceoftheSAG,theprojectgoalswereexpandedtodevelopasuiteofperformancemeasuresthatcanbegeneralizedtoanynewworkplacetechnology.

b)a) c)

Figure3:Theauthorconductingresearchatagriculturalworkplaces:a)intensiveswineproductionwithmeasurementteam(LtoR)CatherineTrask,LeeWhittington,OlugbengaAdebayo,XiaokeZeng,andBernardoPredicala;b)outdoorhempproductionatafamilyfarm;c)wholebodyvibrationassessmentonheavyagriculturalmachinery

19

Theresultisanonlinetoolthatestimatescost-benefitbasedonuserinputsregardingthemainconsiderationsforadoptinganewtool:equipmentpurchase,productivity,riskforinjury,maintenanceneeds,andlabourforceconsiderationsliketurnoverandtraining.OccupationalhealthandsafetyforindoormarijuanaproductionChangingregulatoryenvironmentmeansmarijuanaproductionwillmovefromanillegally-growncroptoapotentiallycommonindoorcrop.Becauseithashistoricallybeenillegal,thereisverylittleresearchontheoccupationalhazardsoreffectivepreventionstrategiesforthisindustry.Asaresult,occupationalhealthandsafetyprofessionalsareunlikelytobefamiliarwithindustryneeds.ThereisaneedtobetterunderstandtheOSHknowledgeofmarijuanaproductionworkersandtheirperceptionsofOSHregulations,OSHcontrols,andsourcesofOSHinformation.Thegoalsofthisstudyweretoconductinterviewsandfacilitytourswithmarijuanaproducersto1)describeproductiontasksandidentifypotentialhazardsrelatedtothesetasks;and2)determineproductionworkers’perceptionsof,andinformationsourcesfor,OSHhazardsandcontrolsintheirsector.Manyworkersinthissectorhavehistoricallybeensecretiveandreluctanttosharedetailsabouttheirworkandoccupationalhealthandsafetypractices.Therefore,buildingtrustingrelationshipswithstakeholderswasvitalandinthiscaseinvolvedcultivatingexistingcontactsintheindustry,workingwiththemonthestudyproposal,andenlistingthemtohelpwithadditionalrecruitment.Torecognizecontributionstothestudydesignandfindings,oneoftheseinitialcontactsandstudyparticipantsisalsoaco-authoronajournalmanuscript.

RelevancetoPractitionersThispaperpositsthatergonomicsprojects(andalloccupationalhealthresearch)aremorerelevantandapplicablewhenrelatedstakeholdersareengagedthroughouttheprocess,andgivesseveralexamplesfromthechallengingcontextoftheagriculturalindustry.Hereisasummaryofconsiderationsforincorporatingthisstrategyinanergonomicsproject:1) Donotunder-estimatethetimeorbudgetrequiredtodothiswell.Stakeholderswilltaketime

togetuptospeed,andifthattakestimeawayfromtheirworkanhonorariummaybeappropriate.

2) It’shelpfultocultivaterelationshipswithstakeholders,andnotjustwhenyouneedsomethingfromthem.Prioritizefrequentcommunicationtostakeholdersbyreportbackonfindings,providingupdatesonfundingapplicationsandprojectprogress,andcheck-injusttosayhiandtouchbaseonwhattheircurrentissuesare.

3) Considerformalizingpartnershipsandinvolvementwithstakeholders.Thismayinvolveincludingstakeholdersasco-authorsorco-presenters,deliveringfindingsinformatstheyselectandthatservetheirconstituency.

4) Gotothegroupyoutrustforideasanddirection;theywilltellyouwhatisimportanttothem,andwhentheprojectismeaningfultheywillwanttobeinvolvedinthework.

20

References1. ILO ILO. The ILO Programme on Occupational Safety and Health in Agriculture 1999 [cited 2011 October 31]. Available from: http://www.ilo.org/safework/areasofwork/lang--en/WCMS_117367/index.htm. 2. StatisticsCanada. Census of Agriculture counts 44,329 farms in Saskatchewan 2007 [cited 2011 December 16]. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ca-ra2006/analysis-analyses/sask-eng.htm. 3. Osborne A, Blake C, Fullen BM, Meredith D, Phelan J, McNamara J, et al. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among farmers: A systematic review. Am J Ind Med. 2011. 4. Voaklander DC, Dosman JA, Hagel LM, Warsh J, Pickett W. Farm work exposure of older male farmers in Saskatchewan. Am J Ind Med. 2010;53(7):706-15. 5. Rosecrance J, Rodgers G, Merlino L. Low back pain and musculoskeletal symptoms among Kansas farmers. Am J Ind Med. 2006;49(7):547-56. 6. Walker-Bone K, Palmer KT. Musculoskeletal disorders in farmers and farm workers. Occup Med (Lond). 2002;52(8):441-50. 7. McMillan M, Trask C, Dosman J, Hagel L, Pickett W, Team SFICS. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among Saskatchewan farmers. Journal of agromedicine. 2015;20(3):292-301. 8. Trask C. Preliminary ergonomic evaluation of barn tasks in intensive Swine production. J Agromedicine. 2013;18(4):368-78. 9. Hartman E, Oude Vrielink HH, Huirne RB, Metz JH. Risk factors for sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders among self-employed Dutch farmers: a case-control study. Am J Ind Med. 2006;49(3):204-14. 10. Whelan S, Ruane DJ, McNamara J, Kinsella A, McNamara A. Disability on Irish farms--a real concern. J Agromedicine. 2009;14(2):157-63. 11. Weir P, Holmes A, Andrews D, Albert W, Azar N, Callaghan J. Determination of the just noticeable difference (JND) in trunk posture perception. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2007;8(3):185-99. 12. Trask C, Khan MI, Adebayo O, Boden C, Bath B. Equity in whom gets studied: A systematic review examining geographical region, gender, commodity, and employment context in research of low back disorders in farmers. Journal of agromedicine. 2015;20(3):273-81. 13. Kirkhorn SR, Earle-Richardson G, Banks RJ. Ergonomic risks and musculoskeletal disorders in production agriculture: recommendations for effective research to practice. J Agromedicine. 2010;15(3):281-99. 14. Davis KG, Kotowski SE. Understanding the ergonomic risk for musculoskeletal disorders in the United States agricultural sector. Am J Ind Med. 2007;50(7):501-11. 15. CAIR CAIR. Agriculture-related Fatalities in Canada. Edmonton, Alberta: 2016. 16. Elliot V, Cammer A, Pickett W, Marlenga B, Lawson J, Dosman J, et al. Towards a deeper understanding of parenting on farms: A qualitative study. PloS one. 2018;13(6):e0198796. 17. CIHR CIfHR. Guide to Knowledge Translation Planning at CIHR: Integrated and End-of-Grant Approaches. Ottawa, Canada: 2012.

21

WORKSHOPSDay1–Oct15th

09:00-16:30

Facilitators:Dr.JudyVillageandDr.PatrickNeumannHowtoIntegrateErgonomicsintotheEngineeringDesignProcess

Day2–Oct16th

14:45-16:15

Facilitator:TanyaMoroseApplyingforcertificationwithCCCPEandmaintainingcertification

Day3–Oct17

10:15-12:00

Facilitator:VanceMcPhersonApplyingadultlearningprinciples:ensuringsuccesstoyourhealthandsafetyeducationandtrainingsessions

15:15-16:45

Facilitator:LucyHartOfficeergonomics2018:unpackingthenewCSAz412standard

Day4–Oct18th

10:30-12:0013:00-14:30

Facilitator:RichardWellsDevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario

13:00-14:30

Facilitator:AllisonStephensMovingfromLabtoIndustry:Howtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptability

13:00-14:30

Facilitator:TrevorSchellCanergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients.

22

Howtointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocess

Dr.JudyVillage1,Dr.PatrickNeumann2

1SchoolofPopulationandPublicHealthUBC,Vancouver,BC,Canada

2DepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineering,RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario

WorkshopOverview

Inthisone-dayworkshop,participantswilllearnabouthowhumanfactors/ergonomicscanbeeffectivelyintegratedintotheengineeringdesignprocesstoimprovenotonlyworkerhealth,butbusinessperformance.ParticipantswilllearnaboutHFandtheindustrializationprocessandvariousproductiondesignissuesandstrategies.TheywillalsolearnhowtolinkHFtocorporatestrategiestogainsupportfromseniormanagementforHF.Ergonomistswillbechallengedtothinkaboutgapsintheirunderstandingofengineeringdesignlanguage,toolsandtechniquesandstrategizetofindwaystogainthisinformationinordertoworkmoreeffectivelyonateamwithengineers.Commonbusinessimprovementstrategiessuchas“Lean”and“SixSigma”willbediscussedhighlightingwaysthatHFcanenhancethesestrategies.SeveralengineeringdesigntoolsthathavebeenadaptedforHFwillbepresented(suchasthefailuremodeeffectsanalysis,anddesignforassembly).ParticipantswilllearnwaystoworkwithengineeringgroupstoadaptotherengineeringdesigntoolsandtechniquestoincludeHF.ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:Attheendofthisworkshop,participantswillbeableto:

• Explainwhyergonomicsistypicallyleftoutoftheengineeringdesignprocess• Describetypicaldesignprocessesforhowworkisorganized• Describewaystointegrateergonomicsintotheengineeringdesignprocessbasedonthe

designforhumanfactors(HF)theory• ExplainkeyprinciplesofleanmanufacturingandhowHFcanbeintegratedintolean• Usetoolstonavigatethecorporatestrategy(cognitivemapping)andthedesignprocess

(processmapping)• Showhowotherengineeringtoolscanbeadaptedtoincludeergonomics(suchasfailure

modeeffectsanalysis,anddesignforassembly)• Provideergonomicdesignguidelinesandotherinformationtoengineersinaformatthatis

mosteffectivefortheiruseDurationoftheWorkshop:FullDayBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:JudyVillageisanAdjunctProfessorintheSchoolofPopulationandPublicHealthattheUniversityofBritishColumbiaandaCertifiedProfessionalErgonomistinCanadaandtheUS.Shehasmorethan25yearsofexperienceconductingresearch,consultingandteachinginmusculoskeletalinjury

23

prevention.SheearnedherPh.D.intheDepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineeringatRyersonUniversity.Thegoalofherresearch,workingwithalargeelectronicscompany,wastoworkwithengineersandhumanfactorsspecialiststofindwaystointegratehumanfactorsintodesignoftheirassemblyproductionsystems.HerpublicationintheErgonomicsJournaldescribingthethree-yearactionresearchcollaborationrecentlywonthe2015LibertyMutualAwardforthepapermostadvancingthefieldofergonomics..PatrickNeumannisanAssociateProfessorintheDepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineeringofRyersonUniversity.HeholdsalimitedengineeringlicenseinOntario,theEuropeanErgonomistdesignationandadoctoraldegreeindesignsciencefromLundUniversityinSweden.Hisresearchfocusesonintegratinghumanfactorsintothedesignandmanagementofoperationsforsustainablecompetitiveadvantagethroughimprovementsinproductivity,qualityandemployeecompetencedevelopment.

24

ApplyingforCertificationwithCCCPEandMaintainingCertification

TanyaMorose,MSc,CCPE,CRSP1,21PublicServicesHealthandSafetyAssociation,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

2CanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists,Renfrew,Ontario,Canada

WorkshopOverviewInthisinteractiveworkshop,representativesoftheBoardoftheCanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists(CCCPE)willprovideanoverviewoftheapplicationrequirementsandtheapplicationprocessforAssociateErgonomist(AE)andCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)designations.Tipstoimprovethechancesofasuccessfulapplicationwillbeprovided.

OncetheCCPEdesignationisawardeditistheresponsibilityofthecertificanttoparticipateincontinuingeducationandmaintainanactiveprofessionalpracticeasanergonomistinordertomaintaintheircertification.TheContinuanceofCertificationrequirementsandprocesswillbereviewed.TipstomaximizeaccumulationofpointsduringtheCCPE’s5yearCoCperiodandtrackprogressforsuccessfulCoCsubmissionswillbeproved.

ParticipantsareencouragedtoreviewtheContinuanceofCertificationand/orCCCPEApplicationkitpriortoattendingthesessioninordertoengageinadiscussionandquestion/answerperiodwithboardmembers.

ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:• ParticipantswillgainanunderstandingoftheapplicationrequirementsfortheAEand

CCPEdesignations• Participantswillgainanunderstandingoftheapplicationprocess,importantdeadlinesand

timelinesfortheCCCPEBoard’sdecisionontheapplicationstatus.• ReceivetipsfromseasonedboardmemberstoincreasethechancesofasuccessfulAE,CCPE

orCoCsubmission

DurationoftheWorkshop:90minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:TanyaisaCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)andCanadianRegisteredSafetyProfessional(CRSP).Shehasworkedinawiderangeofindustriesandbringsover18yearsofconsultingexperiencetoPSHSA.PriortojoiningPSHSA,Tanyawasinvolvedinclients'ergonomicsprogramsincludingreviewsofnewproductionlinesinthedesignphase,workstationassessments,andjobsuitabilityevaluationsforreturn-to-work.InhercurrentroleasthePoliceServicesSpecialistatPSHSA,Tanyaprovidessupporttopoliceservicesintheirinjuryandillnesspreventionefforts.

TanyaearnedherMastersofScienceinKinesiologyfromtheUniversityofWaterlooandOccupationalHealthandSafetycertificatefromRyersonUniversity.SheisontheExecutiveoftheGoldenTriangleCanadianSocietyofSafetyEngineers(CSSE)chapterandisacurrentboardmemberandpastpresidentoftheCanadianCollegefortheCertificationofProfessionalErgonomists(CCCPE).

25

ApplyingAdultlearningPrinciples:EnsuringsuccesstoyourH&Seducationandtrainingsessions

NatalieCarscadden,BSC,CCPE,CRSP1,VanceMcPherson,MEd1

1VanceMcPhersonMEd,HSN,SudburyOntarioCanada

WorkshopOverviewWhatarethemosteffective,efficientwaystoteachhealthandsafetytopicstoadults?Howcantraininggobeyondknowledgetransferandhelpcreateacultureofsafety?Whattechniqueswillmoveyoupastcompliancetowardslastingchange?Thisworkshopwillprovideyouwithsomebasicprinciplesandtoolstofacilitatesuccessfultrainingsessionsforadultlearners.Participantswillwalkawayfromthishalf-dayworkshopwithavarietyofready-to-usetoolsandtemplates,anddesigndocumentsforatrainingprogramthattheycanimplementimmediately.

ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:Bytheendofthisworkshop,participantswill: SectionFocusQuestion1) Assesstheneedforeffectivehealthandsafetytraining Doyouwantcompliance,orculture?2) Distinguishoutcomes,objectives,andcompetencies Outcomes/objectives…whocares?3) Developanoperationaldefinitionoflearning Canlearninglast?4) Reviewtechniquesthatpromotememoryretentionin

adultsWhatcanbedonetopromotelearningandretention?

5) Distinguishcognitive,affective,andpsychomotor(knowledge/attitude/skill)outcomes

Whatabouthardskillsandsoftskills?

6) Reviewpsychomotordomain(hands-on)techniques Whatcanbedonetopromotespecificactions?

7) Recognizeaffectivedomaintechniquesasthekeytoculturechange

Howcanyouingrainnewattitudes?

8) Assesstheefficacyofonlinelearningforavarietyofworkplacetrainingscenarios

Whatcan/shouldgoonline?

9) Performanoutcomeanalysisforatrainingproblem Puttingittogether:Establishinganeffectivetrainingplanin30minutes

10) Designanauthenticevaluationforatrainingproblem11) BlueprintatrainingplanforatrainingproblemDurationoftheWorkshop:1hour45minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitators:NatalieCarscaddenistheManagerofOccupationalHealthandSafetyatHealthSciencesNorth.Shehasover25yearsofworkexperiencerelatedtohealthandsafetymanagement,ergonomicsandauditing.VanceMcPhersonisCoordinatorofLeadershipandLearningatHealthSciencesNorth.Hehasbeendesigningandcoordinatinglearningexperiencesforadultlearnersinavarietyofcontextsforeightyears.

26

OfficeErgonomics2018:UnpackingtheNewCSAZ412StandardLucyHart,MSc,CCPE

1GlobalFurnitureGroup,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

WorkshopOverview

CSAZ412-17OfficeErgonomics–Anapplicationstandardforworkplaceergonomicshasundergoneamajoroverhaulsincethelasteditionwaspublishedin2000.Z412-17istheapplicationpartofZ1004-12asitappliestooffices.Asastandard(previouslyaguideline),itisintendedtobesuitableforadoptionintojurisdictionalregulations.CSAZ412-17containshighlevelrequirementsaswellasdetailedrequirementsfortheapplicationofergonomicsinofficeworksystemsincludingfurniture,accessories,equipment,layoutanduse,environmentalconditions,manualmaterialshandling,psychosocialworkplacefactorsandpsychologicalhealth.Thestandardappliestoallofficeusersinofficeworkspacesinnewandexistingbuildings.CSAZ412-17isanewstapleforcorporateduediligencewithrespecttoenhancingoccupanthealth,safetyandwell-beingandoptimizingsystemperformance.

ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:1. RecognizethepositioningofZ412-17withinCSAOHSManagementSystemstandards2. DescribeZ412-17highlights3. Summarizekeyhighlevelanddetailedrequirementsfortheofficeworkspace4. RecognizetheusefulnessofZ412-17inthedesignandredesignofofficeworkspacesDurationoftheWorkshop:1hourBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:LucyHartisacertifiedergonomistwithover25years’experienceguidingpublicandprivateorganizationsintheapplicationofergonomicstoenhanceemployeehealth,well-beingandproductivity.SheactivelycontributestothedevelopmentandmaintenanceofstandardsandguidelinesincludingtheCanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA)applicationstandardforofficeergonomicsandtheBusinessandInstitutionalFurnitureManufacturer’sAssociation(BIFMA)ErgonomicsGuideline.SheistheChairofCSATechnicalCommitteeonZ412OfficeErgonomics,ChairofBIFMAErgonomicsSubcommitteeandmemberoftheLEEDPilotCredit44ErgonomicsWorkGroup.Lucyisapeer-electedEducationallyInfluentialErgonomistasrecognizedbytheInstituteforWorkandHealth.

27

DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario

RichardWells,PhD1.21ProfessorEmeritus,DepartmentofKinesiology,UniversityofWaterloo

2Director,CentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)

DevelopmentofanewMSDPreventionGuideforOntario:Amulti-stakeholderinitiativeledbytheCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)BuildingonpreviousworkbytheOntarioHealthandSafetysystem,theCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD)hasbeenleadingatwo-yearprojecttodevelopanewOntarioMSDPreventionGuide.Wehaveusedacollaborativeapproachtoengageandworkwithawiderangeofworkplacestakeholders.ThenewGuidelinesarebeingreleasedduringGlobalergonomicsmonthinOctober2018.Thehalf-dayworkshopwillleadtheparticipantsthroughtheprocessofcreatingtheGuidelinesandtherationaleforthecontentandstructure.Durationoftheworkshop:3hoursBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:Dr.RichardWellsisaprofessorintheDepartmentofKinesiology,FacultyofAppliedHealthSciences,UniversityofWaterloo.HewaseducatedasaMechanicalengineerattheUniversityofManchester,EnglandandMcMasterUniversity,wherehespecializedinAppliedMechanicswithapplicationtohumanfunctionandinjury;headinjuryinboxinganddescriptionofhumangaitusingassistivedevices.Heistheassociatedirector,stakeholderrelationsfortheCentreofResearchExpertiseforthePreventionofMusculoskeletalDisorders(CRE-MSD),amulti-universityCentrehostedattheUniversityofWaterloo.HeisalsoanadjunctscientistattheInstituteforWork&Health(IWH).HeisapastmemberoftheBoardofDirectorsofOccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkers(OHCOW).HehasbeeninvolvedinergonomicsstandardsandregulationswithACGIHandtheOccupationalSafetyandHealthAdministration(OSHA)intheUSAandintheOntarioStrategyforthePreventionofMSDandtheCanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA).Healsoactsasaconsultantandspeakeronergonomicissues.

28

MovingfromLabtoIndustry:HowtomeasureforceandassessitforacceptabilityAllisonStephens,MSc,CCPE,CPE1

1FanshaweCollege,LondonOntario,CanadaLearningobjectivesinclude:

� Criticalthinkingtodetermineapproachtoforcemeasurement� Measureforcestodemonstratepartvariation.� ReviewanddemonstrateexternalinfluencesonForcemeasurement� Analysisofacceptabilityrelativetostrengthcapability

TheworkshopwouldbeusingtheMark10forcegauge.Workshopwillincludemanyhandsonmeasurements,oflego,jars,clips,andtriggers.Topicsofdiscussionwouldincludeabriefreviewofforcegauges,tipsandtrick,variabilityofpartsandhowtodealwiththisstatistically.Fromthemeasurementstaken,participantswillevaluatetheacceptabilityoftheeffortusingtheHandpaksoftware,DreyfusandPeebles&Norrisreferences.Toconcludetheworkshoptherewillbeademonstrationofanewtechnology,theForcePuck.Anintroductiontowhyitwasdeveloped,it’sreliabilityandrepeatabilitywillbediscussed.ParticipantscanperformhandsonmeasurementwiththeForcePuck,andreviewtheforceprofiles.Thiswillbeahands-onworkshopforbothbeginnersandpractitionerstoreview,discussanddemonstrateforcemeasurementinthefieldofergonomics.Durationofworkshop:90minutes

29

Canergonomistsdomoreharmthangood?-Howtoavoidcostlymistakesforyourclients

TrevorSchellBSc.MSc,CCPE11OccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkers(OHCOW),Sudbury,ON,Canada

WorkshopOverviewWhileofficeergonomicscanbethemostcommonareaofinvestigationforanErgonomist,theprocessofevaluationandstructuringofrecommendationscanoftenbecomeveryconfusingandcostlyforworkplaceswithoutsufficientknowledge.Nothingcanbemorefrustratingforacompanythanpurchasingnewequipmentonlytofindoutitisnotcompatiblewiththeworkers.Thisinturn,canhavemanyworkplacesrejectthenotionofergonomicsasabenefittothem.Ergonomistsneedtobeconsciousofequipmenttheyarerecommendingtotheirclientstoensuretheproducttheyaresuggestingwillperformaspromisedandnotplacetheworkeratanincreasedriskofinjury.Howrecommendationsarepresentedisimportanttoworkplacepartiestoensuretheyarepurchasingthecorrectequipment.Forexample,issaying“purchaseaheightadjustablekeyboardtray”thecorrectapproach?Byutilizingcasestudiesandtoolslearnhowtoavoidcostlymistakesandimproveemployeewell-being.

ObjectivesoftheWorkshop:• Toincreaseawarenessoftheimportanceofknowingtheproductyouarerecommending• Implicationsofrecommendingequipmentwithlittletonoresearchbehindit• Thecoststoworkplacesbasedonunsoundrecommendations• Recognitionoftheimportanceofknowingtheproductbeingsuggested• Isaproducttrulyergonomicorbeneficialtotheworker

DurationoftheWorkshop:90minutesBriefBiographyoftheFacilitator:TrevorSchellgraduatedfromtheUniversityofGuelphin1994withanHonorsBachelorofSciencedegreeinHumanKineticswithspecializationinthefieldofBiomechanicsandErgonomics.In1997,TrevorgraduatedfromtheUniversityofMassachusetts-LowellwithaMaster’sdegreeinthefieldofErgonomicsandaminorinEpidemiology.TrevorisalsorecognizedasaCanadianCertifiedProfessionalErgonomist(CCPE)andafullmemberoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists(ACE).TrevorhasbeenanErgonomistwiththeOccupationalHealthClinicsforOntarioWorkersfor20yearsworkingwithjointhealthandsafetycommitteesonavarietyofergonomicissuesoverawiderangeofindustries.HeisalsothecoordinatoroftheannualInternationalRSIDaywebinarseries.Trevorhasalsopresentedatconferences,testifiedbeforeaUSSenateCommissionontheneedforergonomicregulationsandhasbeenfeaturedininterviewswithCNN,AssociatedPress,CTVandCBCRadio.

30

PAPERSESSION1:PHYSIOLOGY

Day2-Oct16th

10:30-11:30

PaperSession1Physiology

IgorZoviléÉvaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelativeSamuelCharbonneauContraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempératureambianteAlexieDennieTheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry

31

Évaluationdescontraintesphysiologiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100dansdifférentesconditionsd’humiditérelative.

Zovilé,I.1*,Charbonneau,S.1,Marchand,D.1,Gauvin,C.2,Tuduri,L.21UQAM,Montréal,Québec, Canada2IRSST,Montréal,Québec,Canada

Introduction

Leportdesappareilsdeprotectionrespiratoires(APR)detypeP100causeuninconfortquiincitelestravailleursànepasseprotégeradéquatementetàs’exposeràdescontaminantsquipeuventfavoriserledéveloppementdeplusieursmaladiesprofessionnelles(1).Parmilesfacteursenvironnementauxsusceptiblesd’influencerleurconfort,l’humiditérelativeinterfèreaveclesmécanismesdethermorégulation,augmenteraitlarésistancerespiratoire(2),etinciteraitlestravailleursànepasporterleurAPR.Ceprojetàcommeobjectifd’identifierlesconditionsenvironnementaleslesplusinconfortablesetquantifierl’effetdecesconditionssurplusieursparamètresphysiologiques.

MethodsHuithommesentre20et30ansontmarchépendant30minutesàuneinclinaisonaugmentantprogressivementde30%à80%ducoutcardiaquerelatif.Lestestsontétéréalisésdans3conditionsd’humiditérelativedifférentes(30%,50%,80%)àunetempératurede29°C.Chaqueconditionaétéeffectuéeavecetsansleportd’unAPR.Lesvariablessuivantesontétémesurées:saturationenoxyhémoglobine,fréquencecardiaque,températureinterne,températuredansl’APR,%O2,%CO2,fréquencerespiratoire,perceptiondel’effort,tempsderéaction,tempsdemouvement.

FindingsDanslesconditionsd’humiditérelativeplusélevéesonobservedesfréquencescardiaques(Figure1),l’EtCO2,lafréquencerespiratoireetuneperceptionsubjectivedel’effortsignificativementplusélevéspourunmêmeeffortpourlesconditionseffectuéesavecleportd’unAPR.Cesdifférencessontplusapparenteslorsdeseffortsphysiqueslesplusintenses.

32

RelevancetoPractitionersLesrésultatsdeceprojetdevraientpermettred’émettredenouvellesrecommandationspourlimiterlespériodesdetravailtroplongueschezlestravailleursportantunAPRdanscertainesconditionsenvironnementales.

References1. RamirezJA.EvaluationofparticlepenetrationandbreathingresistanceofN95filteringface---piecerespiratorsanduncertifieddustmasks.2015.2. BeaudryC,DionC,GérinM,PerraultG,BéginD,LavouéJ.Expositiondestravailleursdelaconstructionàlasilicecristalline.Bilanetanalysedelalittérature(versioncorrigée)Montréal:InstitutderechercheRobert---Sauvéensantéetensécuritédutravail(IRSST).2011.3. CheMuhamedAM,AtkinsK,StannardSR,MundelT,ThompsonMW.Theeffectsofasystematicincreaseinrelativehumidityonthermoregulatoryandcirculatoryresponsesduringprolongedrunningexerciseintheheat.Temperature(Austin,Tex).2016;3(3):455---64.4. MoyenNE,EllisCL,CicconeAB,ThurstonTS,CochraneKC,BrownLE,etal.Increasingrelativehumidityimpactslow---intensityexerciseintheheat.Aviation,space,andenvironmentalmedicine.2014;85(2):112---9.5. RobergeRJ,KimJ---H,CocaA.Protectivefacemaskimpactonhumanthermoregulation:anoverview.Annalsofoccupationalhygiene.2011:mer069.

33

Contraintesphysiologiquesetphysiquesassociéesauportd’unappareildeprotectionrespiratoiredetypeP100selonl’intensitéphysiqueetlatempérature

ambiante

DenisMarchand1*,ChantalGauvin2,LudovicTuduri2,SamuelCharbonneau1,IgorZovilé1

1UQAM,Montréal,Québec,Canada2IRSST,Montréal,Québec,Canada

Introduction

Dans le secteur de la construction, l’exposition professionnelle à divers contaminants tels quel’amiante, lasilicecristallineet lesmoisissures,estfréquentedansplusieursmétiers.Leportd’unappareil de protection respiratoire (APR) est reconnu commeun outil essentiel pour réduire lesrisques d’exposition par voie respiratoire dans les milieux où le contrôle à la source s’avèreinsuffisant.Unedesraisonslesplusfréquemmentcitéespourl'intoléranceetl'inutilisationdesAPRdetypefiltrantseraitl'inconfortliéàl'accumulationdechaleurauniveauduvisage(Radonovichetcoll., 2009; Baig et coll., 2010). Selon Roberge et coll. (2010), d’autres facteurs tels quel’augmentationdelatempératuredel'airrespirableetdelaconcentrationdedioxydedecarbone(CO2)àl’intérieurdel’APR,oudescontraintesphysiologiquestelsquelafréquencecardiaqueetlasaturation en oxygène peuvent aussi expliquer le manque de motivation à porter ce type deprotection respiratoire. L’objectif de ce projet de recherche consiste àmesurer l’impact du portd’unAPRàépurationd'airsur différentesvariablesphysiologiquesselon l’importancede l’effortphysique et de la température ambiante. Le typed’APR sélectionnépour l’étude est celui le plusfréquemment utilisé par les travailleurs du milieu de la construction et suggéré par l’ASPconstruction, soit undemi-masqueà filtreP100 réutilisable (3Msérie6000avec filtreparticules2091).

MéthodologieDesconditionsavecetsansAPRontétéévaluéeslorsd’untestd’effortprogressif(30%à80%ducoût cardiaque relatif) sur un tapis roulant dans une chambre à environnement contrôlé.Différentes conditions de température ambiante (23°, 29° et 35°C dans un environnement oùl’Humidité relative HR est constante à 50%) ont été évaluées afin de mesurer l’importance descontraintes physiologiques associées au port de l’APR selon l’effort demandé et la températureambiante.Lorsdesévaluations,destâchesperceptivo-motricesontétéréaliséesavant,pendantetaprèslestestssurletapisroulant.Plusieursvariablesphysiologiquesontétémesurées:lacapacitécardio-respiratoiremaximale(VO2max),laconcentrationdeCO2àl’intérieurdel’APR,lasaturationenoxygènecérébrale,ainsiquelafréquencecardiaqueetrespiratoire.Deséchellesdeperceptionpsychophysique(Borg)ontétéutiliséespourévaluerlaperceptiondel’effort.

Résultats

Lafigure1présentelafréquencerespiratoiredessujetsselonlesdifférentesconditionsévaluéesetl’intensitéde l’effort.L’analyse statistiqueAnovaàdeux facteursàmesures répétéesapermisdedéceler une différence significative seulement pour le facteurAPR (p=0,0028) et une interactionentre les facteurs APR*intensité (p=0,0003). L’analyse par comparaisonmultiple pour le facteurAPR semble indiquer que la condition avecAPR engendreune fréquence respiratoire supérieureparrapportàlaconditionsansAPRpourlesintensitésde70et80%ducoûtcardiaquerelatif.Lafigure 2 présente la perception de l’effort des sujets selon les différentes conditions évaluées etl’intensitédel’effort.L’analyseAnovaàdeuxfacteursàmesuresrépétéesapermisdedécelerunedifférence significative pour les facteursAPR (p=0,0001), intensité (p<0,0001) et une interactionentre les facteurs APR*intensité (p=0,0054). L’analyse par comparaisonmultiple pour le facteur

34

APRsembleindiquerquelaconditionavecAPRengendreuneperceptiondel’effortsupérieureparrapportàlaconditionsansAPRpourlesintensitésde70et80%ducoûtcardiaquerelatif.

Leportd’unAPRaégalementeudeseffetssignificatifssurlesconcentrationsenO2etenCO2respirées(p<0,0001).LesconcentrationsenO2àl’intérieurdel’APRetdansl’airambiantétaientrespectivementde17,51et20,52%,alorsquelesconcentrationsenCO2étaientde2,82et0,11%.

DiscussionLa variable physiologique la plus affectée par le port d’un APR semble être la fréquencerespiratoire.CommelesconcentrationsenO2etenCO2à l’intérieurdel’APRsontrespectivementinférieures et supérieures aux concentrations que l’on retrouve dans l’air ambiant, uneaugmentation de la fréquence respiratoire permet d’augmenter la ventilation afin de renouvelerl’airà l’intérieurde l’APR.Nosrésultatssontenaccordavec l’étudedeLouhevaaraetcoll. (1984)qui avait également observé une augmentation de la fréquence respiratoire avec le port d’unmasquedeprotectionà l’effort.Les recommandationsde l’OSHA(OccupationalSafetyandHealthAdministration) envers les concentrations en O2 dans l’air ambiant sont fixées à 19,5% et plus.PourlesconcentrationsenCO2,onrecommandedesvaleurs<0,5%pourunquartdetravailde8h,alorsquedesconcentrations>3%sontassociéesàdesmauxdetête,del’anxiétéetdelaconfusion.Lesrésultatsobtenuslorsdecetteétudenerespectentpascesrecommandations.L’augmentationdelafréquencerespiratoiresembleégalementexpliquerl’augmentationdelaperceptiondel’effortlorsdel’utilisationd’unAPR.

PertinencedelarecherchepourlespraticiensLesrésultatsobtenuspermettrontd’émettredesrecommandations lorsque lesAPRde typeP100sont utilisés dans des conditions ambiantes contraignantes et lors d’efforts physiques important.Des recommandations seront proposées pour identifier le début des situations à risque pour lasantédesutilisateursd’APR.

Références1. Radonovich,L.,Cheng,J.,Hodgson,M.,Shenal,B.,Bender,B.(2009).RespiratorTolerancein

HealthcareWorkersandImplicationsforPandemicInfluenza.JAMA.January(301).2. Baig,A.S,Knapp,C.,Eagan,A.E.(2010).Healthcareworkers’viewsaboutrespiratoruseand

featuresthatshouldbeincludedinthenextgenerationofrespirators.AmJInfectControl,38:18–25.

3. Louhevaara,V.,etal.(1984)."Cardiorespiratoryeffectsofrespiratoryprotectivedevicesduringexerciseinwell-trainedmen."EuropeanJournalofAppliedPhysiologyandOccupationalPhysiology52(3):340-345.

4. Roberge, R.J., Coca, A., Williams, W.J., Powell, J.B. et Palmiero, A.J. (2010b). Physiologicalimpact of the N95 filtering facepiece respirator on healthcare workers. Respir. Care May,55(5):569-577.

35

TheRelationshipBetweenthePhysicalWorkingEnvironmentandSelf-ReportsofSleepQualityandQuantityintheMiningIndustry

AlexieDennie1,3*,CélineLarivière1,3,,ZsuzsannaKerekes2,3,TammyEger1,3,MonikaTiszberger2,CarolineDignard3,4,BehdinNowrouzi-Kia3,AlyssaSmith3,LisaSchutt3,4,

CourtneyLessel3,MichelLarivière1,31SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

2UniversityofPécs,Hungary,Europe3CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealthatLaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,

Canada4SchoolofRuralandNorthernHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

Introduction

Poorsleepqualitycanalteraworker’sattention,vigilanceandalertness1.Thesecanbefurtherimpactedinoccupationscharacterizedbychallengingworkingenvironmentstherebyincreasingaworker’svulnerabilitytoanoccupationalinjury2.Workintheminingindustrycanbeaphysicallydemandingoccupationconductedinsuboptimalworkingenvironments.Althoughevolutionsintechnology,includingequipmentmodernization,haveimprovedworkingconditions,theminingindustryremainsanoccupationcharacterizedbyextremesoftemperaturesandhumidity,suboptimallighting,poorairquality,elevatednoiseandphysicallydemandingwork,allofwhichcanimpactaworker’swellbeing.Inthecurrentstudy,thelinkbetweenthephysicalworkingenvironment,theworkingconditionsandsleepqualityintheminingindustrywereinvestigatedastheirassociationsarenotfullyunderstood.

MethodsDatawerecollectedfrom2,224workersfromaCanadianminingcompanyusingacomprehensivequestionnairethatincludedvariousvalidatedquestionnaires.Forthepurposeofthisstudy,amodifiedversionofthePittsburghSleepQualityIndex(PSQI)wasusedtocollectinformationonself-reportsofoverallsleepqualityoverthepastmonth.ThePSQIgeneratesanoverallGlobalComponentScorethatrangesfrom0to18.Scoresbetween0and4aredeemedasgoodsleepquality,andindividualsscoringbetween>4areclassifiedashavingpoorsleepquality.Furthermore,datawerecollectedfromtheNationalInstituteofOccupationalSafetyandHealth(NIOSH)GenericJobStressQuestionnaire.Usinganindependentsamplet-test,themeansoftheGlobalPSQIScoresfromtheparticipantsthatcompletedtheNIOSHGenericJobsStressQuestionnaire,morespecificallythephysicalenvironmentcomponent(i.e.noise,lighting,temperature,humidityaircirculation,airquality,dangeroussubstances,andoverallphysicalenvironment,)werecompared.

FindingsTheaverageGlobalPSQIScoreforindividualsthatareclassifiedashavinggoodsleepquality(N=345,16%ofsample)was2.34(±0.79).AsfortheindividualsthathadaGlobalPSQIscoreabove4(N=1781,84%ofsample),theaveragescorewas7.22(±2.69).TheoverallaverageoftheGlobalPSQIScorefortheentiresamplewas6.43(±3.07),whichqualifiesaspoorsleepquality.ThePSQIscoresforeachofthephysicalenvironmentsubcomponentsoftheNIOSHGenericJobStressQuestionnairearedisplayedinTable1.

DiscussionWhilepoorsleepqualityisknowntoimpactworkersonthejob,lessisknownabouthowtheworkingenvironmentintheminingsectorcancontributetosleepquality3.Resultsfromthecurrentstudysuggestthatover80%oftheworkersself-reportedpoorsleepqualitydefinedasscoresgreaterthan4onthePQSI.Thet-testsrevealedsignificantdifferencesbetweenthemeansoftheGlobalPSQIScoresaccordingtothesubcomponentsofthephysicalenvironment.Inparticular,sleepqualitywasworstforindividualsthatreportedworkinginnoisyconditions,poorlylitareas,

36

inuncomfortablesummertemperatures,incomfortablewintertemperatures,incomfortablehumidity,inenvironmentswithpooraircirculationandairquality,feelingunprotectedfromdangeroussubstances,andworkingincrowdedworkareas.Itisworthnotingthatthephysicalworkingenvironmentisconsideredacomponentofpsychosocialworkstress,whichinturnisakeydeterminantofsleepquality4.Althoughthereisarelationshipbetweenthephysicalworkingenvironmentandsleepquality,thesephysicalcomponentsmayimpactoverallsleepqualityindirectlyviapsychosocialworkstress.Accordingly,regressionmodelswillbedevelopedtoidentifythekeydeterminantsofsleepquality,includingthephysicalworkingenvironmentcomponentsthatcanexplainthegreatestvarianceofoverallsleepqualityscores.

RelevancetoPractitioners

Theworkplacephysicalenvironmentislinkedtooverallsleepqualityinthesampleofworkersinthecurrentstudy.Physicalfactorsmayinfluencesleepqualityviatheirimpactsonpsychosocialwellbeing,whichisknowntoaffectsleepquality.Table1.T-testanalysisforGlobalPSQIScoresandsubcomponentsfromtheNIOSHGenericJobStressQuestionnaireVariable Condition N M SD df pvalueNoise Toohigh 1412 6.64 3.11 1465 0.000

Fine 699 6.00 2.94Lighting Poor 983 6.67 3.15 2102 0.001

Fine 1121 6.21 2.98Temp.Summer Comfortable 904 6.05 3.00 2109 0.000

Uncomfortable 1207 6.71 3.09Temp.Winter Comfortable 827 6.69 3.08 2106 0.001

Uncomfortable 1281 6.26 3.04Humidity Toohighortoolow 873 6.07 2.89 1973 0.000

Fine 1231 6.68 3.17AirCirculation Good 1123 6.05 2.85 1969 0.000

Poor 982 6.88 3.23AirQuality Good 672 5.95 2.95 2096 0.000

Poor 1426 6.65 3.10DangerousSubstances

Protected 1201 6.09 2.96 1858 0.000Unprotected 894 6.91 3.15

OverallPhysicalEnvironment

Good 911 6.80 2.95 1878 0.000Poor 1189 6.14 3.18

CrowdedWorkArea

Crowded 331 7.04 3.38 432 0.000NotCrowded 1768 6.32 2.99

References[1]DrakeCL,RoehrsTA,BurduvaliE,BonahoomA,RosekindM,RothT.Effectsofrapidversusslowaccumulationofeighthoursofsleeploss.Psychophysiology.2001Nov;38(6):979-87.[2]SwaenGM,VanAmelsvoortLG,BültmannU,KantIJ.Fatigueasariskfactorforbeinginjuredinanoccupationalaccident:resultsfromtheMaastrichtCohortStudy.OccupationalandEnvironmentalMedicine.2003Jun1;60(suppl1):i88-92.[3]LintonSJ,KecklundG,FranklinKA,LeissnerLC,SivertsenB,LindbergE,SvenssonAC,HanssonSO,SundinÖ,HettaJ,BjörkelundC.Theeffectoftheworkenvironmentonfuturesleepdisturbances:asystematicreview.SleepMedicineReviews.2015Oct1;23:10-9.[4]ÂkerstedtT.Psychosocialstressandimpairedsleep.ScandinavianJournalofWork,Environment&Health.2006Dec1:493-501

37

INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION

Theevolutionofwearableassessmentdevicesinergonomics

PanelFacilitator:MicheleOliver,Ph.D.,P.Eng.1SchoolofEngineering,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,Canada

PanelOverviewWearablesarearecentadditiontooureverydayvocabularybutinrealitythey’vebeenavailableforuseinergonomicsforthebetterpartofthelastthreedecades.Thepurposeofthispanelwillbetohighlightwherewe’vebeen,wherewearerightnowandwhereweseethefuturegoingintermsofwearablesavailableforuseinergonomicassessments.Alongthewaywe’lltalkaboutproductdevelopmentusingarecentUniversityofGuelphengineeringcapstonedesignproject.

Panelists

Panelist1 MicheleOliver,Ph.D.,P.Eng.SchoolofEngineeringUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaWhatisawearable?ThePast-Abriefhistoryofwearablesinergonomics.Panelist2 KarenGordon,Ph.D.,P.Eng.ThePresentWhatproductsarecurrentlyavailable?Arethemeasurementsprovidedvalid(i.e.,dotheymeasurewhattheysaytomeasure)andreliable(andhowwouldyouknowiftheyweren’t)Panelist3 ErikaZiraldo,B.Eng.SchoolofEngineeringUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaBriefdiscussionofwhyandhowarecentwearableergonomicassessmentdevicewasdeveloped.Panelist4 AndrewHamilton-Wright,Ph.D.,P.Eng.SchoolofComputerScienceUniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,CanadaTheFutureArtificialIntelligence–TheGood,theBadandtheUglyWhiledataloggersandotherwearablecollectiondeviceshavebeeninusefordecades,short-rangebroadcastdevicessuchastheFitbit™haverecentlybecomepopularasalocalarearemotesensorbroadcastingtocomputersandcellphones.Byusingtheavailablecomputationalpoweronacellphoneorsimilardevice,machinelearningalgorithms,reasoningsystemsandothertechnologies

38

identifiedasArtificialIntelligence(AI)comeintoplay.ThepositiveaswellasthenegativeaspectsofAIwillbediscussedaswellassomeinsightsintowhatthefuturemayhold.ConcludingRemarksfromAllPanelists-Dowearableshavethepotentialtoultimatelyreplaceergonomistsandothersafetyprofessionals?

39

PAPERSESSION2:MANUALMATERIALSHANDLING

Day2–Oct16th

10:30-11:30

PaperSession2ManualMaterialsHandling

HarrisonKlokeBalancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategyAlisonMcDonaldTheeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasksTiannaBeharriellPhysiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitude

40

Balancedjointloading–anewrecommendedliftingstrategy

HarrisonKloke1,GulerArasan1,EricPoon1,AndrewTao-AnWong1,MohammadAbdoli-Eramaki1

1RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionTrainingforsafeliftingtechniquesisusedbyemployerstolowerexposuretoriskofworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuries.Inourpreviousstudies,266attendeesattwoprofessionalconferenceswereaskedtoidentifyanddemonstratetheirpreferredlifttechniquewithdemonstrationbeinganidealfloor-to-waistheightliftofa10-kgweightedcrate(1).TheresultsshowedthatthetrainedgroupexperiencelessloadingatL5/S1,buthigherloadingatthekneesandankles(1).

ObjectiveTheobjectiveofthisstudywastocomparethekinematics(joint)ofposturesofsymmetricalandasymmetricalliftingtechniquesinordertodeterminetheoptimalliftingmethodwithanequivalentloadingdistributiononalltheinvolvedjoints.

Methodology3DStaticStrengthPosturePredictionsoftware[3DSSPP]wasusedtomodel6912symmetricalconditionsrepresentingallthepossibleliftingposturesfromthefloorwithdifferentpositionsfortheupperextremities,trunkandthelowerextremities(4leganglesx6thighanglesx2reachingdistancesx4trunkanglesx3footpositionsx2footanglesx3loadsx2:95th%ilemaleand5th%ilefemale).Theforceincrementstobothhandswere0,11.5,and23Kgrespectively.Female5thandmale95thpercentilewerechosenfortheanalysis.3DSSPPisawidelyusedtoolthatisknownforsimulationofstaticposturesforkinematicevaluation(2).

ResultsJointmoments,spinalcompressionforces,andpopulationstrengthcapabilitieswereanalyzedfromthedatacollected.Theprimaryevaluationsshowedthatlowestaveragejointmomentsforthekneeandhipwereobservedinthe150-60(Figure1.),and30-80(Figure2.)postures.Lowestanklejointmomentsvariedbypopulation.Thesewereseeninthe80-60postureforMale95thpercentilepopulationandthe80-50postureforFemale5thpercentilepopulation.Whenaverageanklejointmomentswereexamined,the80-60postureproducedthelowestmoment(Figure3.).AllpopulationsshowedthelowestL5/S1compressionforcesinthe30-80posture(Figure4.).Hipandanklepopulationstrengthcapabilitieswerewithinsaferangeswithmorethan80%ofallpopulationscapableofreproducingtherequiredjointangles(Figure5.).Kneepopulationstrengthcapabilitiesshowedsomeareasofconcernthoughwithonly29.97%oftheMale50thpercentilepopulationand55.93%oftheFemale5thpercentilepopulationhavingthestrengthrequiredtoreproducethe30-80posture.Postureswithkneeangles

41

of80and150degreeswereobservedtohavethegreatestproportionofthepopulationabletoreproducetheposture(Figure5.).

ConclusionOptimalliftingposturesareoftenthoughtofasasquatliftsimilartothe30degreekneeangleposturesmodelledwhilespineisthemainfocusoftraining.However,thisanalysispresentsfindingsthatshowsomepopulationsmaynothavethestrengthcapabletoproducethesepostures,andhavehighertotaljointmomentswhentheloadisliftedsymmetricallyinfrontofthebody.Basedontheposturesmodelled,150degreekneeangleareoptimalforthistaskwhenthefeetareparallelandkeptsymmetricalclosetooneanother.Thisissupportedbylowertotaljointmomentscomparedtoallotherposturesandthegreaterproportionofthepopulationscapableofproducingit.

References1. Abdoli-EramakiM,AgababovaM,JanabiJ,PaskoE,DamecourC.EvaluationandComparisonof

LiftingTechniquesAmongIndividualswithDifferentLevelsofLiftingTraining.Toronto,Canada;RyersonUniversity;2017

2. BudnickP.AretheRevisedNIOSHLiftingEquationand3DSSPPModelsValidRiskPredictorsforWork-RelatedLowBackPain?[Internet].;[citedMay29th,2018].Availablefrom:https://ergoweb.com/are-the-revised-niosh-lifting-equation-and-3dsspp-models-valid-risk-predictors-for-work-related-low-back-pain-2/

42

Theeffectsoftaskandladderonshoulderandlowbackdemandsduringcommonladderhandlingtasks

AlisonC.McDonald*,AlanC.Cudlip,EmmaTung,JackP.Callaghan,ClarkR.Dickerson

1UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionWorkplaceupperextremitybackandshouldermusculoskeletalinjuriesareverycommoninOntario1.Awkwardpostures,constrainedworkplaces,repetitiveexertionsandhighloadsareriskfactorsfordevelopingtheseinjuriesintheworkplace2.Thepurposeofthisinvestigationwastoevaluatetaskdemandsduringcommontasksperformedbytelecommunicationpoleworkerswhileusing3different

laddersandproviderecommendationsforwhichladdershouldbeusedtominimizeawkwardposturesandhighshoulderandlowbackloading.

Methods

Twenty-threeyoung,healthy,noviceparticipantswereincludedinthisstudy(23males,2females;27±4yearsold,1.8±0.2mtall,87.2±14.3kgbodyweight).Participantswereinstrumentedwithreflectivemotioncapturemarkers(20individualmarkers,7markerclusters)and10VICONMX20cameras(VICON,Oxford,UK).Theywereprovidedwithpersonalprotectiveequipment(fallarrestharness,ahardhat,steeltoeboots)andhands-ontrainingonhowtoperformtheladdertasks.Participantswereaskedtocomplete4ladderhandlingtasks([1]Removingladderfromsimulatedvehicle;[2]Liftingladderfromgroundtocarryposition;[3]Carryladdertoraiselocation;[4a]Raiseladdersupportedagainstwall,[4b]freeraiseladder),eachwith3differentladders([1]2-piecewoodladder(8.5m,29.6kg),2P-W;[2]2-piecefiberglassladder(8.5m,29.6kg),2P-F;[3]3-piecewoodladder(9.2m,30.1kg),3P-W.Eachtask/laddercombinationwascompleted3times.Theorderthatthetasks/laddercombinationswereperformedwereblockrandomizedbetweenparticipantstomitigateordereffects.Followingeachtask,participantsratedtheirperceivedexertion(RPE)andperceivedhand,shoulderandbackdiscomfort(RPD).Attheendofthedatacollectionparticipantscompletedasurveyexpressingtheirfavoriteandleastfavoriteladderandtask.Inclusivehumeralelevationanglesrelativetothetrunkwerecalculatedusingalgebraicdotproductsbetweentheupperarmandtrunkvectors.TorsoanglesrelativetotheglobalaxissystemwerecalculatedwithanXYZEulersequence.Tocalculatejointloading,externalhandforceswereestimatedwithahandhelddynamometerplacedbetweentheladderandoneoftheresearchersduringthetasksandusedinakineticmodelthatwascreatedinMatlabwithindividualparticipantsegmentmassesandpostures.Theraisetaskswereevaluatedatthetopandbottomoftheraise.Resultantjointmomentswerecalculatedandcomparisonsweremadetopopulationstrengthestimatesfora50thpercentilemalefrom3DSSPP(v6.0.1,UniversityofMichigan).Theanalysisportionofthisinvestigationisongoing,thereforeonlytheresultsforthecarryandraisetasksareincluded.Repeatedmeasuresanalysisofvarianceexaminedtheinfluencesoftask(5)andladder(3)forjointangles,forces,moments,andperceptualvariables(RPE,RPD)(IBMSPSSStatisticv.23IBM,NY,USA).LeastSquaredDifferences(LSD)testswithSidakcorrectionswereusedtoevaluateposthocsignificantmaineffects.

Findings

Thebiomechanicalvariables(posture,jointforces,jointmoments)wereaffectedbythebothladderusedandthetaskcompleted.Armandtrunkposturewereinfluencedbytask(p<0.05)andwerethesameacrossladders.Dominantarmelevationwasgreatestatthetopsoftheraisestasksthanthecarryandthebottomoftheraises(p<0.05)andwasloweratthebottomoftheraisesthanthecarry

43

task(p<0.05).Shoulderandlowbackjointforceswereinfluencedbybothtaskandladder(p<0.05).Inthedominantshoulderandthelowback,jointforceswerelowestwhentaskswereperformedwiththe3-piecewoodladder.Acrossthetasks,dominantshoulderandthelowbackjointforcesweregreatestduringthecarrytask.Jointmomentsinthedominantandnon-dominantshoulderandtrunkwereinfluencebyladderusedandtask(p<0.05).Whencomparedtoestimatesofpopulationjointstrengthsfor50thpercentilemales,resultantdominantshoulderjointmomentswere27-81%ofstrength(Figure1)andresultanttrunkmomentswere61-123%ofstrength.Inthesurvey,52%ofrespondentsindicatedapreferenceforthe2-piecefiberglassladder,comparedto24%forboththe2-pieceand3-piecewoodladders.

DominantShoulderMoments

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

LadderandTask

Figure1:Resultantshouldermoments(Nm)forthe5tasksand3laddersplottedinbars.Resultantpopulationstrengthvalues,fora50thpercentilemale,calculatedwith3DSSPP(v6.0.1)areplottedwithredlinesforeachtask.

DiscussionTherewasnopreciseladderchoicethatuniversallymitigatedthephysicaldemandswhilealsoloweringperceptualdifficulty.However,trendsemergedthatfavoredthe3-piecewoodladderforminimizingthebiomechanicalvariables.The3-piecewoodenladderwasassociatedwiththelowestjointloadsatboththeshouldersandlowback,whilethesurveysuggeststhatthe2-piecefiberglassladdergenerallyledtopreferredbodyposture.Severaltaskandladdercombinationsrequiredclosetoorevengreaterresultanttrunkmomentsthanthestrengthestimates. Inalargestudyofoccupationallowbackpaindevelopment,lowbackpaincaseswereexposedtogreaterpeaktrunkmomentsandhandforces3,suggestingthatcautionshouldbetakenwhenperformingthesetasks.

RelevancetoPractitionersAlthoughthisinvestigationwasspecificallyfocusedanddesignedfortheevaluationofladderhandlingtasksperformedbytelecommunicationpoleworkers,thesetasksandsimilaronesarecommonacrossmanyindustries.Spaceconstraintsmakelaboratorybasedevaluationsofladderhandlingtaskschallenging.Thefindingsfromthisinvestigationshowtheimportanceofequipmentevaluationandselectionandcanbeappliedacrossindustriesthatuseladders.

References1. http://www.wsibstatistics.ca/2. McDonaldAC,KeirPJ.TheResponseoftheShoulderComplextoRepetitiveWork:ImplicationsforWorkplace

Design.CritRevBiomedEng.201543(1):21-32.3. NormanR,WellsR,NeumannPetal.Acomparisonofpeakvscumulativephysicalworkexposurerisk

factorsforthereportingoflowbackpainintheautomotiveindustry.ClinicalBiomechanics.199813:561-573.

2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W 2P-W 2P-F 3P-W

Carry Free Raise - Free Raise - Top Raise - bottom Bottom

Raise - top

44

PhysiologicalresponsestoacuteliftingtasksofvariedfrequencyandmagnitudeTiannaBeharriell1,WantuirJunior1,Jean-FrancoisMauger1,PascalImbeault1,

RyanGraham11SchoolofHumanKinetics,FacultyofHealthSciences,UniversityofOttawa,Ottawa,

Canada

IntroductionCurrently,musculoskeletaldisorderresearchfocusesprimarilyonmechanicalvariablestoassesswhetheracuteorcumulativetaskdemandsexceedthecapacityofthetissue;however,itisimportanttoassesshowothernon-mechanicalvariablesaffecttissuecapacityinatime-dependentmanner1,2.Thecurrentresearchsoughttoanswerthequestionofwhetherliftingaheavierloadinalowfrequencymannerinducedcomparablesystemicinflammatoryresponsestoliftingalighterloadinahighfrequencymanner.Placedinanoccupationalcontext,ifaworkerhastomove10boxesweighing50kgintotalfromthefloortoashelfatwaistheight,theoreticallytheycouldchoosetolift50kgatonce,orperform5liftsof10kg,10liftsof5kg,andsoon.

PurposeTosupplementthetraditionalmechanicalapproachtoMSDresearchbyconsideringsystemicinflammatoryresponsesandrelatedfactors(i.e.bodycompositionandpsychology)underdifferentialmagnitudesandfrequenciesduringaliftingtasktoidentifytheirimpactoninjuryriskwhilecontrollingforexternalbiomechanicalwork.

MethodsIninitialpilotwork,fourparticipants(2M/2F)completedtwosessionsseparatedbyaperiodofoneweek.Eachsessionincludedaliftingtask(2hrs)fromfloortoknuckleheightundertworepetitiveloadingprotocolsdesignedwithequivalentcumulativeexternalbiomechanicalwork(5%and25%ofmaximumbackstrengthatarateoffiveandonelift(s)/minute,respectively).Baselineblooddrawswereperformedat8amoneachdayandat0,2,4,6and24hoursfollowingcompletionoftheliftingtask.Sampleswereanalyzedforinflammatorymarkers(TumourNecrosisFactorAlpha(TNF-α),Cortisol,Interleukin-6(IL-6),Interleukin-8(IL-8),andCreatineKinase(CK)).EachparticipantalsounderwentaDualX-RayAbsorptiometryscanandcompletedPainCatastrophizing/KinesiophobiaScalesandVisualAnalogueScalesofdiscomfort.CaloricintakewasstandardizedforallparticipantsaccordingtotheHarris-Benedictequation.Apreliminary2-wayrepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasrunforeachinflammatorymarkertodetermineeffectsofloadcondition(5%vs.25%)andtime(Baseline,0,2,4,6and24hours).Thesedatawereutilizedtodecidewhichmarkersandtime-pointswouldbeusedinpart2ofthestudy(N=12).

45

Figure1:IL-6andIL-8concentrationlevelsat0,2,4,6and24hours

ResultsThemaineffectsoftimeandload,aswellastheload*timeinteractionwerenon-significantforCK,cortisolandTNF-α.MeanconcentrationlevelsforIL-6andIL-8inparticipants1-4areshowninFigure1.Overall,IL-8andIL-6exhibitedthegreatestchangefrombaselineconcentrationsat24hourspost-lifting,remainingelevatedonaverageby5.13and2.5pg/mL,respectively,forthe25%condition,and4.4and5.51pg/mLforthe5%condition.Il-6exhibitedastatisticallysignificanteffectoftimeonconcentration(p=0.024,η2=0.683)andwhilenotstatisticallysignificant,therewasamoderateeffect(η²=0.455)forload*timeinteraction.

DiscussionThepreliminaryresultsdemonstratesystemicinflammationthatisnotresolved24hoursfollowingaliftingtask,andthatIL-6andIL-8werethemostsensitivetothetask.Inpart2,wewillcollectdatafrom8moreparticipantsatBaseline,0,4and24hours,andwilltestforIL-6andIL-8.Correlationaldatabetweenpsychologicalscales/adipositydistributionandsystemicinflammationwillbepresentedattheconference.

References:1.Yangetal.2011.ClinBiomech26(5),431-437.2.Klyneetal.2016.BrainBehav.Immun.60,84-92.

46

PAPERSESSION3:OFFICEERGONOMICS

Day2–Oct16th

14:45-16:15

PaperSession3OfficeErgonomics

NancyBlackChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealofficeenvironments:impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariationsDanielViggianiAutomatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensorsNancyBlackMatchingposturalstatesequenceswithfatigueandpainexperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandsit-standworkstationsKaylaFewsterAnevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemands

47

ChallengesofcontrolledmeasuresinrealOfficeenvironments:Impactofworkstationstand-sitheightvariations

NancyL.Black1,MathieuTremblay,2,3,GiberingMougnol1,MaximeMcGrath2and

PamelaKengne11MechanicalEngineeringDepartment,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,N.-B.,Canada2SchoolofKinesiology&Recreation,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,N.-B.,Canada

3FacultyofKinesiology,UniversityofNewBrunswick,Fredericton,N.-B.,Canada

IntroductionSedentarybehavioursobservedinofficeenvironmentsandcomputerintensiveworkareassociatedwithmultiplehealthissues[1].Onesolutionsuggestedisregularlyalternatingbetweenstandingandsitting[2].Differentcontrolledperiodshavebeenstudied:15or30-minuteextendedstandingperiodsperhour(25%and50%standing,respectively)[3]and5-minutestandingfor10-minutesitting(33%standing)[4].Typically,atmost50%oftheworkdayshouldbestanding,thisbeinginterspersedregularly,respectingmicrobreaksevery20to40minutes[5].Adatacollectioniscurrentlyunderwaytodeterminethe“best”durationnon-sitting(standingormoving)withina30-minutecycleduringtypicalwork.Thispaperdescribes:1)theprotocolusingaheight-adjustabletableandcontrollertocomparesixstandingperiods’impactonobjectiveandsubjectivevariablesrelatingtomusculoskeletaldisorder(MSD)development,and2)thechallengesofthisprotocol.

Methods

Studydesign:Twenty-fourofficeworkersarecurrentlyparticipatinginthisnaturalexperimentalstudydesign,withatmostsixatatime.Thisprotocoloccursinparticipants’workingenvironmentwithexperimentalandcontrolconditions.Eachparticipantusesallsixstand-sitdurationratiosinrandomisedordering.Atleast3days’exposuretoeachconditionprovidesrequiredacclimatisationbeforeanhour-longcontinuousrecordingofparticipantandcondition,workingnormally.Conditions:Anhour-longbaselinerecordingwithworker’susualofficedeskprecedesinstallationoftheheight-varyingdynamicdeskandagainfollowsthecompletionofthesixcontrolleddynamicconditions.Forthedurationofdynamicconditions,theparticipant’susualdeskisreplacedbyoneofsixmodifiedelectricallyheightadjustabletable(motorizedDL5systembyLinak;Nordborg,Denmark)fromErgotables.com(Thetfordmines,QC,Canada),withsurfacedimensions1.40mx0.76mwithheightfrom0.68mto1.35m.Casters(0.05mheight)facilitateinstallation.Anin-housedesignedcontrolsystemcommunicatesstandingandsittingconditionstothetableforeachparticipant(i.e.thestandingandseatedelbowheightfromthefloorwhenwearingregularshoes),includingstandingduration(0%,10%,20%,30%,40%,or50%)withina30-minutecycle.Datacollection:Bothsubjectiveandobjectivedataseriesarecollected.Firstly,participantsansweredtwoquestionnairesdaily(atstartandendofeachworkday),signallingtheirperceivedagreementalonga10-pointLikert-typescaleforeachofelevensubjectivedimensions(stiff,tired,neckpain,backpain,happy,uncomfortable,productive,abilitytoconcentrate,alert,headache,eyepain).Secondly,objectivedatawererecordedoverone-hourattheendofeachcondition’sexposure.Objectivemeasurementsquantify:1)posturalvariationsandgroupthemintohealthyandunhealthycategoriesusinginertialsensors,inclinometersandvideocamera;2)muscularactivityusingsurfacewirelessEMGofsternocleidomastoid,superiortrapezius,anteriordeltoidandgastrocnemiuslateralis(onthedominantside);and3)autonomicnervoussystem(ANS)activityusingheartratevariability(HRV).Videosupportstaskanalysisandprovidescontextfordatarecordedbytheotherequipment.Overall,theeightdatacollectionsoccuroveratleastfiveweeks.

48

ChallengesencounteredThenaturalisticstudysettingcreatedchallengesrelatedtothetableanditsinstallation,studydesignandparticipantavailability.Dynamictable:Addingcasterstotablesfacilitatedtheirmovement,butincreasedtheminimumtablesurfaceheighttofrom0.62mto0.68m.Whilelowerthanstandardofficedeskheight,thiswassometimeshigherthanseatedelbowheightwiththeusers’properlyadjustedofficechair.Thenseatheightmustbeincreasedandafootrestaddedtorespectergonomicsguidelines.Installation:Eachphysicalofficeenvironmentdiffered.Installationmustallowvideotrackingwithoutencumberingwork.Officeswithbuilt-indesksurfaces,attachedtodividerswereparticularlychallenging.Inonecase,theworksurfacewasdetachedfromthedividersforthedurationofthestudyandreplacedbythetable.Inanother,participationwasimpossiblebecauseexistingworksurfaceswerenotremovable,andweresmallerthanthesuppliedtable.Studydesign:Researcherstriedtominimiseparticipantandworkdisruption,howeverequipmentinstallationtook30minutesforeachcontinuousrecordingsession.CalibrationofEMGusingmaximumvoluntarycontractionswerelongerandlessrelevant;task-relevantmaximawerequicker.Earlyparticipantsfrequentlyforgottofillindailyquestionnaires;dailyelectronicremindersandimmediatequestionnairesubmissionimprovedresponserates.Participants:Todate,fourteenparticipantsstartedtheprotocol,fourcompleteditandsixareinprogress.Ofthefourthatdroppedout,twowereduetovacationandtimecommitments,andoneeachdueemploymentchangeandhealth.Delaysinequipmentavailabilityexacerbatedconstraints.

Conclusionsanddiscussion

WhilestudyingrealworkactivitiesintheirnaturalenvironmentbetterreflectstrueMSDrisks,implementingusualandnecessaryscientificcontrolswasparticularlychallenging.Researchersandpractitionersmustbecreativetoovercomespatialconstraintsandminimiseinconveniencetoparticipants.Sharingthisstudy’schallengescanhelpotherstudiesinnaturalworkenvironmentsanticipatelikelyproblems.Participantsusingthedynamictablewiththisprotocolappreciatedimposedpositionvariationsandthechancetosit-standchangesduringtheirwork,buttheexperimentalcontrolsimplementedinthisstudylimitedparticipation.

AcknowledgementOfficeErgonomicsResearchCommittee(OERC),theNaturalSciencesandEngineeringResearchCouncil(NSERC)ofCanadaDDG2017-00014andUniversitédeMonctonprovidedfunding.

References1. Owen,N.,Healy,G.N.,Matthews,C.E.,Dunstan,D.W.Toomuchsitting:Thepopulationhealthscienceofsedentarybehavior.ExercSportSciRev.2010;38(3):105-113.

2. Davis,K.G.Kotowski,S.E.StandUpandMove:YourMusculoskeletalHealthDependsonIt.ErgonDes.2015;23(3):9-13.

3. EbaraT,KuboT,InoueT,MurasakiGI,TakeyamaH,SatoT,SuzumuraH,NiwaS,TakanishiT,TachiN,ItaniT.Effectsofadjustablesit-standVDTworkstationsonworkers'musculoskeletaldiscomfort,alertnessandperformance.IndHealth.2008;46(5):497-505.

4. Karakolis,T.&Callaghan,J.P.Theimpactofsit-standofficeworkstationsonworkerdiscomfortandproductivity:Areview.AppErgon.2014;45(3):799-806.

5.McLeanL,TingleyM,ScottRN,RickardsJ.Computerterminalworkandthebenefitofmicrobreaks.ApplErgon.2001;32(3):225-237.

49

Figure1:Sittingandstandingdistributionsofdeskheights,separatedbygender.

Automatedpredictionofsit-standdeskusefromlow-costdistanceandtemperaturesensors

DanielViggiani*,EricWill,JeffM.Barrett,andJackP.Callaghan.DepartmentofKinesiology,UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada

Introduction

Sit-standworkstationshavebeenshowntoreducemusculoskeletal(1)andcardiovasculardisorders(2)relatedtoprolongedsittingorstandingatwork.However,thesehealthbenefitsarereliantontheusertransitioningbetweenseatedandstandingconfigurations(1).Measuringtheeffectivenessofasit-standworkstationinprovidingtheintendedhealthbenefitsrequiresaccurateandreliablemeasurementofitsusage.Therefore,thepurposeofthisprojectwastoconstructandtestalow-costsensormadefromreadilyaccessiblecomponentsthatwascapableofautomaticallydetectingwhetherauserisstanding,seatedorabsentfromasit-standworkstation.

MethodsSensorConstructionThesensorconsistedofthreesensingcomponentsandanintegrator,connectedtoalaptopthroughUSB.Thesensingcomponentsincludedanultrasonicdistancesensor(HC-SR04,ElegooIndustries,Shenzhen,China),aninfrareddistancesensor(GP2Y0A02YK0F,SharpElectronics,OsakaJapan),andaninfraredtemperaturesensor(IRTemp54,Freetronics,PtyLtd,Maroondah,Australia).ThethreesensingcomponentsinterfacedwithanArduinoUnoR3(ArduinoLLC,Turin,Italy)whichwasprovidedwithashortcustomscriptthatconvertedrawsensoroutputsintodistancesandtemperatures.Allcomponentsweremountedinarectangularfoam-corehousingthatcouldbeeasilyaffixedtotheundersideofmostcommerciallyavailablesit-standdesks.Theultrasonicdistancesensorwaspointedatthegroundandservedtomeasurethecurrentdeskheight.Theinfrareddistanceandtemperaturesensorswereaimedattheusertomeasurethedistancebetweentheuserandthesensorhousingaswellasthetemperatureofareaaroundtheuser’sworkingposition.Aneight-hourdrifttestwasperformedoneachsensorcomponenttoensurestability.

PredictingSit-StandDeskUseApilotstudywasconductedon72participants(38female)todeterminethedistributionofpreferredstandingandsittingdeskheights.Thesedistributionscarriedforwardintoalaboratorystudywiththesensorpreviouslydescribedmountedtothesamedeskasusedinthepilotstudy.Thirtysamplesweretakenfromboththestandingandsittingdistributionsofdeskheights,ensuringthe1stand99thpercentileofeachdistributionwereincludedinsampling.Deskheightsweresetusingreal-timefeedbackfromanoptoelectronicmotioncapturesystem(OptotrakCertus,NDI,Waterloo,Canada).Two-thirdsofthetrialsinvolvedasinglemaleparticipant(26years,175cm,90kg)simulatingofficeworkatthedesk.Thiswasdonesothatthereweretwentytrialswithauserpresentandstandingatthedesk,twentytrialswiththeuserpresentandsittingatthedesk,andtwentytrialswiththeusernotatthedeskateitherastandingorsittingdeskheight.Amultinomiallogisticregressionwasperformedtodetermineifthesensorcouldaccuratelyclassifyeachofthesixtytrialsaseithera)standingandpresent

50

(Stand),b)sittingandpresent(Sit),orc)awayfromthedesk(Away).Cross-validationwasperformedusingabootstrappingprocedurewhere80%ofthedatasetwasselectedatrandomandusedasatrainingdataset;theremaining20%ofthedatawasusedasatestdatasettoassesstheregression’saccuracy.Thisprocedurewasrepeated1000times.

FindingsTherewereminimaldriftobservedintheinfraredtemperaturesensor(0.2°C/hour);theothercomponentsdidnotdrift.Therewasacleardichotomybetweenstandingdeskheightsandsittingdeskheightsregardlessofgender(Figure1).Theminimumheightofthedeskwas70cm;someparticipantspreferredadeskheightbelowthisminimum.Allthreesensors(ultrasonicdistance,infrareddistanceandinfraredtemperature)werefoundtobesignificantpredictorsofconditionsbyalikelihoodratiotest(Table1).Cross-validationdeterminedthatthemodelwas94.1%accurate(95%CI:93.9–94.3%)atpredictingnovelconditions,with99.8%ofallmisclassificationsfalselypredicteduserpresenceratherthandeskheight.Figure2showssensorinputsforeachofthe60trials.

Discussion

Alow-cost,automatedsensorwasconstructedthatallowsfordetectingthesit-standdeskconfigurationwithanestimated94%accuracy.Adistributionofpreferredsittingandstandingdeskheightswerealsopresented.Oneofthereasonsforthehighpredictionratesisthatthestandingandsittingdeskheightdistributionsdonotoverlap;thisallowsthedistinctionbetweensittingandstandingtorelysolelyontheultrasonicsensordirectedattheground.Thepresenceofauserwasbasedoninfrareddistanceandtemperaturesensors,whichwerefoundtobelessaccuratethantheultrasonicsensorduetovariabilityinclothinganduserpositioning.

RelevancetoPractitionersPractitionerscandesignandimplementsensorsbasedonthismodeltoautomaticallytrackusersatsit-standdeskswithhighaccuracy.

References1. KarakolisT,CallaghanJP.Theimpactofsit-standofficeworkstationsonworkerdiscomfort

andproductivity:Areview.ApplErgon.2014;45(3):799–806.2. GravesLEF,MurphyRC,ShepherdSO,CabotJ,HopkinsND.Evaluationofsit-stand

workstationsinanofficesetting:Arandomisedcontrolledtrial.BMCPublicHealth;2015;15(1):1–14.

DeskHeight(Ultrasonic)

User-DeskDistance(InfraredDistance)

TemperatureatDesk(InfraredTemperature)

LikelihoodRatio 39.381 8.771 32.689

P-Value <0.001 0.012 <0.001

Figure2:Sensoroutputsforthe60trialscollectedinthelaboratorystudy.

Table1:Likelihoodratiosforthelogisticmodelusedtopredictsit-standdeskcondition.

51

MatchingPosturalStateSequenceswithFatigueandPainExperiencedtodistinguishlowandhighriskatsittingandSit-StandWorkstations

NancyL.Black1,AndrewHamilton-Wright2,JoshuaLange2,ClémentBouet1,Mariah

MartinShein31MechanicalEngineeringDepartment,UniversitédeMoncton,Moncton,NB,Canada

2SchoolofComputerScience,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,ON,Canada3ComputerScience/TheoreticalNeuroscience,UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada

Introduction

Officeworkplacesaretypicallysedentaryandinvolveintensivecomputeruse(1),andresearchconsistentlylinkssedentarybehaviourstohealthdegradationincludingmusculoskeletaldisorders(MSDs)(2),withapproximately75%ofofficeworkersreportingsignificantdiscomfortinoneormorebodyregions,particularlyintheneck,backandshoulders(3,4).Regularlychangingbetweensittingandstanding,includingafter6or9minutesofa20minutecycle,hasbeenshowntoreducediscomfortrelativetocontinuouslysitting(5).Usingaone-hourrecordedsessionrepresentativeofanysuchhour-longperiodoftheworkingday(5),continuouslyrecordedposturaldeviationsfromaneutralpositionwererelatedtoperceivedgeneralfatigueandneckandbackpain.Thispaperexploresthetechniquesusedtouncoverrelationshipsbetweensequencesofposturalstates,andparticipants’experienceofpainorfatigue.EmphasisonthereasoningbehindthemethodschosensothatothersmayapplyoradjustthisstrategytoimproveabilitytorecogniseposturalpatternsassociatedwithMSDrisk.

MethodsDatasource:Apreviouslyrecordedhour-longsimulateddataentrytaskusingseatedandtwosit-standalternatingpostureswasusedforthisstudy.Continuousphysicalbehavioursduringthistaskwerethusrelatedtoworkstationswhichtypicallylimitdiscomfort,painandfatigue(sit-standworkstations)ornot(sittingcontinuously).Groupedposturaldata:Wireless2-DinclinometersandCAPTIV7000analysissoftware(TEA,France)recordedposturaldeviationofheadandtrunkat15Hzinbothsagittalandfrontalplanes.Theseweregroupedintolevelsofincreasingdeviationandrisklevels,definedasposturalstatesdesignatedbya4-charactercode(ex.HS-2)followingthelevelsdefinedbyRULA(6)sagittallyandKeyserling(7)frontally(seeTable1).Groupedperceivedfatigueandpain:Eachparticipantrecordedtheirperceivedfatigue,backpainandneckpainattheendoftheone-hourstudyforeachworkstation.Participantsplacedamarkonahorizontallinerepresentingavisualanaloguescalefrom0(none)to10(maximumimaginable).Thesevalueswerediscretizedintoquintiles,eachcontaining1/5oftheobservedpointsforagivenposturalfeatureandtogetherexactlycoveringtherangeofvaluesobservedforthatperceptualfeature.Subsequently,quintileswereaggregated,basedonwhetherthequintilewasidentified

Table1.Angulardeviation(°)groupingsbybodyregionandplane

StateIDHead Back

Sagittal(HS) Frontal(HF) Sagittal(BS) Frontal(BF)-2 -∞to-10 -∞to-10-1 -∞to-5 -10to-2 -∞to-5 -10to-20 -5to10 -2to2 -5to5 -2to2+1 10to20 2to10 5to20 2to10+2 20to∞ 10to∞ 20to60 10to∞+3 60to∞

52

withthepresenceorabsenceofagivenperception.Thisaggregationwasperformedbyplottingthequintilemeansandnotingwheretheinflectionpointoccurred,dividing“low”from“high”values.Combinedpostureandperception:Posturalgesturesofinterestwereidentifiedbycalculatingaχ2contingencybasedontheoccurrenceofeachposturalsequenceforthesetof“Low”versus“High”quintilesofperceptualfeatureresponsedata.Theχ2contingencycomparisonaccountsforvariationinproportion;thatis,ifoneproportiondescribes3/5ofthedata,andanother4/5,theχ2contingencyconsidersthetotalsizeofthedatasetwhenestimatingwhetherthisdifferencemaybeobservedbychance.ThegoalistodistinguishbetweenproportionsofoccurrencesofapatternthatvarybetweenLowgrouprelativetoHighgroupwithinthesameperceiveddimension.

ResultsAnumberof“significantposturalgestures”werefound,indicatingthatthereareidentifiablemovementsthat,foragivenperson,occuratsignificantlydifferentrateswhenpainorfatigueispresent,versusabsent.Nineparticipantsandallthreeworkstationstylescontributedto230significantpatternsand81patternswerepresentforallparticipantsusingsit-standworkstations.Differentsignificantpatternswereobservedwhenaperceptionwashigh,andwhenitwaslow.Thefrontalplanewasassociatedwithmostsignificantgestures(83%for10participants,73%for9).

Conclusionsanddiscussion

Thedifferentpatternssignificantlyassociatedwithhighandlowperceptionsofpainandfatiguethatarecommonacrossallparticipantsindicatethatthesegesturesmaydescribebehavioursthateitherarerisksfor,orarepotentiallyprotectiveagainst,painorfatigue.Byexaminingpatternsassociatedwithgeneratingpainorfatigue,andthosethatassociatewiththeiravoidance,dynamicposturalbehaviourstoinduceoravoidmaybeuncovered.Practitionersshouldwatchforposturalgesturesthatarelinkedsignificantlytochangesinperceptionandalertworkerstorisks.Addingdurationanalysistoposturalpatternorderingmayenhanceresults.

AcknowledgementNaturalSciencesandEngineeringResearchCouncil(NSERC)ofCanada,NewBrunswickInnovationFundResearchAssistantInitiative,andUniversitédeMonctonprovidedfundingforthiswork.

References1. ThorpAA,HealyGN,WinklerE,ClarkBK,GardinerPA,OwenN,etal.Prolongedsedentarytime

andphysicalactivityinworkplaceandnon-workcontexts:across-sectionalstudyofoffice,customerserviceandcallcentreemployees.IntJBehavNutrPhysAct.2012Oct26;9:128.

2. ChauJ,GrunseuiA,CheyT,StamatakisE,BrownWJ,MatthewsCE,etal.DailySittingTimeandAll-CauseMortality:AMeta-Analysis.PLOSOne.2013Nov13;8(11).

3. BhanderiD,ChoudharyS,ParmarL,DoshiV.AStudyofOccurrenceofMusculoskeletalDiscomfortinComputerOperators.IndianJCommunityMedOffPublIndianAssocPrevSocMed.2008Jan;33(1):65–6.

4. BlackN,ScoliègeJ.Ergonomicstudyofworkstationsandemployee’sposturetominimisetheinjuriesandimprovequality.MonctonNB;DartmouthNS:WSPCompany;2016.

5. BlackN,FortinA-P,HandriganGA.PosturalandPerceptionVariationsWhenUsingManuallyAdjustableandProgrammableSit–StandWorkstationsinanEmergencyCallCenter.IIETransOccupErgonHumFactors.2015Apr3;3(2):127–38.

6. McAtamneyL,CorlettEN.RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders.ApplErgon.1993;24(2):91–9.

7. KeyserlingWM.Posturalanalysisofthetrunkandshouldersinsimulatedrealtime.Ergonomics.1986;29(4):569–83.

53

AnevaluationofofficechairbackrestheightonmusculardemandsKaylaM.Fewster,GrahamMayberry,JackP.Callaghan

UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionProlongedstaticsittinghasbeenimplicatedwithanumberofnegativehealthconsequences,including,lowbackpain,heartdiseases,typeIIdiabetesandworkerdiscomfort(1–4).SittingforprolongedperiodshasbeenassociatedwithanincreasedincidenceofLBP(5,6)regardlessofwhetherornotaworkersuffersfromcurrentLBP.Damkotandcolleagues(7)identifiedtheinabilitytochangepositionwhilesittingasamajorfactorinthedevelopmentofLBPduringprolongedsitting.Ergonomicstudiesonofficeseatinghavefoundelementsthatencouragemovement,suchasadjustable/reclinablebackrests,seatpans,armrestsandtiltmechanismscanminimizediscomfortandstresstothebodyduringsitting(8).Wheninvestigatingofficeseatingdesigns,themainfocushasbeenonlumbarsupportsandbackrestreclineangles.Lumbarsupportshavedemonstratedtheabilitytoimprovelumbarlordosisinthelowback(9–11)andreducemuscleactivity(12,13).Thereisalsopreliminaryevidencetosuggestthatamodifiedbackrestallowingtheextensionoftheshouldersduringsittingcanalsoimprovespineposturesinsitting(14).However,todate,thereisverylimitedinformationontheimpactofbackrestheightonphysiologicresponsestositting.Thus,theprimaryfocusofthisstudywastoassesschangesinmuscularresponsestochangingbackrestheightinastandardizedofficechair.

MethodsSixteenparticipants(8femalesand8males)wererecruitedfromtheuniversitypopulationtoparticipateinthisstudy.Thisinvestigationsimulated4differentworkingposturesinstandardizedofficechairswiththreedifferentbackrestheights(Short,Mid,andTallchairbackheights).Thefourdifferentworkingposturesconsistedof:1)Uprightbackrestengagedsitting;2)Forwardleaningontoaworksurface;3)Midreclined;4)Fullyreclined(Fig1),acrossthe3standardizedofficechairbackrestheights.Thedurationofeachtrial(3chairsx4conditionsx3repeats=36trials)was70secondsintotal.Ineachtrail,duringthefirst5secondstheparticipantmovedfromuprightsittingtothedesiredposture,inthemiddle60secondstheparticipantheldthedesiredposture,andthenintheremaining5secondsattheendtheparticipantreturnedtouprightsitting.Posturaltrialswereblockrandomizedbychairacrossandwithinsubjects.

Figure1:TheFourconditionsexamined:1)Forwardleaningontoaworksurface;2)Uprightbackrestengagedsitting;3)Midreclined;4)Fullyreclined.

54

Acrossallconditionstested,surfaceelectromyography(EMG)wasusedtotrackmuscleactivityfromfivemusclesbilaterally:thoracicerectorspinae(TES),lumbarerectorspinae(LES),rectusabdominus(RA),sternocleidomastoid(SCM)andcervicalerectorspinae(CES).Maximumvoluntarycontractionswerecollectedfromeachmusclefornormalizationpurposes(%MVC).Foreachoftheconditionscollectedthemiddle30secondsofeachstaticholdwastakenandtheaveragemuscleactivationofthatmiddle30secondswascomputedforeachmuscle.This30secondaveragewasthenaveragedacrosseachofthe3trialsforeachcondition.Rightandleftmuscleswereaveragedresultinginatotalof5averagemuscleactivationvaluesforeachconditiontested.Rightandleftmuscleswereaveragedsinceallmovementsweresymmetricalacrossconditions.Inaddition,togiveanestimateoftotalactivation,eachofthe5muscleaveragesforeachconditionwasalsosummed,resultinginonetotalsumofactivationforeachconditiontested.Athree-waymixedgenerallinearmodelassessedtheinfluenceofBackrestHeight,PostureandGenderonaveragemuscleactivation.

Findings:Overallmuscleactivationlevelswereverylowwithaverageactivationsacrossallbackrestsandposturesbelowapproximately5%MVC(SCM3.8;CES5.3;TES4.7;RA4.2;LES4.3%MVC).TherewasasignificantmaineffectofBackrestHeightforaverageLESEMG(p=0.019).TheTallBackresthadsignificantlyhigheraverageLESactivationincomparisontotheShortBackrestheight(p=0.015).Therewasa3-wayinteractionacrossGender,BackrestHeightandPosturefortheSCM(p=0.005).MalesandFemaleshadsignificantlylessSCMmuscleactivationwhenusingtheTallBackrestintheFull-reclinedpositionincomparisontotheShortandMidheights.Inaddition,FemalesalsohadsignificantlylessSCMmuscleactivationwhenusingtheMidchairincomparisontotheShortchair.Forthetotalsumofallmuscleactivationfromthe5measuredmusclegroupstherewasasignificantBackrestHeightxPostureinteraction(p=0.045).WhenintheForwardandFull-reclinepositions,theMediumbackrestheightresultedinsignificantlygreatertotalmuscleactivation.Inaddition,whenintheFull-reclinedposition,theMediumbackrestheightresultedinsignificantlymoretotalmuscleactivationincomparisontotheTallbackrestheight

DiscussionOverallthemuscleactivationlevelswereverylowacrossallBackrestHeightsandPostures.WhiletherewaslittleimpactofBackrestHeightonmuscleactivation,theTallBackrestheighthadhigheraveragelumbarerectorspinaemuscleactivationincomparisontotheShortheight.Inaddition,therewaslessneckflexormuscleactivity(SCM)whenusingtheTallbackrestheightintheFull-reclinedpositionincomparisontotheShortandMidheights.ThismaybeindicativeoftheTallbackrestsupportingtheheadandneckbetterthantheShortandTallbackrestheights.ThefindingofgreatertotalmuscleactivationwhenintheForwardandFull-reclinepositionsfortheMidchairbackheightmaybeindicativeofmoreco-activationoftheflexorandextensormusclegroups.Thisstudywaslimitedbytheshortdurationofexposureforeachconditioninvestigated.Thismaynothavebeensufficienttimetoreflectmuscleactivationpatternsoverprolongedofficework.

References1)Callaghanetal.(2010)IntJIndErgon.40(2):165–70;2)Dunstanetal.(2012)DiaRes&ClinPractice.368–76;3)Grootenetal.(2013)Ergo.56(8):1304–14;4)Strakeretal.(2013)AppErgo44(4):517-522;5)Wilder,etal.(1988)J.ofSpDis;6)Frymoyeretal(1980)Spine5(5):419–23.7)Damkotetal.(1984)Spine9(4):395–9;8)Corlett(2006)Ergonomics;49(14):1538–46;9)DeCarvalho&Callaghan(2012)ApplErgo;43(5):876–82;10)Reineckeetal(1994)JSpinalDisord:7(1):29–35;11)Makhsousetal.(2003).Spine;28(11):1113–21;12)Andersson&Ortengren(1974)ScandJRehabilMed.6(3):73–90;13)Anderssonetal.(1979),Spine.1979,52–814)Goossensetal.(2003),Ergonomics.46(5):518–30.

55

PAPERSESSION4:APPLIEDCASESTUDIES

Day2–Oct16th

14:45-16:15

PaperSession4AppliedCaseStudies

AllisonStephensDoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?KristinaZucchiattiOneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers:isachairtheanswer?NicholasPatrickDevelopingphysicaldemandsdescriptionsfromjobsimulations

56

DoIneedaDigitalHumanModel(DHM)todoErgonomics?

AllisonStephens,MSc,CCPE,CPE1*,ChristinaCort,MHK,CPE,2,1FanshaweCollege,LondonOntario,Canada

2Siemens,AnnArbor,Mi,USA

BackgroundDigitalHumanModels(DHM)aredisruptivetechnologyforthefieldofErgonomics.Priortotheiradoption,ergonomicanalysisinavirtualenvironmentwaslimited.ThekeyaspectofthetaskanalysisistheHuman.InordertoassesstheriskfactorsofaworkspaceinaproactivedesignaDigitalHumanModelsuchastheSiemensJackandJillrepresentthehuman.ThedatareceivedfromtheDHMisbiomechanicalinnature.JointTorquesandspinalcompression.Visualandanalyticalanthropometricscanalsobeassessed.ThroughouttheyearsofusingDHM,ergonomicanalysistoolshavebeenaddedmakingtheiruseforbothproactiveandreactivesomethingtoconsider.

Objectives

1. WhatisaDHMandit’sunderlyingassumptions2. ReviewoftheadvancedergonomictoolsandresearchimplementationintoDHM’s3. Reviewofergonomictoolsandmeasurementsthatdriveergonomicdecisions4. UnderstandwhenaDHMisagoodinvestmentandergonomicanalysistool

TheuseofDigitalHumanModelsforergonomicshasbeenusedinindustrieslikeautomotivemanufacturing,buthaslimiteduseinotherindustriesandinreactiveergonomics.ThispaperwillreviewtheergonomictoolswithinDHM’sandapplications.ItwillalsoexploretheDHMasaplatformforfutureErgonomicresearch.ThisreviewisbasedonexperienceoftheuseofDigitalhumanModelswithinAutomotivemanufacturing.TheobjectiveofthereviewisallowthoseunfamiliarwithDigitalHumanmodelsknowledgeofDHMcapabilitiesinthefieldofergonomics.

ContextTraditionalErgonomicAnalysisrequireobservationofexistingjobs,withoverviewtoolssuchasRULA,SueRodgersandPDA’s(1-2).Inthedesignphaseofsettinguptheworkplacetheobservationoftheworkerisnotavailable.DigitalHumanmodelsallowstaticanddynamiccreationoffutureworkplacesforanalysis.ManycommontaskanalysistoolscanbeusedwithDigitalHumanModels.OtherneworcomplexergonomictoolscanbeaccessedwithDigitalHumanModels.

Spinalcompressionisanacceptedanalysisparametertoassessliftingandbackloading.ManybiomechanicalmodelslikeUofM3D(3)staticstrengthandWatbak(4)havebeenutilizedinergonomicassessments.TheDHM(SiemensJackandJill,includespinalcompressionbutalsocalculateajointtorqueforallinterestedpostures.Toassessbiomechanicalstrainonthehuman,ajointtorqueassessmentcanbeemployed.Acceptedpracticeistocomparethejointtorquerequirementsofatasktothoseofa25thpercentilefemalestrength.(5)Overtheyearsdigitalhumanmodelshaveincorporatedotherergonomicassessmentssuchasfrequencymodifiers,cumulativeloading,forceacceptabilityandpostureprediction(6).Thesetoolsandotherfutureadditionswillbeexplored.IstheDigitalHumanmodelthefutureplatformofallergonomictoolsforreactiveandproactiveanalysis?

ActionsInaproactiveErgonomicapplication,theDHMhasbeenusedforhandclearance,reachassessment

57

andstrengthcapability.Theacceptabilitydecisionreliesontheanthropometry,workstationparametersandtheworkingposture.Overtheyear’sresearchhasallowedtheseparameterstobebetterdefined.Globalpopulationswithimprovedanthropometricsallowsdecisionstomadeforglobalpopulations(7).Theabilitytopredicttheworkingpostureshavebeenenhancedbymotioncaptureandposturepredictionalgorithms(8)Repetitionshasposedchallengesforbiomechanicalmodels.Theintegrationoffrequencymodifiershasallowedmorerealisticjobevaluations.Fullsimulationshaveallowedcumulativeanalysissuchascumulativebackcompressionandmetabolicanalysis.

OutcomesThecontinuedimprovementoftheDHMtointegratenewergonomicresearchasitbecomesavailable,makestheDHMnotjustabiomechanicalanalysistoolbutinsteadaplatformforacomprehensiveergonomicanalysis.(9)Fullsimulationcapabilitiesallowscumulativetoolsamechanismtowork,thatinthepastrequiredsignificantcomputingpowerandtime.ResearchsuchastheArmForcefieldrecentlyintegratedintoprocesssimulateallowaccesstothelatestresearchinarmstrength.ResearchintheareaofperceivedexertionbeingconductedbyDrJonesattheUniversityofMichiganandFordistargetedforimplementationintoadigitalhumanmodel.

DiscussionThecostandexpertisetousedigitalhumanmodelshasbeenabarriertoit’sadoption.WiththeDHMbeingapromisingplatformtoconductallergonomicassessmentsisthereacaseforErgonomic,SafetyandengineeringprofessionalstoadopttheDHMasatoolofthetradeinthefuture?TheUSCARErgonomicstaskforcehasviewedtheDHMasaconduitforimplementingresearch.Thismodelwillbedemonstratedandinvokediscussiononit’sroleinthefutureuseofDHMforbothproactiveandreactiveergonomics.

RelevancetoPractitionersTheuseofdigitalhumanmodelswithinergonomicsislimitedtolargercompaniesandproactivedesignanalysis(10)It’suseasacommonergonomicanalysisforbothreactiveandproactiveergonomicsisbecomingmoreofareality.Theadvancedanalysiscapabilitiesandpathforresearchimplementationmakesitatoolthatallpractitionersshouldlookat.

References

1.LynnMcAtamney,E.NigelCorlett(1993).RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders,AppliedErgonomics,Volume24,Issue2,Pages91-99

2.SuzanneH.Rodgers,Afunctionaljobevaluationtechnique,inErgonomics,editedbyJ.S.MooreandA.Garg,OccupationalMedicine:StateoftheArtReviews.7(4):679-711,1992.

3.LynnMcAtamney,E.NigelCorlett(1993).RULA:asurveymethodfortheinvestigationofwork-relatedupperlimbdisorders,AppliedErgonomics,Volume24,Issue2,,Pages91-99

4.D.Chaffinetal,(1991)3DstaticstrengthpredictionModel,UniversityofMichiganhttps://c4e.engin.umich.edu/tools-services/3dsspp-software/3dsspp-background-information/

5.SNeumann,W&PWells,R&Norman,Robert.(1999).4DWATBAK:AdaptingResearchToolsandEpidemiologicalFindingstoSoftwareforEasyApplicationbyIndustrialPersonnel.IndustrialEngineeringPublicationsandResearch.

6.Potvin,J.R.,Chiang,J.,Jones,M.L.H.,McInnes,B.andStephens,A.(2008).ProactiveErgonomicAnalyseswithDigitalHumanModeling:AValidationStudyofPercentCapableValues.Proceedingsofthe2008NorthAmericanCongressofBiomechanics.AnnArbor,MI.

7.Smets,M.,Jones,M.L.H.,andStephens,A.(2013).TowardstheDevelopmentofaGlobalManikinSetforProactiveErgonomicsinAutomotiveEngineering.Proceedingsofthe2013InstituteofIndustrialEngineersAppliedErgonomicsConference.Dallas,TX.

8.Jones,M.L.H.,Chiang,J.,Stephens,A.andPotvin,J.R.(2008).TheUseofPhysicalPropsinAutomotiveAssemblyMotionCaptureStudies.TechnicalPaper2008-01-0049.SAEInternationalJournalofPassengerCars-MechanicalSystems.1(1):1163-1171.

9.Stephens,A.andJones,M.L.H.(2008).WorkplaceMethodsandUseofDigitalHumanModels.InV.G.Duffy(Ed.),TheHandbookofDigitalHumanModelingforAppliedErgonomicsandHumanFactorsEngineering.pp.6-1-6-1.NewYork:CRCPress,2008.

10. Stephens,A.andGodin,C.,"TheTruckthatJackBuilt:DigitalHumanModelsandtheirRoleintheDesignofWorkCellsandProductDesign,"SAETechnicalPaper2006-01-2314,2006

58

Oneconveyor,prolongedstanding,manyworkers–isachairtheanswer?KristinaZucchiatti1*andCarrieTaylor1

1Taylor’dErgonomicsIncorporated,Cambridge,Ontario,Canada

BackgroundSpecifyingthe“ergonomic”heightforaworksurfaceisachallengeoftenfacedbyergonomists,butit’sachallengethatwecanmeetwiththerecommendationtomaketheworksurfaceadjustable.Adjustabilityofferstheopportunitytoaccommodateworkersofvaryingheights,withasimpleadjustment.Adjustableworksurfaceshavebecomesoprevalentintheworkplacethatofficeandfactoryworkersalikehavecometoexpectthem.

ProblemHowever,whentheworkinvolvesmanyworkerspositionedalongaconveyororline,adjustabilityisamorecomplexproposition.Inmanyfoodmanufacturingenvironmentssuchapoultryprocessingandcookiepackaging,workersstandshouldertoshoulder,workingathighlyrepetitivetasks.Despitehighratesofshoulder,elbow,andwristinjury,theirmostcommonrequestistypically,“CanIhaveachair?”Theycannotimagineasolutionfortherepetitivenatureofthework,buttheyfeelsurethatsittingwouldalleviatetheirlegandbackfatigue.

ContextThispresentationisacollectionofcasestudiesandexperiencesgainedthroughconsultingpractice.Theyareprimarilyfromfoodandautopartsmanufacturing.

ActionsAcollectionofcasestudiesevaluatedvarioussolutionstoimprovetherisksassociatedwithworkatconveyors,usingCSAreferenceguidelinesforidealstandingworkheights(1).Inonecasestudy,threetypesofplatformswereimplementedatadjacentworkstations,toallowheightadjustabilityforoperators.Operatorsweretrainedandencouragedtoadjusttheplatformheightwhileworkingateachsectionoftheproductionline.Asecondcasestudydepictshowachairmightmakethejobworsefortheupperbodyandback,asaresultofawkwardseatedposturesfromlimitedlegclearance,andconveyorheight.Anti-fatiguemattingandleanstoolswereinvestigated,butnewhazardsarisewiththetypeandenvironmentinwhichthetaskisperformed.

Outcomes

Safetyactionswereimplementedtoaddressfallandpinchpointhazardsfromthevariousheightsoftheadjacentplatforms.Implementationofplatformshashadpositivefeedbackfromworkersoperatingthelines.Anti-fatiguemattingisnotsuitableinmanyfood-basedindustriesbecauseofqualityandsanitarystandards.Inaddition,areaswithhighamountsoffoottrafficsurroundingtheconveyor,increasedthehazardofatripandfall.

DiscussionTherequestforseatingatconveyorscreatesadilemmaforergonomist;weunderstandtherisksofprolongedstanding,butwecanalsounderstandthatseatingataconveyorcanincreasetheriskofupperlimbinjury.Clearancerequirementsforappropriatechairuseisrarelyavailableataconveyor.Areleanstoolsabettersolution?

RelevancetoPractitionersWehavedevelopedafewrecommendationsforworkplacesfacingthischallenge:

59

1. Lowprofileconveyorsarerequiredtomakesittingpractical2. Platformsolutionsareavailabletoallowheight-adjustabilityforstandingworkat

conveyors3. Useofanti-fatiguemattingtoaddressprolongedstandingconcerns,andchallengesinfood

environments4. Implicationsofprolongedstandingonoperators5. Jobrotationsolutionsthatallowtheworkertositforpartoftheshift6. Off-linepackagingworkstationdesigntoallowlegclearanceforsitting

References1. CSAZ412-17:OfficeErgonomics—Anapplicationstandardforworkplaceergonomics.2017.

60

DevelopingPhysicalDemandsDescriptionsFromJobSimulations

NicholasPatrick1*,MartySmets2,AllisonStephens3,StevenFischer11UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada

2FordMotorCo.,Dearborn,Michigan,UnitedStatesofAmerica3FanshaweCollege,London,Ontario,Canada

Background

Physicaldemandsdescriptions(PDDs)areusedbyemployerstoobjectivelydescribethephysicaldemandsassociatedwithaparticularjob.PDDsserveavitalroleinanorganization’sergonomicsprogramwheretheyareusedtoinformpreventionefforts,andalsoserveascriticalinformationtoinformthereturntoworkprocess.

Digitalhumanmodelingsoftwarepackagesaretoolsinwhichtheuserisabletocreatevirtualenvironmentswithhumanavatarsforthepurposeofjobtaskevaluation.TheSiemensTecnomatixJack(Jack)digitalhumanmodelingprogramhasrecentlybeenupdated,providingtheuserwiththecapabilityusetheTaskSimulationBuilder(TSB)featuretodevelopPDDsdirectlyfromadynamicjobsimulationofaseriesofjobtasks(1).Forthisinvestigation,thesePDDdevelopedfromadigitalhumanmodelwillbeknownasanePDD(ePDD,forelectronicPDD).p

ProblemThecostassociatedwithacquiringalicenseforJack,therequiredoperatorskillsetnecessarytoefficientlyusetheprogram,andthetimerequiredtodevelopajobsimulationmayincreasethedevelopmentcostsforanePDD.However,theaddeddetail,inclusionofvideosimulatingthework,andopportunityforquickadditionalhazardassessmentmayprovidebenefittooffsettheaddeddevelopmentcosts.Forenterpriseergonomistsalreadycreatingsimulationsaspartofanadvanceproactiveprocess,ePDDscannowbeautomaticallygeneratedprovidingpotentialprocessefficiencies.ToevaluatetheprospectiveutilityoftheePDD,thiscaseexampledescribesthedevelopmentanduseofePDDs,asanadditionalstepoverandabovetraditionalPDDdevelopment,tosupportreturntoworkseffortsatanautomotiveassemblyfacility.

ContextThisinvestigationtookplaceatanautomotiveassemblyfacility.

ActionsTheprocessofePDDdevelopmentwasdocumented,frominitialdatacollectiontoreportgenerationtoidentifybarriersandopportunitiesforimprovement.Twentycyclicassemblylinejobs,cycletime<60seconds,wereevaluatedinordertogeneratesimulationsusingtheTSBfeatureinJackversion8.4.ThesimulationsweresubsequentlyusedtogenerateePDDsforeachjob.Forthisinvestigationllppp,datacollectionoccurredasifa“traditional”PDDwasbeingdeveloped,withadditionaldatabeingcollected,asrequired,inordertodevelophighfidelitysimulationse.g.detailedworkstationlayouts.Itwastheintentionofthereturntowork(RTW)teamtomakeuseofthesenewlygeneratedePDDsinordertosupplementtheirPDDcurrentdataintheRTWprocess.Simulationsweredevelopedusingmaleandfemalemannequinsscaledto50thpercentile(ANSURdatabase)forstatureandbodymass.ThegoalwastoleveragethecapabilitiesofJack,theTSB,andcertainePDDreportoutputsasrequired,toprovideadvancedinformationthatmaynotbeavailablewithinatraditionalPDD.

Outcomes

61

TheanalysisoftheprocessofePDDcreationuncoveredmultipleareasforimprovement.Oneimportantareaforimprovementrelatestothetimerequiredtodevelopasimulation.Theprocessofsimulationdevelopment,includingallstagesfromshopfloordatacollectionthroughreportgenerationrangedfrom8-24hoursperjobwiththemajorityofthetimeconsistingofsimulationdevelopment.Ingeneral,simulationtimeincreasedwithnumberofindividualtasksperformedduringacycle,aseachgoalorientedmovementmustbeindividuallysimulated.PrimaryresultsrelatedtotheuseoftheePDDwithintheRTWprocesssuggesttheePDDisabletoprovidecontexttothedatacontainedwithina“traditional”PDD.Thesimulationandthegraphicalrepresentationofjobtaskdemandse.g.figure1,werebeneficialinprovidingeasytounderstandcontexttoinformationthatmaybecontainedwithindatatablesinatraditionalPDD.Thiscontextappearstoallowforthequickidentificationoftasksofinterestwithinthejob,andpotentiallyanincreasedeaseofuseofthedatacontainedwithinatraditionallydevelopedPDD.

Figure4.SampleTSBoutputs

DiscussionAstheePDDwasinitiallydevelopedinconjunctionwithinputfromreturntoworkprofessionals(1),itwasexpectedthattheePDDshouldprovidevaluewithintheRTWprocess.Forselectjobs,ePDDoutputswereusedtosupplementthetraditionalPDDdatausedduringtheadjudicationprocess.ePDDswerealsousedtoassistinthematchingofindividualswithrestrictionstoalternativework.InterestinthepotentialuseoftheePDDwasgeneratedthroughoutmultiplelevelsoftheorganization,fromemployeesontheproductionfloorandunionrepresentation,throughdepartmentalmanagement.FurtherworkregardingtheePDDiscontinuingtoexaminethethoughtsandopinionsofPDDusers,e.gergonomists,clinicians,andRTWprofessionals,regardingfurtherdevelopmentoftheePDDasameansforpresentingphysicaldemandsdescriptiondata.Potentialcostsavingswerenotinvestigated,asthefocusofthisworkwastodevelopthedocumentsinasimilarfashionasatraditionalPDD,notinadditiontootherproactiveevaluations.

RelevancetoPractitionersTheePDDprovidespractitionerswithnewpossibilitiesfordevelopingaPDD,aswellasmorepossibilitiesforpresentingtheinformationcontainedwithinaPDDthatmaynotbepossiblewithcurrentmethods.

References1. WardR,StephensA,CortJ.Developmentofmedicalplacementprocessthroughtheuseof

digitalhumanmodelsimulation.In:46thAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofCanadianErgonomists.2015.

62

INTERACTIVEPANELSESSION

AppliedFieldResearchUsingField-Lab-Field(F2L2F)ApproachFacilitator:SandraDorman,Director,CROSHPanelists/Co-authors:AlisonGodwin,PhD,AssociateDirector,CROSHBrandonVance,MHK,ResearchTechnologist,CROSHMallorieLeduc,PhDCandidate,ResearchAssociate,CROSHTammyEger,PhD,ResearchChair,CROSHCROSH’sresearchphilosophyisbasedonaField-toLab-toField(F2L2F)approach,withthefirststepbeing:problemidentificationinthefield;secondstep:solutiondevelopmentinthelab;andthethirdstep:interventionevaluationbackinthefield.ThepanelistswillprovideseveralexamplesofhowCROSHhasusedtheF2L2Fapproach.Membersoftheaudiencewillbeinvitedtoaskquestionsandengageinaninteractiveconversationwiththepanelistsaroundthethemeoftheconference:ResearchtoPracticetoPrevention.

63

PAPERSESSION5:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE

Day3–Oct17th

11:15-12:00

PaperSession5ErgonomicsinHealthcare

CarolynnKallitsisEstimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudyJimPotvinCaregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices

64

Estimatedactionlimitsandposturalrangesforcareproviderswithpediatricpopulations:anappliedcasestudy

CarolynnKallitsis,BHSc.1*,JoanneHodder,PhD2

1OptionsInc.,Guelph,ON,Canada2SheridanCollege,BramptonON,Canada

BackgroundCare providers for the pediatric population are at high risk for sustaining injuries.1 Historically,research shows childcare and home support workers account for almost 10% of the lost timemusculoskeletal (MSK) injuries.2Non-neutralpostures like forwardbendingandsquattingcanbeidentifiedasoccupationalriskfactors inpediatricpopulations.3Lifts fromgroundlevel, liftswhensitting/kneeling, liftswith loadswith a far horizontal reach from the body, asymmetrical lifts oraboveheadliftsarecommonforpediatriccareprovidersandmaybeofconcerngiventheposturesadoptedduringthesetasks.4Currently,noguidelinesexistregardingmaximumpatientweightforcommonhandlingtaskinapediatricsetting.

PurposeThepurposeofthiscasestudywastocapturetheposturesadoptedbyone(1)careworkerduringpediatric patient care tasks and to use their postures to calculate an estimate of the maximumpatient weight that would be acceptable to lift for frequent tasks. This study is useful whenexaminingarangeofacceptable loads liftedbyworkersandwhether therangewouldbegreaterthan the average child patient weight. This will allow for more generalizable estimates ofacceptablepatientweights.

Methods

This case study was conducted over a 5hr period with one (1) volunteer female pediatric careprovider (168 cm; 63.5 kg) who provided care for infants 6-18 months. Trunk postures wererecordedusing theVirtual CorsetTM(VC)(Microstrain Inc.,Williston, VT,USA). TheVCmonitoredflexion-extensionandlateral(lefttoright)bendanglesofthetrunk.Thedevicewassecuredatthesternumforadurationof5hours.All taskscarriedoutbytheparticipantweredocumentedonatablet(SamsungGT-N8000,SamsungElectronicsCo.,Suwon,SouthKorea)withtheobservationalevent logging software WorkStudy+ 6 (Quetech Ltd., Waterloo, ON, CA). The postures for allperformed,tasksweresegmentedandmeanandpeakpostureswerefound.Usinga50thpercentilefemalemannequin in the3Dstatic strengthpredictionprogram(3DSSPP;UniversityofMichigan,Michigan,USA),posturesobservedwereusedtofindtheactionlimitforacceptablehandloads.

OutcomesThe pediatric care tasks of feeding/meal time tasks, nap time duties, physical activity and othertaskshad thepeak trunk flexiondisplacement as large as109.7°.Trunk flexionobserved rangedfrom4.2°to109.7°andlateraltrunkdisplacementsrangedfrom8.4°to61.9°(L)and1.4°to55.5°(R). The recommended weight limits (as determined from 3DSSPP) for pediatric care tasksanalyzed in thisstudyranged from6.36–10.91kg.Therecommendedweight limits forhygienictasks,naptimeduties,andphysicalactivitywerefoundtobeapproximately10kg.Limitsforliftingachildfromthefloorwereassessedtobe6.36kgandfromacribat9.55kg(Figure1).

ConclusionTheresultsofthisstudysuggestthatitisfeasibletodetermineworkerspecificliftinglimitsbasedonposturestheyutilize.Thismaybeeffectiveineducatingworkersandwithfurtherinvestigation,toestablishasafeliftingguidelineforpediatriccareworkerstohelpreducetheriskofMSKinjuries.This method of analysis was deemed beneficial since the recommended weight limits for the

65

pediatric care worker observed in this study were less than 50% of the NIOSH recommendedguideline.

DiscussionThereisalackofpublisheddataregardingtheacceptablelimitsforprovidingcareandhandlingapediatric population. Due to the considerably lowerweight of infants and children compared toadults,thispopulationisnotconsideredwhenimplementingliftguidelinesinpatientcaresettings.Theappliedanalysis completed in this casestudysuggests that identifyingguidelines for specificliftsandtasksisfeasibleinanappliedenvironment.Theworkerspecificresultsidentifyingthatliftsfromthefloorshouldbecappedat6.4kg.Thiswasofspecificinterestsince,accordingtotheWorldHealthOrganizationStandard forCanada6, themajorityof infantswill surpass thisweightby theageof6months,whichwouldbetheyoungestoftheagegroupthatmostdaycarefacilitieswouldcare for. Examining a range of acceptable loads lifted by careworkerswould be of interest andvaluetosupportadoptingmodifiedworkmethodsinapediatriccaresetting.

RelevancetoPractitioners

Despite a large amount of research on the postures and loads that patient care providers areexposedto,theactionlimitsbasedonposturesadoptedarewidelyunpublished.Understandingtherisks associatedwith variouspediatric care tasks, basedonworkmethodsused, could helpwithimplementationofmusculoskeletal injury riskmitigationandeliminationstrategies.Theextremeposturesobservedinthisstudyhighlighttheimportanceofsafeliftmethods,aswellasguidelineswhenworkingwithaninfantorchildpopulation.

References1Labajetal.IntJournalofIndustrialErgonomics,2016.2Pompeiietal.AmJIndMed,2009.3Swansonetal.Pediatrics,19944Craigetal.AIHAJournal,2003.5Waters,T.R.,V.Putz-Anderson,A.Garg,andL.J.Fine.1993.“RevisedNIOSHEquationfortheDesignandEvaluationofManualLiftingTasks.”Ergonomics36(7):749–76.https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139308967940.6WHO,WHOGrowthChartsforCanada,2006.

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.0025.00

HygenicTasks

LiftFromCrib

LiftFromFloor

NapTimeDuties

Other

PhysicalActivity

PlaceChild

ProviderRegularDuties

Standing(BabyInArms)

Walking(BabyIn Arms)

3DSSPPHandLoadsvs.NIOSHRWL

MaxLoad(kg) NIOSHLC(kg)

Figure1.Themaximumrecommendedweightlimitsestablishedin3DSSPPincomparisonto1991NIOSHLiftingEquationLoadConstant(LC)5.

66

Caregiverloadsduringsit-to-standpatientlifting:Asimulationstudyofthreeclinicaldevices

JimR.Potvin1*

1PotvinBiomechanicsInc.Tecumseh,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionThedemandsassociatedwithpatienthandlingareamajorergonomicsissueinhealthcare.Historically,effortstoreducepatienthandlinginjuryriskhavefocusedonthetrainingofpropertechnique,buttheseeffortshavegenerallynotresultedinasignificantdecreaseinthenumberofmusculoskeletaldisorders.Thiswouldsuggestthatinterventionsshouldincludeeffortstodecreasethebiomechanicaldemandsassociatedwithpatientpositioningandposture.Thiscanbeaccomplishedwithassistivepatient-handlingdevices,whichcanbeeffectiveforreducinginjuriesrelatedtopatienttransfers,whenincorporatedwithinacomprehensiveergonomicsprogram1.Thepurposeofthisstudywastouseergonomicssimulationmethods,digitalhumanmodelingandbiomechanicssoftwaretoassessthedemandsoncaregiverswhenassistingpatientswiththeinitiationofstandingfromaseatedpositioninaclinical:(1)recliner,(2)chairand(3)bed.

MethodsThisstudyinvolvedthreedevices:(1)SymmetryPlusPatientRoomRecliner(termed"D1",Stryker,Portage,MI),(2)ProgressaTMBedSystem(termed"D2",Hill-Rom,Batesville,IN),and(3)TruRizeTMClinicalChair(termed"D3",Stryker).AllanthropometrywassetusingtheNationalHealthandNutritionExaminationSurvey(NHANES)(1990)databaseinJack(Siemens,AnnArbor,MI).MoredetailsofthelargerstudyareprovidedinPotvin(2017)2but,forthisabstract:(a)onlytheoptimalergonomicconditionsarepresentedforeachdevice(D1withnoseatpantilt,D2withitsmaximumseatpantiltof16°,andD3withitsmaximumtiltof21°),(b)thecaregiverssimulatedas50thpercentilefemales(71.0kgbodymass,1.63mstature),(c)thepatientwassimulatedasa95thpercentilemale(123.0kg,1.86m),(d)onecaregiverperformedthelift,(e)theycontributed100%toinitiatingtheliftand(f)theyusedagaitbelt.CADprimitiveswereusedtodeveloprenderingsoftheseatpan,backrest,armrestsandbaseforD1andD2,andCADdatawereprovidedbyStrykerforD3.TheJacksoftwarewasusedtoperformbiomechanicalanalysesforthecaregiverposturesassociatedwiththethreedevices.Foreachcondition,someassumptionsweremadebasedonstaticstodeterminethenecessarycaregiverhandforcestoinitiaterotationaboutthepatient'sankles,thenusedtheJacksoftwareandArmForceField3methodtodeterminethepatientanklemoment,lumbarcompressionandshearforcesandarm,hipandkneestrengthpercentincapable..

Figure1:SimulationswithD1,D2andD3,attheirmaximumseatpanangles,witha95thmalepatientanda50thfemalecaregiverusingagaitbelt

67

FindingsTheresultsherewereconsistentwiththefindingsofotherconditionsinthelargerstudy2.Theanklemomentaboutthepatient'sanklegenerallydeterminedthecaregiverforcesrequiredtoinitiaterotationduringasit-to-standandthisgreatlyinfluencedtheotherjointloads.ThismomentwasmuchlowerforD3,thanwithD1andD2(Table1).Subsequently,thelumbarcompressionandshearforces,andthepercentincapableofthearm,hipandkneestrengthdemandsweremuchlowerwithD1.

Table1:Jointloadingresultsforthesubsetofconditionspresentedhere,forthethreedevices.Absolutevaluesarepresentedasaretheratiosofthedeviceswithrespecttoeachother.Valuesinredindicatecompressionforces>3,400N4,shearvalues>1,000N5andstrengthpercentincapablevalues>25%6.

Discussion

Theresultswereconsistentacrossvariables,indicatingamuchlowerriskofcaregiverinjurywhenusingD3toassistpatientsinasit-to-standmovement,basedontypicalbiomechanicalvariablesusedinergonomicassessments.ThedesignoftheTruRizeTMClinicalChair(D3)allowedforthepatient'sfeettobemovedclosertotheedgeoftheseatpanthanD2(reducingthemomentcausedbytheirbodyweight)andallowedformoretiltandincreasedheightoftheseatpanthanD1andD2(initiatingtheliftandfurtherreducingthemomentabouttheankles).BothD1andD2exceededergonomicsthresholds(seeTable1)whena50thfemalecaregiverwasproviding100%oftheforcetolifta95thmalepatient.Thestudyhadsomelimitationassociatedwiththeassumptionsmade,andconstraintsused,torepresentaswideavarietyofconditionsaspossible.Theseconstraintsincluded:(1)theeliminationofalldynamicloadinganduseofmomentumsuchthatrotationofthepatientwouldoccurwhentheiranklemomentjustexceededzero,(2)onlyanalyzingonepostureforeachconditionwhileanumberofpostureswouldbepossibleforboththepatientandcaregiver,and(3)limitinghandforcestothesagittalplane.However,ergonomicssimulationswithdigitalhumanmodelsprovedtobeaneffectivemethodtocomparethephysicaldemandsoncaregiversforawidevarietyofpatientsit-to-standconditions.

RelevancetoPractitionersTheergonomicbenefitsofanovelclinicalchair(D3),weredemonstrated.Thischairliftsandrotatestheseatpanresultinginasubstantialreductionintheeffortrequiredbycaregiverswhenassistingwithasit-to-stand.Thestudyalsodemonstratesthepowerofworksimulationanddigitalhumanmodelsforcomparingergonomicsdemandsassociatedwithdifferentproductdesigns.

References2. GargA,KapelluschJM.HumanFactors.2012;54(4):608-625.3. PotvinJR.IntJSPHM.2017;7(2):64-73.4. LaDelfaNJ,Potvin,JR.AppliedErgonomics,2017;59:410-421.5. NationalInstituteforOccupationalSafetyandHealth(1981)No.81-122.Cincinnati.6. GallagherS,MarrasWS.ClinicalBiomechanics.2012;27(10):973-978.7. SnookSH,CirielloVM.Ergonomics,1991;34(9):1197-1213.

D1 D2 D3 D2/D1 D3/D1 D3/D2AnkleMoment(Nm) 347.6 357.6 148.8 1.03 0.43 0.42CompressonForce(N) 4,884 4,048 1,260 0.83 0.26 0.31ResultantShearForce(N) 1,381 1,163 371 0.84 0.27 0.32MaxArm%Incapable 53.4% 45.1% 2.3% 0.84 0.04 0.05MaxHip%Incapable 34.3% 42.0% 1.9% 1.22 0.06 0.05MaxKnee%Incapable 28.8% 26.6% 2.3% 0.92 0.08 0.09

RelativeValuesAbsoluteValues

68

PAPERSESSION6:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–UNDERGRADUATEANDMASTERS

Day3–Oct17th

10:15-12:00 PaperSession6StudentAwardFinalists

CROSHUndergraduateStudentAwardFinalistsJacquelineTonerTheimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstrollerErikaZiraldoDesignandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandlingCourtneyNickelEliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearchJMChristensenMastersAwardFinalistsMatthewBarrettCanseatpandesignmitigatelowerlimbswellingandbackpain?SaraSayedCareerfirefighters’real-timephysiologicalresponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:implicationsforinjuryprevention

69

Theimpactofdifferenthandleorientationsonexternalpushingforceandmuscleactivityofa4-childstroller

JacquelineToner1,2,Dr.WayneAlbert2,Dr.UshaKuruganti11AndrewandMarjorieMcCainHumanPerformanceLab

2OccupationalPerformanceLabUniversityofNewBrunswick,Fredericton,NB,Canada

Introduction

Previousresearchexploringappropriatehandleorientationsforpushingtaskshasfoundmixedresults.Whencomparinghandledesignspastresearchhassuggested:gripstrengthisweakerusingahorizontalhandlecomparedtoverticalhandle(1);bothsemipronatedandhorizontalhandleorientationsproducedgreaterpushingcapacitiesthantheverticalhandles(2);andsemi-pronatedhandleorientationsattributedtolowerforcesthanhorizontalhandleorientations(3).Itisimportanttounderstandtheimpactofhandledesignonforceandmuscleactivitytopreventfatigueandmusculoskeletaldiscomfortthatcanaffecttheworkforce,includingdaycareworkers.

PurposeToexaminetheimpactofhandleorientationofa4-child(Quad)strollerontheforceandmuscleactivitycreatedtopushthestroller.

MethodsFourteenwomenwiththemeanage24±4.71yearsvolunteeredforthisstudy.Participantspushedthestrollerdownan8-meterstretch,followedbya90-degreeturntotherightorleftaroundafixedpoint,andcontinuedfor2metersbeforecomingtoacompletestop.Participantswereaskedtocompleteseparatetrialswitheachofthethreehandleorientations:horizontal,vertical,andsemi-pronated.Tosimulatefourchildreninthestrolleratotalcargoweightof54.4kgwasaddedtothestroller.Theweightwasbasedonthe85thpercentileweightfor2yearoldboysandgirls.Thestrollerwasinstrumentedwithforcetransducerswithinthehandlestomeasuretheforcerequiredtopushthestroller.Surfaceelectromyography(EMG)wasusedtomeasuremuscleactivationduringthestrollerpush(NoraxonTelemyo).Bipolarsurfaceelectrodeswereplacedovertheanteriordeltoid(AD),bicepsbrachii(BB),andsuperiortrapezius(TR)musclestorecordtheiractivityduringeachtrial.SurfaceEMGamplitudewasestimatedusingtheRootMeanSquare(RMS)ofthestraightaway,leftturn,andrightturnsegmentsofthepush.

Results

** *

70

Duetothepagelimitforthesubmissionoftheabstractonlyaportionoftheresultswillbeshared.Itshouldbeknownthattherewereadditionalsignificantdifferencesfoundwhencomparinghandleorientationsandtheforce&EMGpeakandareaamplitudes.

EMGFindingsDuringthestraightawaysegmentofthepushingtasksboththehorizontal(H)andsemipronated(S)handleshadsignificantlylowermeanamplitudevaluesfortheSTright(pH=0.0073)STleft(pH=0.00029,pS=0.0078),rightBB(pS=0.048),leftBB(pH=0.005,pS=0.014)thantheverticalhandle.Duringtheleftturn,semi-pronatedhandlescreatedsignificantlylowermeanamplitudeoftherightbiceps(p=0.0459)whencomparedtotheverticalhandle.Finally,duringtherightturn,thehorizontalhandleorientationresultedinameanamplitudesignificantlylowerthanverticalhandlesSTleft(p=0.011),BBleft(p=0.0066),BBright(p=0.097)andsemi-pronatedBBleft(p=0.029)handles.

ForceFindingsDuringthestraightawaysegmentofthepushingtaskthesemipronatedorientationhadsignificantlylowerpeak(p)andarea(a)amplitudesforceincomparisontotherightvertical(pp=0.048)handleandtheleft(pa=0.0387)andright(pa=0.0264)horizontalhandles.Duringtheleftturn,onlythelefthorizontalhandlehadsignificantlylowerpeakamplitudeforcethantheleftverticalhandle(p=0.00958).Nosignificantfindingsfoundcomparingthehandleorientationsforcesduringtherightturn.

DiscussionMusclefatigueiscommonlyseenasadecreaseinone’smaximalforcethattheinvolvedmusclescanproduce,anditdevelopsgradually,soonaftertheonsetofthesustainedphysicalactivity(4).Iftheonsetofthatfatiguecanbedelayedthroughhandledesignthaninjuriesmaybeabletobeprevented.TheEMGdatasuggeststhatboththehorizontalandsemi-pronatedhandlesresultinlowerlevelsofmusclesactivationcomparedtotheverticalhandle.SurfaceEMGhasbeenusedtostudymusclefatigueextensivelyintheliteratureandthereisevidencethatthereiscorrelationbetweenthedevelopmentofmusclefatigueandinanincreaseintheamplitudeanddecreaseinthecharacteristicspectralfrequencies(4).Thispreliminarystudysuggeststhatthetaskbeingperformedbyaworkertopushastrollermaycausemusclefatigueduetotheforceandmusclerequirementsandthathandledesigncouldreducetheamountofstrain.Furtherinvestigationiswarrantedtodeterminetheoptimumhandledesignaswellasestablishmentofappropriateworkprotocols.Futurestudiesshouldexaminemuscleactivityofbothupperandlowerlimbsandmonitormuscleactivityoveralongerperiodoftimetobettersimulatetypicalworkingconditions.

FutureImplicationsUnderstandingtheimpactofhandleorientationonstrollerdesigniscriticalinordertopreventinjuryandfatigueofaworker.Thisstudyhasprovidedpreliminarydatasuggestingthattherearedifferencesinforceandmuscleactivityrequirementsduetohandleorientationandfurtherinvestigationshouldexaminehandlesdesigntoensurethesafetyfortheworker.Outsideofthechildcareindustrythesefindingcouldinspireergonomicchangesthatwilllowertheimpactontheworkerandenhancetheirphysicalcapacitytocompletepushingtasks.

References

1.Mogk,J.,&Keir,P.(2003)Theeffectsofpostureonforearmmuscleloadingduringgripping,Ergonomics,46:9,956-975.2.Lin,J,H.,McGorry,R,W.,&Chang,C,C.,(2012).Effectsofhandleorientationandbetween-handledistanceonbi-manualisometricpushstrength,AppliedErgonomics,43,664-670.3.OlanrewajuO.Okunribido&ChristineM.Haslegrave(2008)Readysteadypush–astudyoftheroleofarmpostureinmanualexertions,Ergonomics,51:2,192-216.4.Kallenberg,L.,Schulte,E.,Disselhorst-Klug,C.,&Hermens,H,J.(2007).Myoelectricmanifestationsoffatigueatlowcontractionlevelsinsubjectswithandwithoutchronicpain.JournalofElectromyographyKinesiology,17,264–274.

71

Designandvalidationofaprototypewearabledeviceforautomatinglowbackinjuryriskfactorquantificationduringmanualmaterialshandling

ErikaZiraldo,HannahArthurs,EliseHuet,JessieLeith,MicheleOliver

SchoolofEngineering,UniversityofGuelph,Guelph,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionWorkrelatedmusculoskeletaldisorders(WMSDs)aretheleadingworkplaceinjuryinOntariogeneratingmorethan40%oflost-timeinjuries(1).AccordingtotheWorkplaceSafetyandInsuranceBoard(WSIB),lowbackinjuriesaccountedfor17%ofOntario’sallowedclaimsin2017withapproximatelythreeoffourCanadianswhoseworkinvolvesmanualmaterialshandling(MMH)experiencingalowbackinjuryduringtheircareer(1).Employerscanassessriskusingwelldevelopedergonomictoolswhichofteninvolveanergonomistwatchingandevaluatingemployeesperformingatask.Unfortunately,workersoftenperformtasksdifferentlywhilebeingobserved(2).Toreducetheneedforanergonomisttodirectlymonitoraworker,thepurposeofthisworkwastodesign,buildandvalidateaprototypewearabledevicefortheautomationoflowbackinjuryriskfactorquantification.

MethodsDesignTomeasuretheliftverticallocation,displacement,twistangle,frequencyanddurationtobeusedasinputparametersforthe1991NIOSHliftingequation(3)andMitaltables(4),twosensorswereusedincombinationwithanArduinoMicromicrocontroller.Thefirst,aLightDetectionAndRanging(LiDAR)systemuseslightintheformofapulsedlasertomeasuredistancefromthesensortoanobject.Thissensor,attachedatthewristonafreelyrotatingjoint,trackshandpositionduringthelift.CustomsoftwareidentifiesliftingcyclesfromtheLiDARpositiondataenablingliftingfrequencydetermination.Thesecondsensorisaninedegreeoffreedominertialmeasurementunit(IMU)containinganaccelerometer,gyroscope,andmagnetometer.Outputsfromthesetoolsareusedtocalculatepitch,roll,andheadingoftheIMU,whichdescribesensororientation.Placedontheshoulder,thefilteredIMUoutputscanthenbeusedtocalculatemaximumandminimumtrunktwist.Thesensorsareattachedtotheuserbyanarmband,andallauxiliaryelectricalcomponentsareenclosedwithina3Dprintedbox(Figure1).SensordataaresavedtoamicroSDcardforsubsequenttransfertoacustomsoftwareprogramwheretheuserispromptedtoinputhandcoupling,sex,liftingdurationaswellasthedepthandweightoftheobjectbeinglifted.Thesoftwarethencalculatesarecommendedweightlimitandriskindexoverdurationswhichcanrangefromasingleliftingcycletoanentireworkshift.

Figure5:Wearabledevicecomponentsandlayout

72

ValidationTovalidatesensorandcalibrationaccuracy,sensordataweretestedagainstdistancesandanglescalculatedduringasampleliftusinganinecameraBonitaVICONMotionCapturesystem.Sphericalmarkers(1cmdiameter)wereplacedonboththeleftandrightacromionprocessesandtheradialandulnarstyloidprocessesoftherightwrist.Alldataweresampledat100Hzandsmoothedusinga4thorderButterworthfilter.Figure2comparestheverticaldistancefromthestandingsurfacethroughoutthedurationofthesampleliftasmeasuredbybothLiDARandVICON,whileFigure3providesanillustrationofthetwistangleforthesamelift.

Figure6:TrackingverticaldistancewithVICONandLiDAR

Figure3:TrackingtwistanglewithVICONand9DOFIMU

DiscussionLiDARresultsfortheverticaldistanceparametercloselyfollowVICONmeasurements(Figure2).Whilethereissomeclippingatthepeaks,theaveragemaximaanddisplacementsareverysimilar.Theclippingerrorisminorgiventhatmosthand-calculatedliftingriskassessmentsaresimplifiedbyassumingthatanyliftfromthefloorstartsat0cmandendsattheheightofthefinishingsurface,despiterecommendationfromNIOSHtomeasurefromthehand(3).Therefore,theVICONandLiDARdataprovideamoreaccuratemeasureofverticaldistancethanahand-measuredvalue.

Incontrast,thetrunktwistinganglemeasuredusingtheIMUdoesnotcloselymatchthevaluescalculatedfromVICONpositiondata.Thiscanbeexplainedbythemagnetometercalibration,whichcorrectsdriftinthegyroscopemeasurements.Toimprovetwistangleaccuracy,anextendedcalibrationwhichcompensatesforbothhardandsoftironerrorswasdevelopedfortheIMU.Datacollectioniscurrentlyinprogresstotestthemethod,however,itisanticipatedthatthenewcalibrationshouldgreatlyimprovethetrunktwistestimation.

References1.WSIB.BytheNumbers:2017WSIBStatisticalReport.WSIB;2018.2.ClaypooleV,DewarA,FrauliniN,SzalmaJ.EffectsofSocialFacilitationonPerceivedWorkload,SubjectiveStress,andVigilance-RelatedAnxiety.ProceedingsoftheHumanFactorsandErgonomicsSocietyAnnualMeeting.2016;60(1):1169-1173.

3.WatersT,Putz-AndersonV,GargA,FineL.RevisedNIOSHequationforthedesignandevaluationofmanualliftingtasks.Ergonomics.1993;36(7):749-776.

4.MitalA,NicholsonA,AyoubM.Aguidetomanualmaterialshandling,2nded.2nded.London:TaylorandFrancis;1997.

Manual OnboardSensors VICONFinalHeight(cm) 114 123 120StartingHeight(cm) 0 10 8TrunkTwist(°) 90 41 86

Table1:Summaryofexperimentalinputvariablesasmeasuredmanually,bythedevicesensors,andbyVICON.

73

Eliminatingthelearningeffectforminingsimulatorresearch

CourtneyNickel1*,2,CarolynKnight2,AlisonGodwin1,21SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionSimulatorsprovideameansbywhichresearcherscanevaluatetrainingandperformanceinarelativelyrisk-freeenvironment.Thiscanbeespeciallyusefulinhighriskworkplaces,suchastheminingindustry.TichonandBurgess-Limerick(2011)identifiednotonlyhazardasareasontoexplorevirtualrealitytrainingmethodsbutalsothereducedcostandimpactonworkplaceproductivity,andtheabilitytoexplorescenariosthatareimpossibletorecreateintherealworld.Trainingnoviceusersinasimulatoralsohasthebenefitofimprovingtheperceptuo-motorskillsrequiredtoenhancereal-worlddecisionmaking,problemsolvingandhazardidentification(Tichon&Burgess-Limerick(2011).Theseareimportantconstructsthatleadtoaworkerhavingbettersituationalawarenessoncetheyareintheworkplace(Sausetal.2012).

Areviewoftheindustry-leadingThoroughtecCyberminesimulatorshowedthattraineesfoundthesimulatortobeveryrealisticandtheybelievedthatthecompetenciesdevelopedduringtrainingwouldbetransferabletotherealworld(Bellehumeur&Marquis,2016).Notallresearchlabshaveaccesstothefundsrequiredtopurchaseandinstallthesehigh-fidelitysimulators.Additionally,theabilitytobuildcustomsoftwarespecifictoresearchinterestshasmeritsfromaresearchperspective.Withthisinmind,ourresearchlabhasdesignedavirtualrealitysimulatorontheUnitygamingplatform,withanintegratedjoystickandpedalcontrollertocloselymimicoperationofaload-haul-dump(LHD)machine.Themaintaskinthesimulatorisfortheindividualtopickuporeinthebucketofanaccurately-scaledLHDanddelivertheoreinasimulatedminedrifttoanorepasslocation.Severalfeaturesintendedtotestsituationalawarenesshavebeenbuiltintothesimulator,andadatalogfeaturerecordsperformancefeaturessuchasmachinespeed,headdirection,collisionstatisticsandreactiontime.Inpreliminaryresearch,itwasfoundthatastronglearningcurvewasaffectinganalysisofperformancevariablesacrossdifferentresearchconditions.Assuch,thisresearchstudysetouttodeterminea)theimpactofatutorialsessiononthelearningeffectandb)atwhatpointdidthelearningeffecttaperoff.

MethodsAtotalof18participantswererecruitedtothisstudy,andrandomlyassignedtooneoftwogroups,tutorialornotutorial.Thetutorialwasafive-minutesessioninaseparatevirtualreality(VR)spacethatprovidedanoverviewoftheLHDmachine,howthecontrolsworkedandhowtonavigateinVR.Allparticipantsthencompletedfivesessionslastingfiveminuteseachinthesimulator(Figure1).Thesessionsallhadthesamegoal,whichwastodeliverorefromthemuckpiletotheorepass.Alongtheway,participants

encounteredpedestrians,whichtheywereinstructedtoavoidhittingandtorespondtowithaspecialbuttononthejoystick.Thiswasloggedasaperception-responsetimebythesimulatordatalog.Aftereachsession,theparticipantwasgivenabreakandaskedasituationalawarenessquestion.

Figure1:UserwithVRheadsetnavigatinganLHDmachineinthevirtualmineenvironment.

74

Duetonon-normaldatadistributions,non-parametrictestswereusedthroughouttoevaluatetheimpactofthetutorialsessionontotalcollisions,perception-responsetimeandnumberofcorrectlyansweredsituationalawarenessquestions.Whereapplicable,Levene’sTestforEqualityofVarianceswasusedtoevaluatethedifferenceinvariancebetweentutorialandnotutorialgroups.

FindingsTheMann-WhitneyUprovidednoevidenceofadifferenceintotalcollisions(p=0.203)oraverageperception-responsetime(p=.515)whencomparingthetutorialgrouptothenotutorialgroup.Largeindividualvariabilitywaslikelydrivingthisrelationship(Figure2),andpromptedustolook

atameasuretoevaluateequalityofvariance(Levene’sTest).TheLeveneTestviolation(p<0.05)fortotalcollisionssuggeststhatthelowervarianceforthetutorialgroup(27.7±17.1)comparedtonotutorial(56.6±46.4)isworthyofnote.

TheLeveneTestwasnotviolatedforaverageperceptionresponsetimesothegroupswerecollapsedandtheFriedmantest(p=0.04)wasusedtodemonstrateasignificantrepeatedmeasureseffectacrosstime(Session1-5).FollowupWilcoxonSignedRanksTestsuggeststhatperception-responsetimeinSession1wassignificantlyslowerthanallotherSessions.

DiscussionThefindingsofthisworkdemonstratethatusingthetutorialsessiontoorientunfamiliaruserswiththeVRenvironmentisbeneficialforreducingintra-individualvariabilityincollisionoccurrence.Achievingabaselevelofcompetencyinthephysicaltaskofdrivingallowstheresearcherstohaveconfidenceinthesubsequentmeasuresofcognitiveloadthatwillbeusedintheevaluationofinterfacedesign.

RelevancetoPractitionersUsingVRinatrainingorresearchcontextisgainingtractionbutalargelearningcurveexiststhatmustbeovercome.Further,manyindividualsmaynottolerateVRasamediumforlongperiodsoftime.Thisworkhasdemonstratedtheimportanceofusingatutorialsessiontoorienttheuser,andthedecreasingvariancethatcanbeachievedwithincreasedpracticeintheVRsimulation.

References1. Tichon,J.,Burgess-Limerick,R.Areviewofvirtualrealityasamediumforsafetyrelatedtrainingin

mining.JournalofHealthandSafety,ResearchandPractice2011;3(1),33–40.2. Saus,E.-R.,Johnsen,B.H.,Eid,J.,Thayer,J.F.Whobenefitsfromsimulatortraining:Computersin

HumanBehavior,2012;28(4),1262–1268.3. Bellehumeur,V.,Marquis,R.Pouruneimplantationréussiedelaformationparsimulateurd’engins

miniersauQuébec.Institutnationaldesmines.2016

Figure2:TotalcollisionsacrossSessionsfortutorialandnon-tutorialgroups

-10-5051015202530

Tutorial Non-tutorial

TotalCollisions

Session1 Session2 Session3 Session4 Session5

75

CanSeatPanDesignMitigateLowerLimbSwellingandBackPain?

MatthewBarrett*,MonaFrey,DianaDeCarvalhoDivisionofClinicalEpidemiology,DisciplineofMedicine,FacultyofMedicine,MemorialUniversityof

Newfoundland,St.John’s,NewfoundlandandLabrador,Canada

IntroductionProlongedsittinghasbeenshowntohaveverynegativehealthconsequences,includingearlydeathandcardiovasculardisease,especiallywhennotoffsetbyphysicalactivity1Further,thereisevidencethatprolongedsittingisrelatedtoincreasedratesoflowbackpain(LBP)2.Forthesereasons,increasingmovementduringtheworkdayhasbeenadvocatedfordeskworkersinofficesettings.Onepossiblesolutiontothisproblemcouldbealternativechairdesigns:specifically,adesignthatpermitsmovementofthelowback,hipsandlowerlimbsinseatedposture.Thepurposeofthisstudywastoexaminetheimpactofan“active”multi-axischaironlowerlimbswellingandperceivedbackpainoveraprolongedsittingexposure.

MethodsInthisrandomizedrepeatedmeasurescross-sectionalstudy,30maleparticipantsofworkingage(19-65)wererecruitedfromthelocalpopulation.Participantscompletedtwo,threehour,experimentalsessions,atthesametimeofday,atleast24hoursapart.Eachsessionconsistedofinstrumentationwithtwoaccelerometersattheupperandlowerback,followedbya2-hourstandardizedtypingtaskatanergonomicallyadjustedworkstation.Participantswereblockrandomizedtoeithertypeinthe“active”ortypicalofficechaironthefirstday,followedbytheotherchairduringthesecondsession.Lumbarspineanglewascalculatedattherelativeanglebetweenaccelerometersnormalizedtospineflexionrangeofmotion(%ROM),calfcircumferencewasmeasured10cmdistaltothekneecapoftherightlegimmediatelybeforeandaftertheprolongedsittingtrialandratingsofperceivedbackpainwerecollectedat7.5minuteintervalsthroughoutthetrialusingadigital100mmVisualAnalogScale(VAS)withanchorsof0mm=“nopain”and100mm=“worstpainimaginable”.Qualitativefeedbackonbothchairswasalsocollected.Theseoutcomemeasureswerecomparedbetweenchairtypeusinga1-wayrepeatedmeasuresANOVA(SPSSversion22.0,IBMCorporation,Armonk,NY,USA).

FindingsParticipantssatwithsignificantlylessspineflexiononaverageintheactivechair(62.25%ROM+/-18.22SD)comparedtothetypicalchair(70.80%ROM+/-11.98SD;p=0.039).Averagepeakperceivedpainratinginthelowbackregionwasfoundtobesignificantlylowerintheactivecomparedtothecontroltypicalchair(p=0.025).Calfcircumferencemeasuresincreasedsignificantlylessinresponsetotheprolongedsittingtrialwiththe“active”(averagecircumferencedifferential+0.021cm+/-0.73cm)comparedtothecontroltypicalchair(averagecircumferencedifferential+0.962cm+/-0.74)(p<0.00).Qualitativedataindicatedparticipantsperceivedtheactivechairfavourably.

Discussion

Theprimaryfindingfromthisinvestigationwasthatparticipant’sexhibitsignificantlylesslumbarflexionthroughouta2-hourstandardizedofficetasksittingintheactivechaircomparedtothetypicalofficechair.Participantssittinginanoveralllessflexedposturecouldpointtoareductionintheriskofinjurysincethepercentoftimespentinnon-neutralorflexedlowbackposturesisaknownriskfactorforLBP3.Steadilyincreasingperceivedlowbackpain,wasalsoseenforboth

76

chairconditionsinthisstudy,however,participantsreachedasignificantlyhigheraveragepeakpainratinginthetypicalcomparedtothe“active”chair.

Theseresultssuggestparticipantshadalesspainfulexperiencewhileseatedintheactivechairwhilecompletingthetypingtask.Previousliteraturehasshownthatincreasedcalfcircumferenceduetolegswellingassociatedwithvenouspoolingexistsafterperiodsofprolongedsitting4.Calfcircumferenceincreasewassignificantlylowerintheactivechairsuggestingthattheparticipantshadlessvenousbloodpoolingintheirlowerlimbswhileseatedinthe“active”comparedtothecontrol.Thiscouldberelatedthemoreerectposturewhichmayhavereducedcompressionofthevascularsystematthehips,however,aslowerlimbpostureand/ormuscleactivitywerenotmeasuredwecannotsayforsure.Futurelaboratorystudiesshouldfocusonthesemeasurestoprovidemoreinsightintothemechanismofthiseffect.

RelevancetoPractitionersThisstudyfoundthat,incomparisontoatypicalofficechair,the“active”chairdesignhadsignificantimpactsonspineposture,calfcircumferenceandperceivedbackpain.Thisresultisveryencouraginggiventhatthesemeasuresshouldbetheoreticallyrelatedtocardiovascularhealthandlowbackpain.Largeepidemiologicalstudieswouldberequiredtoexaminetheimpactontheseaspectsofhealthatthepopulationlevel.

References

1.EklundU,Steene-JohannessenJ,BrownWJetal.Doesphysicalactivityattenuate,oreveneliminate,thedetrimentalassociationofsittingtimewithmortality?Aharmonizedmeta-analysisofdatafrommorethan1millionmenandwomen.TheLancet.2016.EpubJuly28.2.GuptaN,ChristiansenCS,HallmanDM,KorshøjM,CarneiroIG,HoltermannA.Isobjectivelymeasuredsittingtimeassociatedwithlowbackpain?Across-sectionalinvestigationintheNOMADstudy.PLoSOne.2015Mar25;10(3):e0121159.3.DunkNM,CallaghanJP.Gender-baseddifferencesinposturalresponsestoseatedexposures.Clinicalbiomechanics.2005Dec1;20(10):1101-10.4.ChesterMR,RysMJ,KonzSA.Legswelling,comfortandfatiguewhensitting,standing,andsit/standing.InternationalJournalofIndustrialErgonomics.2002May1;29(5):289-96.

Figure2.Averagechangeincalfcircumference(cm)forthirtyparticipantsafterthe2-hourtypingtrialinboththeactivechairandcontrolchairconditions

Figure1.AverageNormalizedLumbarFlexionAngle(%ROM)overthe2-hourtypingtrialforthirtyparticipantsinboththeactivechairandcontrolchairconditions.

77

CareerFirefighters’real-timephysiologicalResponsetofirefightingtasksover6months:Implicationsforinjuryprevention

SaraSayedMSc(candidate)1*,ReganBolduc2,KathrynE.Sinden,RKin,PhD,1

1SchoolofKinesiology,LakeheadUniversityThunderBay,ON,Canada2ThunderBayFireRescue

Introduction

Firefightingisaphysicallydemandingjobthatrequiresfirefighterstoperformworktasksunderextremeconditions.Theseconditionsareoftenphysiologicallytaxing,requiringperformanceofstrenuoustasksinchallengingworkenvironments(1).Studiesoffirefighterphysiologicalresponseareoftenperformedincontrolledenvironmentswhichmaylimitapplicationtopractice(2).Thepurposeofthisstudyistodeterminecareerfirefighters’real-timephysiologicalresponsetotwofirefightingtasksover6-monthswithaviewonfirefighterinjuryprevention.

MethodsContext:ThisisacohortstudyconductedinpartnershipwithThunderBayFireRescueandtheThunderBayProfessionalFirefightersAssociation.Baselinedataiscomplete;6-monthdatawillbecompletedinMay2018.Sample:37careerfirefighters(36=male)wererecruitedfromtheThunderBayFireRescue.DataCollection:Allstudycomponentswereperformedinthefiredepartment’strainingfacilitywhichallowedaccesstofirefightingequipment.Demographicinformation(age,height,weight,yearsofservice)wascollectedpriortotaskperformance.FirefighterswerethenfittedwithaZephyrBioHarnessthatwasusedtocollectphysiologicalmeasuresoverthecourseofthetaskperformance(3).Firefightersdonnedallbunkergearincludingtheself-containedbreathingapparatusandwereaskedtoperformahose-dragtaskwithachargedlineandapatienttransferintoastairchair.Thehosedragtaskbeganwithfirefightersinastandingposition.Wheninstructed,theyretrievedthenozzleofthechargedfirehose(1000kpa),fromthefloorandthendraggedthehose100ft.Thehosewasthendischargedusinga“straightstream”settingforfiveseconds.Thistaskwasperformedtwicebeforeparticipantsperformedthepatienttransfer.Thepatient

transfertaskrequiredapairedlifttotransferaweightedmanikin(68kg)fromthefloorintoastairchair.Theliftwasperformedtwice;onceliftingattheheadofthemanikinandonceliftingatthefeetofthemanikin.DataAnalysis:Thefollowingisanalysisofbaselinedata;thefinalconferencepresentationwillincludeacomparativeanalysisbetweenbaselineand6-monthdata.Descriptiveanalysesofdemographicandphysiologicalmeasureswereexamined;comparativeanalyseswithintask(trial1vs.trial2.forhosedragandpatientlift)andbetweentasks(hosedragandpatientlift)werealsoconducted.Cumulativephysiologicalloadwasdeterminedbycalculatingchangeinphysiologicalmeasuresbetweenbaselineandpost-task(definedascompletionofbothhosedragandpatient-transfer).Physiologicalmeasuresofinterestincluded:heartrate,heartratevariability,breathrateandestimatedcoretemperature.

FindingsOursampleincludedactiveduty,careerfirefighterswhowere39(+/-8)yearsofagewithanaverageBMIof29whichplacestheminthe“overweight”category(4).

Figure1.Firefighterdischarginghoseonstraightstreamsetting.

78

Table1:DemographicInformation

Mean(SD) Min. Max.Age(yrs) 39.8(7.8) 27 58Height(cm) 183.95(8.23) 167.64 198.12Weight(Kg) 99.6(23.7) 78.5 187.96

yearsofservice 11.6(7.2) 3 26Heartratevariability(HRV)significantlydecreasedbetweenbaselineandendoftaskcompletion(t(19)=2.473,p<.05).Heartrate(HR)increasedthrough-outtaskcompletion,(t(19)=-3.347,p=.003)whereasbreathratedecreased,t(19)=2.491,p=.022.Coretemperatureappearedtoremainconstanthowevertherewasasignificantincreasebetweenpatienttransfercomparedtothehosedragtask,t(16)=-5.867,p<.001.Table2:Physiologicalresponsefrominitiationoffirefightingtasks(hosedrag)tocompletion(patienttransfer)andbetweenfirefightingtasks[𝑋(SD)]

(HRV=HeartRateVariability;HR=HeartRate;BR=BreathRate;CT=CoreTemperature)Discussion

InitialresultssuggestincreasedphysiologicalloadduringperformanceofthesetwofirefightingtasksasdemonstratedbyadecreaseinHRVandincreasedinHR.DecreasingHRVsuggestsanincreaseinsympatheticactivityoftheautonomicnervoussystem(ANS)andisoftenobservedwithanincreasedHR,indicativeofphysiologicalorpsychologicalstress(5).TheobserveddecreaseinBRmayberesultofparticipantsemployingtheValsalvamaneuverduringthepatientlift,therebyreducingtheirbreathingrate.Measuresofphysiologicalloadmayelucidatemanifestationoffatigueandfirefighters’abilitytoregulatephysiologicalresponsetovariousstressors(5).Thesepreliminaryfindingssuggestanincreasingphysiologicalloadoverthecourseoftaskperformance.

RelevancetoPractitionersThesestudyfindingsprovideuniqueinsightsintofirefighters’real-timephysiologicalloadduringtwophysicallydemandingfirefightingtasks.Ergonomistswhoaimtopreventinjuryandillnessinhighworkdemandoccupationsmayusethisinformationtotargetstrategiesaimedtoreducephysiologicalload.

References1. MichaelidesMA,ParpaKM,HenryLJ,etal.Assessmentofphysicalfitnessaspectsandtheir

relationshiptofirefighters’jobabilities.JStrengthCondRes.2011;25(4):956–65.2. SmithDL,HallerJM,DolezalBA,etal.Evaluationofawearablephysiologicalstatusmonitorduring

simulatedfirefightingactivities.JOccupEnvironHyg.2014;11(7):427–33.3. NazariG,MacDermidJC,SindenR.Kin.KE,etal.ReliabilityofZephyrBioharnessandFitbitCharge

MeasuresofHeartRateandActivityatRest,DuringtheModifiedCanadianAerobicFitnessTestandRecovery.JStrengthCondResearch.2017.(Epubaheadofprint)

4. WorldHealthOrganization.BodyMassIndex(BMI)Classification[Internet].;[citedDecember2017].Website:http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html

5. KaikkonenP,LindholmH,LusaS.PhysiologicalLoadandPsychologicalStressduringa24-hourWorkShiftamongFinnishFirefighters.JOccupEnvironMed.2017;59(1):41–6.

Baseline End HoseDrag PatientTransferHRV(ms) 78.5(35.8) 57.4(25.1) 80.2(39.3) 55.7(24.1)HR(bpm) 97.4(21.9) 110.8(17.2) 118.1(17.8) 106.6(17.1)BR(bpm) 20.4(6.4) 16.1(4.8) 18.9(5.4) 17.6(4.1)CT(°F) 99.59(0.23) 99.88(0.25) 99.64(0.24) 99.89(0.24)

79

INTERACTIVELECTURE

Flawedsituationalawareness:astealthkillerintheworkplaceRichardGasaway,PhD,EFO,CFO

Thissessionbuildsonthefoundationestablishedduringthekeynoteaddressandoffersattendeesspecificexamplesofhowflawedsituationalawarenesscanimpactsafety.FlawedsituationalawarenessisNEVERtherootcauseofanear-missorcasualty.ItisaSYMPTOM.Thebarriersthatflawsituationalawarenessaretherootcauses.Thisfast-pacedprogramwillintroduceyoutobarriersthatflawawarenessandmayinclude

• Pre-arrivallens• Missionmyopia• Staffingissues• Normalizationofdeviance• Overconfidence• Miscommunications• Peerpressure• Supervisorpressure• Overload• Taskfixation• Tasksaturation• Minddrift

• Cognitivebiases• Thecurseofknowledge• Humanfactors• Technology• Commandlocation• Commandsupport• Fear-drivendecisions• Culture• …andmore

80

PAPERSESSION7:MOBILEEQUIPMENT

Day3–Oct17th

13:15-14:45

PaperSession7MobileEquipment

KevinGillespieForensicErgonomics:Lineofsignandvisibilityassessmentincriticalinjuryandfatality‘struck-by’investigations;acasestudyHeatherKahleEfficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perceptionandsafetyBrandonVanceDocumentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies

AmandeepSinghInvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod

81

ForensicErgonomics:LineofSightandVisibilityAssessmentinCriticalInjuryandFatality‘Struck-by’Investigations;ACaseStudy

KevinGillespie

OntarioMinistryofLabour,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionStruck-byincidentsareoneoftheleadingcausesofcriticalinjuriesandfatalitiesinOntarioworkplaces.ThegoalsofanyMinistryofLabour(MOL)investigationintoaworkplacehealthandsafetyincidentaretopreventareoccurrenceandidentifyanycontraventionsoftheOccupationalHealthandSafetyActandassociatedregulationsthatmayhavecontributedtotheincident.During‘struck-by’investigations,theinvestigationteamtypicallyincludesaMOLergonomisttoconductalineofsightandvisibilityassessmentwhichisusuallykeytoidentifyingtheincident’srootcause.

Thispaperoutlinesthemethodologyandfindingsoftheergonomicsassessmentthatwasperformedaspartofafatalityinvestigation.

DescriptionofIncidentandErgonomistInvestigationAworkerusingatorchtodismantleequipmentinascrapmetalyardwasfatallyinjuredwhenhewasstruckandrunoverbya47tonnecrawler(track)excavator.Theexcavatorwasreversingthroughtheyardwhilepullingacitybususingthehydraulicshearmountedontheexcavator’sboom.Avisibilityandlineofsightassessmentwasconductedaspartoftheinvestigationtoidentifyblindspotsorareaswithanobstructedview,fromtheperspectiveoftheexcavatoroperatorand/orareasvisibleusingmirrors.Physicalandcognitivefactorsaffectingthevisibilityofthefatallyinjuredworkertotheexcavatoroperatorwerealsoinvestigatedincludingthehumaneyevisualfield,resolutionandpositionofthefatallyinjuredworker,contrastbetweentheworker’sclothingandthebackground,objectsizeandmovement,operator’sexpectancyandtaskcomplexity.

ForensicmappingofthescenewasconductedusingaRoboticTotalStation;anelectronic/opticalinstrumentconsistingofanelectronictheodolite(transit)integratedwithanelectronicdistancemeasurement(EDM).UsingthehorizontalandverticalanglesfromtheelectronictheodoliteandtheslopedistancefromtheEDM,precisethree-dimensionalpointcoordinatesinaphysicalenvironmentarerecorded.Thetotalstationwasalsousedtomaptheboundariesoftheareavisibleusingtherightsidemirrorasitwastheonlymeansofvisibilitytowardthevicinityofthefatallyinjuredworker.Therecordeddatawereusedtocreateathree-dimensionaldigitalmodeloftheequipmentanddepicttheareavisibletotheoperatorusingtherightsidemirror(Figure1).

InvestigationFindingsandOutcomesThefieldofviewprovidedbytherightsidemirrorextendedrearwardalongalinetangenttotherightsideoftheexcavator’sbodyandinapieshapetotheright(Figure2).Withtheoperatorlookingatthehydraulicshearandbus,therightsidemirrorwaspositioned70°totheright,attheouteredgeoftheoperator’svisualfield(Figure2)whereobjectsareunlikelytobenoticed,especiallyifnotlarge,highcontrastandmoving(1).Inthiscase,thefatallyinjuredworkerwasstationarywithhisbacktotheexcavatorandhisclothingprovidedlowcontrastwiththesurroundingbackgroundenvironment.Thepositionofthemirroranditsconvexshapealsoresultedinsmallreflectedimagesofobjectsanddistortionwhichaffectsdistanceperception.Furthermore,themirrorswerenotbeingmaintainedinaconditiontomaximizetheireffectiveness,withdustanddirtonthereflectivesurfacereducingthevisibilityinthemirrors.Asaresultofthelowcontrast,smallreflectedimagesizeandlackofmovementofthefatallyinjuredworker,

82

particularlywhilepositionedneartheedgeoftheoperator’svisualfield,itisunlikelythatthefatallyinjuredworkerwouldhavebeendetectedbytheexcavatoroperatorintherightsidemirror(2,3).Furthermore,therightsidemirrorwascompletelyobstructedbytheexcavator’sboomunlesstheoperatorleanedforwardawayfromtheseatbackandturnedhisheadsignificantlytotheright.Itwasdeterminedthattheoperatorwasnotlikelyusingtherightsidemirrorwhilereversingthroughtheyardandtheoperatorwasfocusedonthehydraulicsheartowingthebus.However,evenifhehadbeenusingthemirrors,therewasnovisibilitytobehindtheexcavatorandthereforenoabilityfortheoperatortoseethepathoftravelwhenoperatinginreverse.

Thecomplexityofthetaskofpullingthebusthroughthescrapyardwasincreasedduetotheamountofcongestionwithlargeamountsofscrapmetal,heavyequipmentandvehicles,reducingtheoperator’slikelihoodofnoticingobstructionsorpedestrians(2,3).Thelackofdedicatedpedestrianworkareasintheyardandthelackofdelineationbetweenareaswhereheavyequipmentoperates,deliveryvehiclesaremovingandpedestriantrafficincreasedtheprobabilityofapedestrian/vehicleincident.Despitetheoperatorbeingpreviouslyawareofthefatallyinjuredworker’spresenceandposition,theoperator’sprimaryfocuswasonthebusthatwasbeingpulledthroughtheyardandnotonhispositionorthatofotherworkersintheyard.Theemployerwaschargedwithmultiplecontraventionsincludingfailingtoensurethatbarriers,warningsignsorothersafeguardsfortheprotectionofallworkerswereusedinareaswherevehicletrafficmayendangerthesafetyofworkersaswellasfailingtoensurethatacompetentsignallerwasusedastheoperatordidnothavefullviewofhisintendedpathoftravel.

RelevancetoPractitionersUnderstandingline-of-sightandvisibilityfactorsinvolvedinstruck-byincidentscanassistpractitionerssettingupworkplaces,policiesandtrainingprogramstopreventworkplaceinjuries.AnunderstandingoftheinvestigationprocessforthesetypesofincidentscanalsoassistpractitionersinvestigatingcomplaintsornearmissincidentswheretheMOLisnotinvolved.

References2. KroemerK.H.E.andGrandjeanE.FittingtheTasktotheHuman.5thed.BocaRaton:Taylor

andFrancis;1997.3. OlsonP.L.,DewarR.andFarberE.ForensicAspectsofDriverPerceptionandResponse.3rd

ed.Tucson:Lawyers&JudgesPublishingCompanyInc.;2010.4. SmileyA,editor.HumanFactorsinTrafficSafety.3rded.Tucson:Lawyers&Judges

PublishingCompanyInc.;2016.

Figure1:Digitalmodelofequipment&LOSdepictionFigure2:Lineofsight(LOS)dimensionsandsightlineangle

83

Efficacyofbroadbandalarms:use,perception&safety

HeatherKahle*,JennyColman2,SashaBrown31WorkSafeBC,Richmond,BC,Canada

Introduction

Whenequipmentorvehicles–especiallylargeones-arereversing,peopleandobjectsmaynotbeinthedriver’sviewduetothesizeofthevehicle,theequipmentonboard,orothervehiclesorobjectsinthevicinity.Ratherthanonlyrelyuponthedriver’sview,acousticbackupalarmsareoftenusedtoalertthosenearbyoftheimpendingdangersothattheyknowtogetoutofharm’sway.Despitetheavailabilityanduseofaudiblealarmshowever,accidentsandfatalitiesinvolvingreversingvehiclescontinue.DatafromWorkSafeBC’sdatawarehouseidentified550backoverincidentsfrom2001to2015.Amongtheidentifiedincidents,13workerswerekilledwhentheywerepinned,struckorrolledoverbymobileequipmentorvehiclesthatwerereversing.

Theubiquitousconventionalsingle-frequencytonal(beep…beep…beep),reversingalarmshaveatypicalvolumeof97-112decibels(dB)andasoundthatpropagatesuptothreekilometersfromthedangerzone;needlesslyalertingothers(1).Inenvironmentssuchasbusyconstructionorminingsiteswithvariouspiecesofequipmentandmachineryconstantlyarriving,workingandleavingthesite,manyofwhichalsoemitbeepingandalarmnoises,single-frequencytonalalarmscanbeignored,difficulttolocalize,andmaskedsuchthattheymightnotbeaudibleabovetheothersounds.Recently–thebroadbandalarm(BBA)isgainingpopularityasameanstomitigateriskfromreversingequipment.TheBBAemitsaunique“pssht....pssht..”soundcomprisedofallaudiblefrequenciesfrom400-10,000Hertzbroadcastsimultaneously,ratherthanasinglefrequencylikethatofthetonalalarm.Broadbandalarmshavemanypotentialbenefitssuchasbeingeasiertolocalize,orpinpointwhichvehicleisreversingbutfewstudieshaveinvestigatedworkers’real-worldperceptionstotheBBAthatultimatelyeffectworkersafety.

MethodsAmultidisciplinary,teamfromWorkSafeBCdevelopedasurveytoassessworkers’perceptionsregardingthebroadbandalarm.Theresearchwasconductedasacontrolledexperimentbyexposingrespondentstothesoundfollowedbyasurvey.BuildingontheworkofDr.DeborahWithington(2),theonlinesurveyaskedparticipantsiftheyhadheardthebroadbandalarmbefore.IftheparticipanthadheardtheBBAsoundbefore,theywereaskedtocompletethesurveycomprisedof15questions.Ifrespondentsindicatedtheyhadn’theardthebroadbandalarm,thesurveyjumpedtotheoutropagewhererespondentswerethankedandexitedoutofthesurvey.Itisnotedthatexcludingthosewhohadn’theardthenoisepreviouslylimitedthedepthoffindings,andisalimitationofthecurrentstudy.Questions1-3assessedoverallawarenessoftheBBA,questions4and5probedreactiontoandcomprehensionoftheBBA,question6askedaboutassociationwithareversingvehicle,questions7-9askedaboutinterpretationasawarning,questions10-11askedifnoisesinterferewiththeBBA,questions12-13askedaboutlevelsofannoyanceandquestions14-15queriedtrainingfortheBBA.

Findings

Thetotalnumberofrespondentswhohadheardthebroadbandalarmbeforewas138.Amongthose,63%hearditatwork;30%hearditnearaconstructionsite;22%hearditinaloadingbay.24%ofrespondentsheardthealarmelsewherenotlisted.

84

DiscussionBBAshaveseveralfavourablefeaturesincludingbeingeasiertolocalize,andprojectingamoreuniformsoundfieldbehindthevehicle(therebyprovidingfewermisleadingproximitycues),andtheBBAalarmsignalismorefocussedintheareawhereapersonmaybeatrisk.Also,itislesslikelytobemaskedbyothernoisesonaworksiteandcauseslessnoiseannoyanceforneighboringcommunities.However,astheBBAisrelativelynewtoworksitesinB.C.,hence,focusisneededtoboostunderstandingofthemeaningofthebroadbandsignalanditsinterpretationasbothawarningsignaltomoveoutofharm’swayandasanindicatorofimminentdanger.Theresearchsupportedourhypothesisthatrespondentswillfindthebroadbandalarmeffectiveincapturingattentiontoindicatethelocationofthehazardbuthaslimitedeffectinconsistentlysignallingwhatthehazardisandwhetheritisalifethreateninghazard.

RelevancetoPractitionersApplyingthesefindingswillhelppractitionersdevelopeffectiveeducationprogramsthatbecomepartofanyemployeeorientationand/orsafetydiscussionacrossindustrieswhendeployingnewtechnologysuchastheBBA.

References

1.Vaillancourt,V.,Nelisse,H.,Laroche,C.Giguere,C.,Boutin,J.,andLaferriere,P.(2013).Comparisonofsoundpropagationandperceptionofthreetypesofbackupalarmswithregardstoworkersafety.Noise&Health,15(67),420-436.2.Withington,D.J.(2004).ReversingGoesBroadband.QuarryManagementJournal.May2004.Retrievedfromhttp://www.agg-net.com/files/qmj-corp/Reversing%20goes%20Broadband_0.pdf

Whenaskedwhatdidyouthinkthesoundmeant,24%thoughtitsoundedlikeabirdindistress.Othersthoughtthealarmsoundedlikestrangeducknoiseswhileothersbelievedthesoundmeantsomethingwasbrokenonapieceofequipmentsuchasanairleak.Othersthoughtitmeanttherewasanissuewiththealarm;believingthebeepermightbebroken.Stillseveralothersindicatedthattheyhadnoideawhatthesoundwas.Thereweremultiple,varyingperceptionsastohowthesignalwastaken.72%ofrespondentsperceiveditaswarningsignal;24%didnot.While66%thoughtitmeanttomoveoutofharm’sway,athirddidnot.Overhalfofrespondentsdidn’tfeelitindicatedimminentdanger.

Figure1:Firstreactiontohearingthebroadbandalarm

42

34

21

19

9

16

I looked around

I turned my head

I was confused

I moved out of the way

I felt surprised

Other

%

Figure2:Interpretationasawarning/danger

85

Documentingconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudearoundreversingaidsandvisibilitypolicies

AlyssaBrunton1,2,BrandonVance*1,2,AlisonGodwin1,2

1SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

Introduction

Accidentsandfatalitiesrelatedtoreversingmachinerycontinuetobealargeissueandareverycostlytotheindustrialsector.Evenwiththepoliciesandlegislationeffortsestablishedonworksitesthataimtoreducethenumberofequipment-humaninteractions,theseaccidentsandfatalitiescontinuetooccur.Thiscanbeattributedtothedynamicenvironmentofworksitesand,attimes,confinedspacesinwhichworkersarerequiredtoperformtasks1.Themostcommoncontributingcausestostruck-byaccidentshavebeenfoundtobehumanfactorsinvolvingmisjudgmentofahazardoussituation,aswellaslargeblindspots2.Evenwithcurrentprecautionssuchasspotters,backupalarms,PPEinplace,theseincidencesstillmanagetooccur.Therefore,effortshavebeenmadetoimproveoperator’ssituationalawarenessandlineofsighttoblindareasaroundthemachine.

InOntario,itismandatedthatadumptruckmusthaveanautomaticaudiblealarmthatalertsindividualswhenitthetruckisreversing(s.105)3.Theconstantbeepingisoftenconsideredanuisancenoise;andoperatorsreportedlydisablethesealarms.Infact,in56outof69fatalitiesusingheavymachineryreviewedbyHinzeandTeizer,theback-upalarmsweredisabledornon-functional1.Usingaspotterforreversingmaneuversmayalsohelptoreducepedestrian-equipmentinteractionsbutonestudyfoundthatunqualifiedindividualsoftenattempttoworkasasignallertoaccelerateworksiteoperations4.Theuseofback-upcamerasandotherproximityawarenesstechnology(PAT)hasbeguntocreepontoworksitesbutisnotroutinelyfound.Thegoalofthisworkwastodocumentconstructionworkerknowledgeandattitudetowardsback-uppoliciesandtechnologies.

MethodsAtotalof56participantsfromtheconstructionindustrywererecruitedfromahealthandsafetytrainingfacilitytocompleteasurveyrelatedtovisibilityknowledge.Thesurveytookabout15minutestocompleteandincludedquestionsrelatedtoknowledgeofvisibilitypolicy,ratingsofreversingaidutilityandfrequencyofuse,andratingsofvisibilityaroundcommonpiecesofmachinery.Participantswereaskedtodifferentiatewhethertheywereoperatorsorsomeonewhoworkedaroundthemachinery.Dataweresummatedandpresentedasdescriptivedatabelow.

FindingsParticipantswereaskedtoratethefrequencyofuseforfivetypesofreversingaids:mirrors,cameras,RFIDsystem,spotters,audio.ThepercentofparticipantsreportingusageofeachaidispresentedinTable1.Theratingofeffectivenesswasmeasuredona3pointscalerangingfrom1=noteffectiveto3=veryeffective(Figure1).

Participantsthenprovidedaratingofperceivedvisibilityineightsectorsaroundthemachineandsubsequently,whengivenabirds-eyeviewoftheareaaroundamachine,wereaskedtoindicatewithafreehand‘X’wheretheywouldpositionthemselvesiftheyweretaskedwithbeingaspotterforthatmachineoperatinginreverse.ResultsforthedumptruckarepresentedinFigure2below.

86

Table1:Frequencyofuseforvariousreversingaidsintheconstructionsector.TypeofReversingAid ReportedFrequencyofuse(%respondents)

Neveruse SometimesUse AlwaysUse UnavailableMirror 1.8 7.1 82.1 1.8Camera 21.1 19.3 17.5 29.8Spotter 5.3 31.6 47.4 1.8RFID 29.8 15.8 14.0 21.1Audio 21.1 33.3 26.3 8.8

Discussion

Themostconsistentreversingaidtowhichconstructionworkershaveaccesswasthemirror,withcameraandRFIDsystemswereunavailabletomostworkers.Furthermore,despiteperceptionsintheindustry,nearlyhalf(47.3%)ofallrespondentsreportedusingaspotterforreversingandonly1.8%reportedspottersasbeingunavailable.Thissuggeststhatmandatedlegislationhashadapositiveimpactonthatrole.Theeffectivenessrankingsofthereversingaidsmirroredtheusequestionwithmirrorshavingthehighestutilityrankingofalldevices(88%).TheRFIDsystemsreceivedequalratingsofnoteffectiveorbeingsomewhatorveryeffective.WhenevaluatingthespotterlocationvaluesoverlaidonaNIOSHvisibilitygraph,onecanseethatthemajorityofworkerswouldpositionthemselvesintheleftrearsectortohelpadumptruckperformareversingmaneuver.Aconcerning17%wouldpositionthemselvesintherearsector,whichismostlyacompleteblindspottotheoperator,unlessacamerasystemhasbeeninstalled.

RelevancetoPractitionersDatafromthesurveyscanbeusedtoguidefuturetrainingsessionsrelatedtooperatorvisibilityfromavarietyofmachinery.

References1. HinzeJW,TeizerJ.Visibility-relatedfatalitiesrelatedtoconstructionequipment.SafSci,2011;49(5),

709–718.2. HinzeJ,HuangX,TerryL.TheNatureofStruck-byAccidents.JofConstrEngMan,2005;131(2),262-

268.3. MinistryofLabour(MOL).ConstructionProjectsRegulationO.Reg.213/91.OntarioGazette;

124(22),2081-2139.4. SertyesilisikB,TunstallA,McLouglinJ.AninvestigationofliftingoperationsonUKconstructionsites.

SafSci,2010;48,72-79.5. 5.NIOSH.HighwayWorkZoneSafety.2009.Availablefrom

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/highwayworkzones/bad/imagelookup.html

0

50

100

Mirrors RFID Camera Spotter Audio

NotEffectiveRanking SomewhatorVeryEffectiveRanking

Figure7:Ratingsofeffectivenessforavarietyofreversingaids Figure2:Chosenspotterlocationbehindadumptruck.Grey(blindarea).Yellow(mirrorvisibility)

87

InvestigationofoccupationalridecomfortincultivationoperationbyTaguchi’smethod

AmandeepSingh1*,LakhwinderPalSingh1,SarbjitSingh1,HarwinderSingh2,VarinderSingh3

1Dr.BRAmbedkarNationalInstituteofTechnologyJalandhar,Punjab,India2GuruNanakDevEngineeringCollege,Ludhiana,Punjab,India

3AshokaEngineeringWorks,Patiala,Punjab,India

IntroductionTillage is an essential agricultural activity for preparing soil to develop the ideal optimumconditionsforseedgermination,seedlingestablishmentandgrowthofcrops.Anumberofprimaryand secondary soil tillage operations are required in every agricultural field. Cultivation is asecondarytillageoperationperformedbyatoothedtypecultivatoroftensimilartochiselplows.Itismountedtoatractorbyusingathree-pointhitchanddriventhroughapowertake-off(PTO).Thetractoranditsmountedimplementsgiverisetovibrationduringinteractionswithuneventerrain[1].Vibrationtransmitstothedriverthroughmanysources(e.g.steeringwheel,seat,seatbackrest,tractor platform etc.) that may affect the ride comfort [2]. Moreover, prolonged exposure tovibrationcanincreaseriskof lowbackdisordersamongtractordrivers[3].Thismaybeduehighamplitudes to which a tractor driver is exposed during off-road operations. In current era, thetractorsarebeingequippedwithadvance technology likecabandeffectivesuspensionsystemtoprovide better ride. However, these are very expensive to buy by the farmers of developingcountries like India. Therefore, it is important to provide optimumdriving conditions in existingtractorstoimproveridecomfort.Therefore,thepresentstudyattemptedtoinvestigatetheeffectofthree ride conditions namely, forward speed, pulling force and tilling depth on ride comfort intermsofoverallvibrationtotalvalue(OVTV).

MethodsThestudywascarriedoutinthefieldsituatedatPunjabAgricultureUniversity,Ludhiana,Punjab(India).A50hptractor‘T’of2014modelwasselectedforthestudy.Therideconditionsandtheirlevels include forwardspeed (1.3,1.5,1.7m/s),pulling force (2,4,6kN)and tillingdepth (0.10,0.13,0.16).Thestudyaimedat toobtainoptimumrideconditionstoreducetheoverallvibrationtotal value response. The experimental design is formulated by using Taguchi’s L27 orthogonalarrayinMinitab17.0software.

FindingsThemeanoverall vibration totalvalue in this tillageoperation ranges from0.625 to0.831m/s2.ThecomputedS/Nratiosarefurtherusedtoobtainoptimumlevelsofinputparametersforgettingreducedoverallvibrationtotalvalue.TheresponseforSignaltoNoise(S/N)ratioswithrespecttorankingofeachinputfactorisrepresentedinTable1.

Table1:ResponseTableforSignaltoNoise(S/N)Ratios(Smaller-the-better)Level InputFactors

ForwardSpeed(m/s) PullingForce(kN) TillingDepth(m)1 3.359 2.172 2.4222 2.323 2.608 2.6153 2.002 2.904 2.648

Delta 1.357 0.732 0.226

In Table 1, the delta value was calculated for each ride conditions and it can be observed thatforwardspeedhadmaximumdeltavalue(1.357)followedbypullingforce(0.732)andtillingdepth

88

(0.226). The delta value showed the intensity of effect of respective condition on the outputresponse.Therefore,theforwardspeedhasmaximumcontributioninaffectingtheoverallvibrationtotalvalue.ThetrendofS/NratioswithrespecttoselectedinputfactorsandtheirrespectivelevelsisshowninFigure1.

Figure 8: Main Effects Plot for Signal to Noise (S/N) Ratios

DiscussionThe mean OVTV response increases with increase in forward speed and it get decreases withincreaseinpullingforce.ThisincreaseinOVTVcouldbeduetotheincreaseinvibrationcausedbyacceleratingspeedsonuneventerrains[4].TheOVTVtendstodecreasesuddenlywithincreaseinthe tilling depth from 0.10 to 0.13 m, however this change represents a slight decrease withincrease in tilling depth from 0.13 to 0.16 m. It means that the vibration get absorbed whileincreasing the tillingdepth. Itwasobserved that forward speedandpulling forcehad significanteffectonoverallvibrationtotalvalueat95%significancelevel.

RelevancetoPractitionersRide comfort has become a challenging issue for tractor manufacturing industries to satisfycustomer demand. Information pertaining to ride comfort among drivers could be useful to thetractormanufacturersforsuitableimprovements.

References1. MehtaCR,TiwariPS,VarshneyAC.Ridevibrationsona7·5kWrotarypowertiller.JournalofAgriculturalEngineeringResearch.1997Mar1;66(3):169-76.2. VillageJ,TraskC,ChowY,MorrisonJB,KoehoornM,TeschkeK.Assessingwholebodyvibrationexposureforuseinepidemiologicalstudiesofbackinjuries:measurements,observationsandself-reports.Ergonomics.2012Apr1;55(4):415-24.3. TiemessenIJ,HulshofCT,Frings-DresenMH.Lowbackpainindriversexposedtowholebodyvibration:analysisofadose–responsepattern.Occupationalandenvironmentalmedicine.2008Oct1;65(10):667-75.4. Vrielink,H.H.O.:Exposuretowhole-bodyvibrationandeffectivenessofchairdampinginhigh-poweragriculturaltractorsReport(2012-0601).ErgoLabResearchBV(2009).

89

PAPERSESSION8:STUDENTAWARDFINALISTS–PHDANDPOST-DOCTORAL

FELLOWS

Day3–Oct17th

13:15-14:45

PaperSession8FoundersAwardFinalists:PhDandPost-Doctoral

Fellows

MichalGlinkaChairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstandingKatieGogginsAnatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudedifferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposureColinMcKinnonTheinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks

90

Chairdesignchallengesforaccommodatingposturesbetweentraditionalsittingandstanding

MikeGlinka,KaylaFewster,GrahamMayberry,MamikoNoguchi,JackP.Callaghan

UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionHeight-adjustablesit-standdeskshaveseenwidespreaduseintheworkplace.Thesedevicesallowusers to freely transition from sitting to standingwithminimal disruption towork flow. Thoughstanding is often touted as an active alternative to sitting, a range of health concerns—includinglow back pain (LBP)—remain unresolved in workers who stand for prolonged periods. Thepersistenceofbackpaininbothsittingandstandingmayberelatedtotheeffecteachposturehasonload-bearingstructuresinthelumbarspine.Insitting,thepelvisslopesbackward,introducingaconvex curve that loads the posterior tissues of the lumbar spine and compresses the anteriorportionoftheintervertebraldisc.Standingpresentstheoppositescenario,wherebythepelvistiltsforward more naturally, but the lumbar spine often extends too much, introducing stressconcentrationson theposteriorelementsof thevertebral column(i.e., facet joints). Interestingly,radiographic[1]andmagneticimaging[2,3]studiessuggestthattrunk-thighanglesbetweensitting(90°) and standing (180°) may provide some relief to the lumbar spine and hip joint tissues.Accordingly, chair manufacturers have developed sitting solutions aimed at supporting users inpostures that approach amore open trunk-thigh angle. Thework presented herein consolidatesdata from three studies aimed at understanding the biomechanical response and perception ofeffort and discomfort of individuals when transitioning, while supported by different seatconfigurations, from sitting up toward standing. The goal was to highlight chair and posturalconstraintsthatmayaffectuserperceptionsofcomfortandphysicaldemandsinopentrunk-thighpostures,withaneyetowardinformingusersit-standworkstationguidelines.

MethodsThe first study involved24participants (mean age= 25.0 ± 2.2 years) transitioning in 5° trunk-thigh angle increments from conventional sitting (hips and knees at 90°) to standing (hips andkneesat180°).Participantsweresupportedateach incrementbya flat, rigidsurfaceunder theirbuttocks and thighs. The second study involved 16 participants (mean age = 25.0 ± 2.2 years)performingasimilartransitiontostudy1,butonlyuptoa135°trunk-thighangleandthistimeinacontouredprototypechairwithahigherfrictionfabricontheseatpanandalumbarsupportpad.Inthefirsttwostudies,participantsperformedsimulatedofficeworkfor1minuteateachtrunk-thighincrementwhilebiomechanicaldatawerecollected.Thethirdstudyinvolved24participants(meanage=25.0±2.2years)simulatingdifferentworkingpostures(e.g.,forwardleaningversusreclined)in threedifferentofficechairswithvaryingbackrestheights.Meanvalueswerecomputed for thefollowingmeasures:foot-floorsupportforces(studies1,2),lumbarspineandpelvisangles(studies1,2,3), chair interface pressures (study 2), and muscle activities of the leg extensors (study1),lumbar extensors (studies 1,3), and neck flexors (study 3). Subjective ratings of perceived effortand discomfort associatedwith the different chair products in each posturewere also assessed.Finally, a trade-off indexwas calculated,which incorporatednormalized values of required foot-floor force (i.e., representing physiologic cost) and the resulting lumbar spine posture (i.e., thepotentialbenefitforpayingthatcost).Relevantmeasureswerecomparedacrosstrunk-thighangles(studies 1,2), backrest heights (study 3) and between support types (study 2,3) using a mixed-modelANOVAwithα=0.05.

FindingsAschairheightincreasedtofacilitatelargertrunk-thighangles(study1),participants’bodyweightshifted fromtheseatpan to the feet. Inorder tokeep thebuttocks fromsliding forwardat these

91

intermediatepostures,kneeextensoractivity increased(up to12%ofmaximum),whichallowedthe feet to apply the required stabilizing force at the floor.Thisphysiologic cost of increased legmuscleactivitywasreducedinstudy2withacontouredseatpan(p<0.001),butthiscameattheexpense of greater pressure under the thighs at more open trunk-thigh angles (p= 0.001). Thetrade-off index encapsulates this competing dynamic, indicating that while the prototype chairgenerally involved a more favourable trade-off of leg muscular demand versus lumbar spineposture(p=0.012),raisingthechairtoinducemoreopentrunk-thighanglesdidnotreducelumbarspine flexion enough to offset the required increase in foot-floor force (Fig. 1A). Individuals’subjectiveresponsesmirroredthesefindings,withgreaterlevelsofperceivedphysicaldemandanddiscomfortatincreasingchairheights(Fig.1B).

Figure9:(A)Trade-offindexcomparedbetweentheflatandprototypechair,and(B)subjectivediscomfortandphysicaldemand responses for theprototype chair. Lower trade-off scores representmore favourablescenarios,wherethelumbarspineisfurtherawayfrommaximumflexion,andfoot-floorforcesarelower.

DiscussionChairs that accommodate intermediate sit-stand desk heights introduce important tradeoffsbetweenphysiologicdemandsandpotentialposturalbenefits.Severalbiomechanicalmeasures inthecurrentwork(e.g., thighpressure, foot force,pelvic tilt)startedtodeviate fromsittingvaluesaroundtrunk-thighanglesof115-120°.Thissuggeststhatthereisalimittotheheight—ortrunk-thighangle—atwhichexistingchairproductscancomfortablysupportusers.Practitionersshouldbemindfulof theunintendedconsequences thataccompanythe intendedpostural improvementsassociatedwithmoreopentrunk-thighangles.Adeterminationshouldbemadeastowhetherthemagnitudeof thepostural improvement isworth thephysiologic cost.Withoutadequate supportforthepelvisandthighs,andevendistributionofbodyweightat theseat interface,sustained legmuscle activation requirements and higher pressure on the soft tissues of the thigh can lead tomusclefatigue,bloodflowocclusion,andincreaseddiscomfort—asreportedbyparticipantsinourstudies. As measures indirectly related to these issues (i.e., foot force, pressure) weremodestlyhigherintheintermediateposturesthaninconventionalsitting,perhapstheseposturesshouldbeusedonlyasa short-termalternative tosittingandstanding.Futureproductsmightbenefit fromexploringhowtoreducethecostsobservedinthiswork,forexample,byincorporatinggreaterbacksupportandallowingbackresttilt(whichhasshownminimaleffectonneckandupperbackmuscledemands(study3)).

References1. KeeganJJ.Alterationsofthelumbarcurverelatedtopostureandseating.JBone&JointSurg.1953;35A(3):589-

603.2. HirasawaYetal.PosturalchangesoftheduralsacinthelumbarspineusingMRI.Spine.2007;32(4):E136-E140.3. AlexanderLetal.Theresponseofthenucleustopositions.Spine.2007;32(14):1508-1512.

0102030405060708090100

85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135

Trade-offscore(%

)

HipAngle

FlatPrototype

0.08.1

21.3

Discomfort Physical Demand

0.013.1

28.8

(A) (B)

92

Anatomicallocationsforcapturingmagnitudediffferencesinfoot-transmittedvibrationexposure

KatieA.Goggins1,2*,BruceE.Oddson2,3,W.BrentLievers1,2,TammyR.Eger2,3

1BhartiSchoolofEngineering,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,

Canada3SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

Introduction

Vibrationexposuremayresultinvibration-inducedwhitefeet(VIWFt),aconditionthatissimilartovibration-inducedwhitefinger(1).Oneshortcomingcommontopreviousfoot-transmittedvibration(FTV)studiesisthatmeasurementshavebeenlimitedtoafewanatomicallocationsonthefoot:theheadofthefirstmetatarsal,andthemedialandlateralmalleoli(2,3).BasedontheresultsfromaFTVstudycapturingtransmissibilityat24anatomicallocations,itisunlikelythattheresponseofastructureascomplexasthefootcanbecharacterizedwithtwoorlessanatomicallocations(4,5).Resonanceisusedasanindicationofinjuryasitleadstothemaximumdisplacementbetweenorgansandskeletalstructures,placingstrainonthetissuesinvolvedandincreasinginjuryrisk(6).Astransmissibilitymagnitudeisameasureoftheabilityofthebodytoeitherattenuateoramplifyaninputvibrationsignal,understandinghowtocapturetheregionaldifferencesintransmissibilitymagnitudeofthefeetbyidentifyingwhichanatomicallocationsneedtobemeasuredmayaidinthepreventionofinjury.Thepurposeofthisresearchistodeterminethenumberandlocationsoftheminimumpointsrequiredtocapturethedifferencesinmagnitudeofthetransmissibilityresponseofthefoot.

MethodsTransmissibilitymeasurementsof21participants(15malesand6females),submittedtoaverticalsinesweepfrom10-200Hz,takenat24anatomicallocations,wereanalysed(4).Multiplecorrespondenceanalysis(MCA)(7)wasconductedonthemaximumtransmissibilitymagnitudeinthreestandingpositions(natural,forwardandbackwardlean).Atransmissibilitymagnitudethresholdof2.0wasused,meaningthevibrationinputswereevaluatedbasedonreaching100%amplification.FromtheMCAanalysisresults,anatomicalmeasurementlocationswerethengroupedbasedoncomparableresponse.Recommendedminimummeasurementlocationsweredeterminedbasedontheresponsegroupings,anatomicalproximity,andeaseofmeasurement.

FindingsTheresultsoftheMCAanalysisaresummarizedinFigure1.Inordertocapturethedifferencesintransmissibilitymagnitudeofthebiodynamicresponseofthefoot,whileaccountingforcentreofpressurechanges,measurementsshouldbetakenat:[1]T1P3,[2]anytoelocationexceptT1P3,[3]M1orL1,[4]M2orL2,and[5]M4orL4.MeasurementsatH1,M3andL3shouldbeavoidedastheselocationsaredifficulttocapturewithanaccelerometerorlaserDopplervibrometerduetoskinartifact.

DiscussionItisimperativetounderstandresonance(maximumtransmissibility)inordertopreventinjuryfromvibrationexposure(6).Thisstudyidentifiesfivemeasurementlocationsforcapturingthepatternofmaximumtransmissibilitymagnitudeatathresholdof2.0over21participants.Thisstudysuggeststhatthebiodynamicresponseofthefootcannotbefullycapturedwith2anatomicallocations(2,3),andrequiresadditionalmeasurementsatthemidfootandtoes.Inordertocapturethemostpotentialforinjury,measurementsattheredanatomicallocations(Figure1)hadthemost

93

participantswithtransmissibilitymagnitudesover2.0.SubsequentstudiesofFTVexposureshouldbemindfulofthetransmissibilitymagnitudedifferencesatanatomicallocations.

Figure1:AnatomicalrepresentationoftheclusteredmeasurementlocationsfromtheMCAconductedatatransmissibilitymagnitudethresholdof2.0.

RelevancetoPractitionersWhenmeasuringFTVexposure,thereareregionalanatomicdifferencesinthebiodynamicresponseofthefoot.Thisstudyidentifiedanatomicallocationswiththegreatestpotentialforinjury(red)fromthetransmissibilitymagnituderesponseof21participants.FutureFTVstudiesfocusedoninjurypreventionbasedontransmissibilityamplificationshouldincludemeasurementsatthefivespecifiedanatomiclocations,ataminimum,inordertoensurethattheregionalresponsesofthefootarecharacterized.

References1. ThompsonAMS,HouseR,KrajnakK,EgerT.Vibration-whitefoot:acasereport.OccupationalMedicine.2010;60:572-4.2. GogginsK,GodwinA,LariviereC,EgerT.Studyofthebiodynamicresponseofthefoottovibrationexposure.OccupationalErgonomics.2016;13:53-66.3. KiiskiJ,HeinonenA,JarvinenTL,KannuaP,SievanenH.Transmissionofverticalwholebodyvibrationtothehumanbody.JournalofBoneandMineralResearch.2008;23(8):1318-25.4. GogginsK,TarabiniM,CortiF,LieversWB,EgerT,editors.Resonantfrequencyidentificationatthefootwhenstandinginanaturaluprightpositionduringverticalvibrationexposure.6thInternationalConferenceonWhole-BodyVibrationInjuries;2017;InstituteofOccupationalMedicine,Gothenburg,Sweden:Work&Health.5. GogginsK,TarabiniM,LieversWB,EgerT,editors.Standingcentreofpressurealtersthevibrationtransmissibilityresponseofthefoot.7thAmericanConferenceonHumanVibration;2018;CedarbrookeLodge,Seattle,Washington.6. MansfieldNJ.HumanResponsetoVibration.London:CRCPress;2004.256p.7. LeRouxB,RouanetH.MultipleCorrespondenceAnalysis.JohnFoxS,McMasterUniversity,editor.California,UnitedStates:SAGEPublicationsInc.;2010.115p.

94

Theinfluenceofhandlocationonlumbarspineaxialtwistandflexionposturesduringsimulatedindustrialreachingtasks

ColinD.McKinnon,ClarkR.Dickerson,JackP.Callaghan

UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,ON,Canada

IntroductionCurrent workstation design guidelines include recommendations for forward and lateral reachdistances during occupational tasks based on task frequency and anthropometry. Forward reachguidelines focus on maintaining a neutral shoulder posture since large reaches create largeshoulder loads, causepeople to fatiguemorequickly, and causemore reportingof shoulderpain(1).Forlateralreaches,currentguidelinesareunderdevelopedanddonothavethesameresearch-based foundation. Rather, lateral reach guidelines generally apply forward reach concepts to thelateral reach envelope determined by worker size and arm length. Low back twisting has beenstronglyassociatedwith lowbackpainandinjurydevelopment(2),andtherelationshipbetweenreaching taskhand location and lowback twist is currently unknown.Thepurpose of this studywastoinvestigatelowbacktwistduringsimulatedmanuallabourtasksacrossarangeofforwardandlateralreachdistances,taskheights,andexertiondirections.

MethodsTwenty-four (12 male, 12 female) right-handed participants performed single-handed exertionsagainstaloadcell(MSA-6,AMTI,USA)attachedtotheendofa6-DOFroboticarm(MotomanHP50,Yaskawa,USA).Elevenright-handtargetlocationscorrespondedtoCanadianStandardsAssociationforwardand lateralreachguidelines for frequent(A), infrequent(B)andoccasional(C) tasks(3).

Exertionswere performed at each hand location in allcombinationsofthreedirections(forwardpush,upwardexertion, downward exertion) and two heights(standingacromionandolecranonheights)foratotalof66 1-second isometric exertion trials. Participantthoracopelvic and right upper limb postures wererecordedusing reflectivemarkersonboney landmarksand an optical motion capture system (MX20+, Vicon,USA). Thoracopelvic angles (YZX Euler sequence) andright upper arm angles (YXY Euler sequence) werecalculated using custom-written Matlab software.Thoracopelvic angles were normalized and expressedrelative to a static upright standing trial. Joint angleswere compared using a mixed general linear model(RStudio 1.0.136) with sex (M/F), target location (11levels), height (elbow/shoulder) and direction (up,

down,push)asfactors(α=.05).ATukeyHSDposthoctesttestedlevelswithinsignificantmainandinteractioneffects.

FindingsSignificanttarget-by-direction(p<.003)anddirection-by-height(p<.03)interactionswereobservedfor all three axes of thoracopelvic motion (axial twist, flexion/extension, lateral bend). Thesemotionaxesalso showed target (p<.0003)anddirection (p<.007)maineffects.Posthocanalysesshowedaxialtwistangleincreasedwithmorelateralhandtargets,andthisincreasewasgenerallysimilar - regardless of reach distance (A vs. B vs. C). Thoracopelvic flexion showed the opposite

Figure1:Elevenhandtargetlocationsusedfor manual exertions. Targets correspondto current ergonomics reach guidelines(CSA,2012).

95

response,with less flexionatmore lateraltargetsandmoreflexionwith increasedreachdistance(Figure2).Significant target-by-direction-by-height (p=.01), direction-by-height (p<.0001), target-by-height(p<.0001), and target-by-direction (p<.0001) interactions were observed for glenohumeralelevation angle. Elevation was highest for straight forward targets and decreased laterally.ElevationshowedsimilarlevelswithAandBreachesbutincreasedforCreaches.Planeofelevationshowedseveralsignificant2-factorand3-factorinteractionsincludingdirection-by-height(p=.003)andtarget-by-direction(p<.0001).Planeofelevationtendedtobeclosertoshoulderabductionforlateraltargetsandclosertoshoulderflexionforforwardtargets,asexpected.

DiscussionThese results indicate a trade-off between the twist and flexion motion axes, with opposingposturaldemandsforforwardandlateralreaches.Participantsusedacontralateraltwiststrategyforstraightforwardhandlocations,withanaverage7.3°ofleftwardlumbaraxialtwistacrossthethree reach zones. This twist indicates that participantsmay favour lumbar twist over shoulderflexion,asthiscontralateraltwistwouldreducetheeffectivereachdistanceforthesehandtargets.Themost lateralhandtargetselicitedapproximately15°ofaxialtwist,whichrepresentsbetween36and41%ofmaximumtwistrangeofmotioninanupright,neutralposture(4,5).Elevatedriskoflumbarspineaxialtwistinjuryisestimatedtooccuratapproximately25%oftwistrangeofmotion,or 8.5° (5). Hand target locationsin the current study greater than60° from themidline of the body(A3, B4 and C4) exceeded thisthreshold and may elicit elevatedinjury risk regardless of taskheightorexertiondirection.

Lumbar flexiondemonstrated the oppositeresponse of twist, with a lessflexed, more upright posture atmore lateral hand targets andgreater flexion with increasedreach distance. Flexion angle wassimilar for the frequent (A) and infrequent (B) reach zones and showed greater flexion for theoccasional (C) reach zone. While clear trends were evident across hand target locations andexertiondirections,itshouldbenotedthatlumbarflexionwaslessthan5°acrossallconditions.

RelevancetoPractitionersThoracopelvicaxial twistwascharacterizedacrossa rangeofhand target locationsand indicatesthatfutureergonomicsguidelinesshouldsuggestlimitingdesignofreachingtasksbeyond60°fromthemidlineof theparticipantorworker.Beyondthis threshold, lumbar intervertebral injuryriskmaybeelevated.Itappearsthatwhileshoulderdemandsareappropriateforderivationofforwardreachguidelinesandtaskrecommendations, lumbaraxial twist is theprimaryconcern for lateralreachingtasks,andfutureguidelinesshouldbeadjustedaccordingly.

References

1.DickersonCR,MartinBJ,ChaffinDB.Ergonomics200649(11):1036-1051.2.MarrasWS.Ergonomics200043(7):880-902.3.CanadianStandardsAssociation(CSA).Z1104-12,2012.4.DrakeJDM,CallaghanJP.ClinBiomech200823(5):510-519,2008.5.McKinnonCD,CallaghanJP.TIES(inrevision)TTIE-2017-0054.

Figure2:Thoracopelvicaxialtwistangleandflexionanglebyhandtargetlocation.Positivevaluesshowrightwardtwistandflexion.

96

PAPERSESSION9:GENERALERGONOMICS

Day3–Oct17th

15:15-16:45

PaperSession9GeneralErgonomics

CatherineTraskEgresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffallsMallorieLeducVibrationToolkit:EvaluationofaneducationalinterventionCoreyBouwmeesterTheeffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort

97

Egresstechniqueinagriculturalmachineryandtheriskoffalls

BehzadBashiri1,StephanMilosavljevic2,CatherineTrask*1,21CanadianCentreforHealthandSafetyinAgriculture,CollegeofMedicine,Universityof

Saskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada2SchoolofRehabilitationSciences,UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada

Introduction

FallsfromaheightareanimportantcontributingfactortoinjuryhospitalizationsinCanada.AccordingtotheCanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI)(1),over60%ofallinjuryhospitalizationswereduetofallsfromaheight.InSaskatchewan,fallshavebeenidentifiedastheleadingcauseoffarminjuries(2);dismounting(egressing)fromfarmmachineryisaprimaryformofexposuretofallinghazardwithverytallmodernagriculturalmachinery,requiringtallladdersorstairstogetaccesstothecab.

Egressfrommachineryisacomplexactionthatrequiresprecisecoordinationofthebody(3).AccordingtoFathallah(4)therearetwopossiblescenariosinwhichegressfrommachinerycouldleadtodriverinjuries:1)driversmightjumpoutofavehiclecab,entirelyorpartially(i.e.fromstairorsteps)thatwouldimposeexcessiveforcesonthejoints,especiallyonankles,knees,andthelowerback;and2)theriskofslipandfallrisesimmediatelyafterlandingduetofactorssuchasstepsurfacegripandpresenceofsurfacecontaminants.Inadditiontotheaforementionedfactors,drivers’egresstechniquemayalsobeacontributortoegressinjuries;Ithasbeenobservedthattractoroperatorspreferredtheegressmethodoffacingawayfromthetractorthatmimicsgoingdownthestairs,whereastherecommendedmethodisegressingwhilefacingtowardthecab,likeclimbingdownaladder(5-6).Whilethefacing-awayegressmethodmightbepreferredbecauseoftheresulting“comfortable”(i.e.lessflexed)kneejointangles(5),itismoredifficulttomaintainasecuregriponthehandrailswhenfacingawayfromthetractor(6).Anadditionalfactorthathasnotbeenaddressedintheliterature,isthefootcontactareaonthemachinerysteps;footcontactareacanbesignificantlysmallerwhenfacingawaycomparedtofacingtowardsthecab.Theobjectiveofthisstudyistocomparefacing-invsfacing-awayegressmethodsintermsoflowerbodykinematicsaswellaswhole-bodycontactpointsforbetterunderstandingofegressperformanceinagriculturalvehicles.

MethodsThisstudyusedastaircaseandcabplatformdevelopedtosimulatethestairsofanagriculturaltractorintheErgonomicsLaboratoryattheUniversityofSaskatchewan.Twenty-fourhealthyparticipantswithatleastoneseasonofexperienceoperatingagriculturalmachinerywererecruitedtocompletethetrials.Theparticipantswereassignedtoperformfiveegresstrialswhilefacingawayofthecab(Figure1a),andfivewhilefacingtowardsthecab(Figure1b)inarandomizedorder.RepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasusedtodeterminetheeffectsofegresstechnique(i.e.facing-inorfacing-away)onpoints-of-contact,durationofthree-point-contact,kinematicsoflowerlimb,andplantarpressure.Points-of-contactwasdefinedasthenumberofbodysegmentsthatwereintouchwiththestairwayduringegress.Participants’egressperformancewascapturedusingavideocamerathatwasprocessedpost-trialforcountingcontactpointsandcalculatingthedurationofthree-point-contact.Kinematicsoflowerlimbparameterswerecalculated,includingrangeofmotionandminimumflexionanglesofknees,ankles,andforefeet.AViconmotioncapturesystemwith10cameras(ViconMXsystem,OxfordMetrics,Oxford,UK)wasusedtorecordparticipants’motionduringtrials.Finally,footplantarpressurewasmeasuredusingNovelPedarsensorinsoles(NovelElectronicsInc.,St.Paul,MN,USA).

98

Findings

Preliminaryfindingsindicatethatfacingawayegressmethodresultedinshorterdurationthree-pointcontacts.Inaddition,resultsfromthemotioncapturesystemshowsthatfacingawayofthecabresultedinlessflexionsinlowerlimbjointsduringegress.Finally,themaximumplantarpressureatlandingissignificantlyhigherduringfacingawayegresscomparedtoegressingwhilefacingtowardsthecab.Weanticipatefurtheranalysiswilldemonstrateinmoredetailhowfacingawayofthecabegressmethodwouldexposeoperatorstoriskfactorsforfallsfrommachinery.

References1. CanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI).InjuryHospitalizationsandSocio-

EconomicStatus[Internet].CanadianInstituteforHealthInformation(CIHI);2010[cited2017Jan9].Availablefrom:https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/Injury_aib_vE4CCF_v3_en.pdf

2. HagelL,KoehnckeN,NeudorfJ.FatalfarminjuriesinSaskatchewan.2013;Availablefrom:http://www.cchsa-ccssma.usask.ca/documents/FatalFarmInjuriesSK1990_2013.pdf

3. AitElMenceurMO,PudloP,DécoufourN,BassementM,GilletC,ChateaurouxE,etal.Anexperimentalprotocoltostudythecaringress/egressmovementforelderlyandpathologicalpopulation.In:ProceedingsoftheEuropeanAnnualConferenceonHumanDecisionMakingandManualControl.Valenciennes;2006.

4. FathallahFA.Fallsduringentry/egressfromvehicles.In:HaslamR,StubbsD,editors.UnderstandingandPreventingFalls:AnErgonomicsApproach.CRCPress;2005.p.157–72.

5. KlebanN,MannD,MorrisonJ.TheCanadianSocietyforBioengineeringPositionanalysisoftractoringressandegress.In:CSBE/SCGAB2013AnnualConference.Saskatoon,SK;2013.

6. LeskinenT,SuutarinenJ,VäänänenJ,LehteläJ,HaapalaH,PlakettiP.Apilotstudyonsafetyofmovementpracticesonaccesspathsofmobilemachinery.SafetyScience.2002;40(7):675–87.

Figure1:thestaircaseandcabplatformintheErgonomicsLaboratoryallowsegress(dismount)botha)facingawayandb)facingin.

a b

99

Vibrationtoolkit:developmentandevaluationofanoccupationalhealtheducationinterventionfocusedonvibrationexposureinmining

MallorieLeduc1,2*,TammyEger1,3,RonHouse1,4,5,AlisonGodwin1,3,NancyLightfoot1,2

1CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

2SchoolofRuralandNorthernHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada3SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

4St.Michael’sHospital,UniversityofToronto,Toronto,Ontario,Canada5NorthernOntarioSchoolofMedicine,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada

IntroductionWorkersintheminingindustryaretypicallyexposedtothreetypesofvibrationexposurewhileperformingtheirjobtasks:whole-bodyvibration(WBV),hand-armvibration(HAV),andfoottransmittedvibration(FTV).Occupationalhealthandsafety(OHS)programmingiscriticalininfluencingworkers’knowledge,attitudesand/orbehavioursregardinghazardousworkplaceexposuresandoccupationalinjuriesanddiseases1.FindingscontinuetosupporttheunderstandingthatOHSeducationandtrainingpositivelyimpactstheoverallworkpracticesofworkers2.Despitethepotentialimpactonthehealthoftheworkers,thereiscurrentlyalackofeducationandtrainingresourcematerialavailabletoaddressthehealthandsafetyissuesrelatedtovibrationexposurewithintheminingindustry.Theobjectiveofthisstudyistodesign,implement,andevaluateacomprehensiveoccupationalhealtheducationinterventiontoimproveknowledge,attitudes,and/orbehaviourbeliefsassociatedwithundergroundmining-relatedvibrationexposure.

MethodsAnempiricallybasedandtheoreticallyinformedvibrationeducationintervention,the‘VibrationToolkit’,wasdevelopedandcustomizedforanundergroundminingsettingtoaddresstheidentificationofhazards,healtheffects,andcontrolstrategiesforWBV,HAV,andFTVexposure.TheVibrationToolkitconsistsof:educationsessionsforeachtypeofvibrationexposure,correspondingposters,stickers,hazardidentificationcards,WBVPod,andpersonalprotectiveequipmentsamples.Theimplementationofthe‘VibrationToolkit’interventionwasconductedwithaninternationalminingcompanywithminesitesinNorthernOntariooveraperiodoffivemonths.TheVibrationToolkitwascustomizedfollowingconsultationwiththeparticipatingminingcompany.Allworkersattendingtheminesite’sstartoftheshiftline-upmeetingwereeligibletoparticipate.Pre-interventionsurveyswerecompleted1monthpriortothe3-monthimplementationoftheinterventionandpost-interventionsurveyswerecompleted1monthaftertheendofthelastsession.

Findings142workerstookpartinvariousaspectsoftheVibrationToolkitintervention.Therewere61participantsattheminethatattendedalleducationsessionsandcompletedthepre-interventionandpost-interventionsurveys.Dataanalyseswereperformedforthe61matchedpairs.Thehighestpercentageofparticipants,37.7%(n=23),reportedexposuretoWBV,HAV,andFTVintheircurrentjob(Table1).Statisticallysignificantpositiveimprovementswereobservedforworkers’behaviourbeliefscores,forpre-intervention(M=4.46,SD=5.697)versuspost-interventionscores(M=8.02,SD=6.417),t(60)=4.212,p<0.001.

100

Table1:Self-reportedvibrationexposureincurrentjobVibrationType Frequency(N) Percent

(%)HAVOnly 7 11.5WBVOnly 6 9.8FTVOnly 0 0

HAVandFTV 3 4.9HAVandWBV 13 21.3

HAVandWBVandFTV 23 37.7None 9 14.8Total 61 100.0

Discussion

Anidentifiedgapwasfoundineducationcoursesandmaterialsfocusedoneducatingworkersintheminingindustryaboutvibrationexposureintheirworkplace.TheVibrationToolkitwasdevelopedtofilltheidentifiedgapandprovideeducationresourcesfortheminingindustry.However,acustomizedapproachtoconsidertheorganization,worksite,andequipmentcharacteristicsisneededtoensuresuccess.TheVibrationToolkitresultedinstatisticallysignificantimprovementinbehaviourbeliefsrelatedtovibrationexposure.Understandingworker’sknowledge,attitudesandbehaviourbeliefsregardingvibrationexposureisimportanttoassistwitheducation,prevention,andcontrolstrategiesintheminingindustry.

RelevancetoPractitioners

ContinuedOHSeducationandtrainingfocusedonvibrationexposureshouldcontinuewithintheminingindustryasoneelementofalargeroverallplantopreventtheinjuryandillnessofworkers.ContinuedeffortsfromOHSprofessionals,ergonomistsandengineersneedtoaddressthetechnicalanddesignchangesthatalsohavethepotentialtoreducevibrationexposure.TheVibrationToolkitalsohasthepotentialtoprovidemeaningfulvibrationspecificeducationforothersectorsthatalsoexperiencevibrationexposure:transportation,agriculture,forestry,andconstruction.Eachsectorpresentsuniqueequipmentandoperatingconditionsfortheirrespectiveworkersandasaresult,theVibrationToolkitshouldbetailoredtothetargetpopulationandindustrytoimprovefutureoutcomesoftheintervention.

References5. GoldenharLandSchulteP.Interventionresearchinoccupationalhealthandsafety.JOccup

Med.1994;36(7):763-75.6. RobsonL,StephensonC,SchulteP,AmickB,IrvinE,EggerthD,ChanS,BieleckyA,WangA,

HeidottingT,PetersR,ClarkeJ,CullenK,RotundaC,GrubbP.Asystematicreviewoftheeffectivenessofoccupationalhealthandsafetytraining.ScandJWorkEnvironHealth.2012;38(3):193-208.

Figure10:VibrationToolkitDesign

101

TheEffectofundergroundminingfootwearonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfort

CoreyBouwmeester1,2*,AlisonGodwin1,2,BruceOddson1,2,TammyEger1,2

1SchoolofHumanKinetics,LaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,Ontario,Canada2CentreforResearchinOccupationalSafetyandHealth,LaurentianUniversity,Ontario,Canada

Introduction

Slip,trip,andfall(STF)incidentsaccountedfor15%ofthereportedlost-timeinjury/illnessclaimsintheOntarioMiningsector1.Lowlightconditions,highheatandhumiditylevels,hazardousterrainandenvironment,fatigue,andcumbersomepersonalprotectiveequipment(PPE)havebeenreportedasriskfactorsforSTFinundergroundmines2-4.ControlstrategiestoreduceSTFrisks,formanyofthesefactors,canbedifficulttoimplement;however,improvementstofootwearmaybefeasible.Although,bootscurrentlywornbyundergroundminersareheavy,stiff,anduncomfortablefortheworker5,6,theimpactthesefootweartypeshaveonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandcomfortlevelisunderresearched.Thisstudylookedtodeterminetheimpactthatvariousundergroundminingfootwearhaveonlowerlimbgaitcharacteristicsandperceivedcomfort.

Methods

15participantswereselectedfromconveniencesample.ParticipantswererequiredtohaveMen’s9-12(~Women’s10-14)sizedfeetandfreefromlowerlimbandbackinjuriesinthepast6months.Participantswerehabituatedtoeachofthreeundergroundminingfootwearconditionsbeforecompletingthelaboratorytrials.Afterthehabituationperiodparticipantscompletedacomfortquestionnaireforeachcondition.Thelaboratorytrialsconsistedoffivepassesofthewalkwayforeachrandomizedundergroundfootwearconditioninadditiontoacontrolrunningshoecondition.Thewalkwayconsistedoftwoforceplateshalfwaydownthewalkway,aMicrosoftKinectcamerasystempositionedinfrontoftheparticipant,adigitalvideocamerasystempositionedtotherightoftheparticipant,andtheNotch7motionsensorsystempositionedonthesubject.Theforceplatesmeasuredthelandingandpushoffforces;Kinectsystemmeasuredthegaitphasetimingandwalkingvelocity;videocamerasystemmeasuredthetoeheightclearanceoftheswingleg;andtheNotchsensorsystemmeasuredthehip,knee,andanklejointanglesofboththerightandleftlegs.

Aftercompletionofthefivepassesinafootwearconditiontheparticipantcompletedthecomfortquestionnaireandafterallfourconditionshadbeensuccessfullycompletedtheparticipantcompletedanexitquestionnairetodeterminetheirundergroundminingfootwearpreferenceandtoratethefootwearconditionstooneanother.

Findings/DiscussionStudyresultsandfindingsarestillpending,tobecompletedbyAugust2018.

DataanalysiswilluseRepeatedMeasuresANOVAtodetermineifanysignificantdifferencesarepresentbetweenthethreeundergroundminingfootwearconditions.Comparisonswillbemadebetweenthethreeundergroundminingfootwearconditionstothecontrolconditionasthedeviationfromtheparticipant’snormalgaitinacontrolfootwearisabettermeasureoftheimpactofthefootwearontheparticipantthantheoverallgaitpatternchanges.Thevariablesusedforcomparisonareimpactforce,pushoffforce,walkingangle,hipjointangle,kneejointangle,stepandstridelength,toeheightclearance,andsubjectivecomfortlevels.

102

-300

200

700

1200

VerticalGroundReaction

Force(N)

P7

Control Oliver

Titanium Viking

PreliminarydatacanbeseeninFigure1.Thedatashowsthe‘Viking’condition,andtoalesserdegreethe‘Titaniumcondition’,tocauseincreasesinpeakimpactforceandchangestotheprofileoftheimpact.IncreasesinpeakimpactforceanddeviationsfromnormallandingprofilesmayhaveimplicationsforSTFrisk.Thesechangesarelikelyduetothecumbersomebootdesignandmaterials.Figure1:Verticalgroundreactionforceprofileofrightfootduringgait,takenduringthe3rdgaitcycleofthetrial.Comparisonofallfourfootwearconditions.

RelevancetoPractitioners

SafetyfootwearisdesignedtoprotectworkersfromcrushtypeinjuriestothefootandshankbuttheeffectitcanhaveonmovementandcomfortmaycausedeficitstogaitpatternsandincreasetheriskofSTF,lowerlimbinjuriesandworkerdiscomfort.Theidealfootwearforthejobathandshouldbeamajorconsiderationtoreducetheseriskfactorsforallworkersintheirworkplaces.

References

1. WorkplaceHealthandSafetySnapshotfortheOntarioMiningSectorin2015.WorkplaceSafetyNorth.(2015)

2. CappelliniG,IvanenkoYP,DominiciN,PoppeleRE,LacquanitiF.MotorPatternsDuringWalkingonaSlipperyWalkway.JNeurophysiol.2010Feb1;103(2):746–60.

3. WadeC,GarnerJC,RedfernMS,AndresRO.Walkingonballastimpactsbalance.Ergonomics.2014Jan2;57(1):66–73.

4. LayAN,HassCJ,RichardNicholsT,GregorRJ.Theeffectsofslopedsurfacesonlocomotion:Anelectromyographicanalysis.JBiomech.2007Jan;40(6):1276–85.

5. DobsonJA,Riddiford-HarlandDL,BellAF,SteeleJR.Workbootdesignaffectsthewayworkerswalk:Asystematicreviewoftheliterature.ApplErgon.2017May;61:53–68.

6. DobsonJA,Riddiford-HarlandDL,SteeleJR.Effectsofwearinggumbootsandleatherlace-upbootsonlowerlimbmuscleactivitywhenwalkingonsimulatedundergroundcoalminesurfaces.ApplErgon.2015Jul;49:34–40.

7. Notch:SmartMotionCaptureforMobileDevices,website.(2018).Availablefrom:https://wearnotch.com/#

0

500

1000

VerticalGroundReaction

Force(N)

P2

Control Oliver

Titanium Viking

103

PAPERSESSION10:GENERALERGONOMICS

Day4–Oct18th

10:30-12:00

PaperSession10GeneralErgonomics

PegScherzingerErgonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladdersHeatherKahle‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustryOrnwipaThamsuwanField-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchardsCyrusLeeEvaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones

104

Ergonomicsassessmentmethodsandguidelinesusedintheinvestigationofacriticalinjuryandafatalityduetofallsfromladders

PegScherzinger,

OntarioMinistryofLabour,Sudbury,Ontario,

IntroductionWhenafatalorcriticalinjuryoccursinaworkplace,andaninvestigationisdone,oneofthegoalsistodeterminethecauseoftheincident,inordertohelppreventfuturesimilaroccurrences.InvestigationsarealsodonetodetermineiftherewerecontraventionstotheOccupationalHealthandSafetyActorRegulationsthatcontributedtotheincident.

Thispaperoutlinestwocasestudieswhereergonomicsassessmentmethodsandrelatedguidelineswereusedasresourcestohelpdeterminethecausesoftheincidents,andwhethercontraventionsoccurred.

DescriptionoffallincidentsandmethodsusedCase1:Ayoungworkeronhisfirstdayofworkwastaskedwithcarryingbundlesofshinglesupanextensionladderleanedagainsttheedgeofaroof.Hesupportedasinglebundleonhisshoulderduringeachladderclimb.Hecarriedseveralbundlesupandplacedthemontheroofinfrontoftheladder.Asthisareabecamefilled,hethenleanedsidewaystoaplacethebundlebesidetheothers.Theladderslidsidewaysandhefell,breakinghisfemur.Therewasarequestforanassessmentofthehandlingmethodandwhetheritcontributedtothefall.Abiomechanicalmodelinganalysisprogram(1)wasusedtomodeltheeffectsonaperson’shandlingdemandsandstabilityfora)aloadplacedontheshoulderwhileclimbing,andb)whilereachingtotheside.

Case2:Agrocerystoreworkerwasarranging(flattening)itemsonshelvesinthestoretomakethemeasiertocountduringanupcominginventory.Shewasusingasmallstepladderthatconsistedofonestepandacap(Figure2).Storevideoshowedthattheworker’sfootappearedtoslipfromthecapoftheladderandshefellbackward,sustainingafatalheadinjury.Thestepladderhadthewords“NOSTEP”imprintedonthecap.Therewasaquestionofwhetherthetaskrequiredtheworkertoreachinamannerthatwouldrequirehertostepuphigherthanthefirststepoftheladder.Anthropometricinformation(2),alongwiththeworker’sheightwasusedtoestimateherreachcapacityinbothhorizontalandverticaldirections.Thisinformation,alongwithdimensionsoftheladderandtheshelving,wasusedtomakeadeterminationonthisquestion.

InvestigationFindingsandOutcomesCase1:Areviewofguidelinesregardingroofingworkandladderuse(3,4)indicatedthatcarryingpacksofshinglesupaladderwasnotarecommendedpracticedue,inpart,totheweightsinvolved(~36kg),theinabilitytouse3pointcontactwhileascendingtheladder,andthepossibleavailabilityofmechanicalassistssuchasladderhoistsorboomtrucks.

Theplacementofa36kgloadlocatedovertherightshoulderandupperarmwillshiftaperson’scentreofgravitytotheright,whichisillustratedinthe3DSSPPanalysisshowninFigure1.Thebalancewasclassifiedasunacceptablewhentherightfootisabovetheleftduringtheladderclimb.Thebalancepointmovedconsiderablytotheright,andthestrengthdemandsalsoincreasedintotheunacceptablerangefortheshoulderandleg.

105

Theergonomicsinvestigationreportconcludedthattheshinglesweremovedinamannerthatendangeredtheworker.Theemployerpleadedguiltytoachargeoffailingtoensurethatmaterialsaremovedinamannerthatdoesnotendangeraworker.

Case2:Theworkerwas157.5cminheightwhichplacesherataboutthe25thpercentileintermsofheight.Anthropometricdataforshoulderheightandarmreachindicatedthatinorderfora50thpercentilesizedfemaletoreachthebackpartoftheshelvingfromthefirstrungoftheladder,hershoulderswouldhavetobeatthesameheightastheshelving.However,theuppershelfwas20cmabovethisheight,requiring50thpercentileorsmallerworkerstosteptothetopcapoftheladder.Thecapwasahardsmoothplasticmaterialthatmayhavecontributedtotheslipandfall(Figure2).Theergonomicsinvestigationreportconcludedthattheheightoffirststepwasnotadequatetoallowtheworkertoproperlyaccesstheshelving,whichcouldhavecontributedtotheworkerinthisinstancesteppingtothetop(cap)ofthestepladdertoaccesstheitemsontheshelving.Theemployerpleadguiltytoachargeoffailingtotakethereasonableprecautionofprovidingappropriateequipmentfortheprotectionoftheworkerwhileperformingtheflatteningtask.

RelevancetoPractitionersThisdescriptionofinvestigationscanassistthosewhoinvestigateand/orworktopreventworkplaceinjuriesrelatedtoladderuseasitoutlinesmethodstoidentify:a)causalfactorsinaladderfallincident,and/orb)possiblehazardsrelatedtoladderusetoaidinpreventionoffallincidents.

References8. UniversityofMichigan,3DStaticStrengthPredictionProgram(3DSSPP),Version6.0.5,Ann

Arbour,MI20119. Pheasant,S,andHaslegrave,C.M.,BodySpace:Anthropometry,Ergonomics,andtheDesign

ofWork,3rded.,TaylorandFrancis,NY.200610. InfrastructureHealthandSafetyAssociation,“MusculoskeletalHazardsandControls:Home

Building,SlopedRoofing,Availablefrom:http://www.csao.org/images/pfiles/386_W309.pdf

11. MinistryofLabourGuideline:PortableLadders(Step,Platform,orTrestleLadders),2011,Availablefrom:https://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/hs/pubs/ladder_sliding.php

Figure11:Michigan3DSSPPmodel:ladderclimbcarryingpackofshinglesFigure2:StepLadder:Case2

106

‘Whatgoesright’Usingappreciativeactionresearchtounderstandworkperformanceandpromotesystem-levelresilienceinthesilvicultureindustry

HeatherKahle*,JennyColman,2*,TomBigda-Peyton3,ClarissaSawyer4

1WorkSafeBC,Richmond,BC,Canada2ActionLearningSystemsInc.,Boston,Massachusetts,USA

Introduction

AppreciativeActionResearch(AAR)isaqualitative,participatorymethodologyforunderstandinghowpeopleconductsuccessfulworkwithinthecontextofaspecificenvironment.It’sbasedongatheringnarrativesandobservationsfrommultipleperspectivestoappreciatehowfeaturesofanenvironmentandsystem-levelfactorsinfluencepeoples’performancebothpositivelyandnegatively(1).InthecontextoftheSilvicultureindustry,thequalitativedatawasabletoprovideinsightsintohowplantersatthefrontlinesuccessfullymanageworkplacefactorsandwereabletodosowithoutexperiencinganinjurystate.Ultimately,thegoalofAARresearchisinunderstandingwhat‘goeswell’(successfuloutcomes)sothoseactionscanbelearnedfrom,andreplicatedtoassistandadvanceoccupationalhealthandsafetyinitiatives.Thepurposeofthisresearchwastwo-fold;1)toaddressthehighrateofMusculoskeletalInjuries(MSIs)whichhaspersistedamongsttreeplantersinspiteofeffortstoreducethisrate.Itaccomplishedthisbygatheringinformationaboutsystemicbeliefs,practices,assumptionsandsafetyculturefromtreeplanterswhoplantedahighnumberoftreesandwereinjuryfree.Uniquely,theresearchapproachengagedwiththeplanterswhohadnothadinjuriesbyhearingtheirstoriesandexperiencestodeterminehowtheymanagedthisverycomplexanddemandingworkenvironment.Thisinformationwasthenusedtoassistnewplantersorthosewhohadalreadyexperiencedaninjurytobettercopewiththetree-plantingenvironment.2)Thisresearchalsoaugmentedthehistorical,individual-focusedapproachofmanytraditionalMSIpreventioninitiatives.Itexpandedthefocusfromtheindividualworkertoothersystem-levelfactorssuchas;thepay-structure,industryincentives,theenvironment,thecontextoftheworkaswellastheinfluencesofthesocialnetworkofforemenandsupervisorsandthesafetyculture.Thisprovidedaframeworkforcollaborativeproblemsolvingaroundcomplexandconsistentrisks.

MethodsStep1:CollectingdataThestudyresultedfrominterestbytheWesternSilviculturalContractors’Association(WSCA)intacklingthehistoricallyhighrateofMSIsusingadifferentapproach.TheresearchteamconsistedofacollaborationbetweenWorkSafeBC’shumanfactorgroup,theWSCAandassociatesfromSecondCurveSystems,adivisionofActionLearningSystemsinBoston,Massachusetts. EmployersregisteredwiththeWSCAwerecontactedtorecruitparticipantsforthisproject.Threeindustryrepresentatives,oneseniormanager,threesupervisorsaswellassixplanters,wereinterviewedtogathertheirobservations,stories,experiences,andanecdotes.DatagatheringwasconductedbetweenMay-June,2012usingastory-tellingguideandsemi-structuredinterviews.Theinterviewsqueriedwhattheproblemsoropportunitieswerefromtheirperspective;whattheyhadtriedsofarandwhat‘workedbest’ingivensituations;probingfortimeswhentheirworkwassuccessfulandwhatfactorstheybelievedmadeitpossible.Thisapproachwasselectedinordertodiscoverpossiblecomplex,system-levelworkplacefactorsthatmightbeaffectingmusculoskeletalinjuriesinadditiontosimplytheindividualworker.Forpurposesofplanninganddebriefingaswellasanalysisofthepilotstudydataset,thehumanfactorsteamatWorkSafeBCandSecond-CurveSystems,engagedinmultipleteleconferencecalls.Step2:AnalysisDatafromtheinterviewswastranscribedandanalyzedusingaframeworktoestablishrepeatingemergingthemesorpatterns(2).TheHourglassmodelframeworkwasusedtohelpsummarize,aggregateandexplaindata.Fromtheanalysis,factorsbecametransparent(seeFigure1)showingtheirimportanceandinfluenceonperformanceandMSIrates.Sharedstoriesinferredcluesaboutperformanceandpracticesinthecontextoftheorganization’sstructure.Thefactorswereverifiedincollaborationwiththestudy

107

participantsagainstactualday-to-dayworkandamatrixofmajorthemeswasdeveloped.Theseinsightsandthemes–concerningboththeproblemandthesolution,gaveglimpsesintothesystematicbeliefs,culture,assumptionsandpatternsofpractice.Bylearningandunderstandingtheworkofplantingtreesincomplexandchallengingsettingsfrommultipleperspectives,thismethodologyprovidedabroadinsightintothesystem-levelworkplacefactorsaffectingtheonsetofMSIs.

FindingsFigure1depictsthesystemoffactorsreportedininterviewsthatinfluenceandshapeperformance.Individualstrategiesamongplanters,foremen,crewmanagersandcontractorswereshowntoproduceimprovements.Multipleandvariedorganizational,customer/supplierandcrewmanagementpracticesemergedinsupportofsafeproduction.Projectdataregardingthissuccessfulworkcanbeusedtosupportfutureplanning,goalsandobjectives.Whilestructural

interventionssuchasreturn-to-workprogramscanimprovesafetycultureandperformance,movingfromteachingto‘actionlearning’(usingAAR)canmakesimilarimprovementsaswellasenhancesafetyandindustrysustainability;ratherthanhavingseparatestrategies.Importantly,tacitknowledgeofskillfulplanters,supervisorsandownerscanbesurfaced,usedandre-used.Notably,evenseasonedplanterswerefoundtobenefitfrompeerlearning.TheAARmethodcanbeusedtogatherandspreadlearningsaswellasaccelerateindustryprogressallwhilebolsteringalearningstrategyandenvironmenttopromoteachievinghigherperformancelevelssooner.

DiscussionThisprojectexaminedthesilviculturalsystemofworkusingtheAARapproach;gatheringperspectivesofparticipantsfromdifferentlevelsinthesysteminordertodiscoverandunderstandwhatstrategiesworkedwell(andthosethatdidnot)tobesuccessfulinthedynamicandcomplexenvironmentoftreeplanting.Thisprojectidentifiedkeyfactorsandhowtheyareappliedindifferentsituationsaswellashowplantersactivelyadapt,learnandanticipatehazardsonthejob.Thesestrategiescanbetriedinthefield-buildingonthemasnecessary-toachievesuccess.UsingtheAARapproachisincontrasttothetraditional,prescriptiveapproachthatappliespreventionsolutionsto‘whatgoeswrong’(re:postinjury).Ratherthandefiningdatanarrowly,andpursuinglaggingindicators,thisresearchapproachcollaboratescloselywiththosewhoproducetheworkgivingaccesstoleadingindicators.Overall,thevalueoftheAARisthatpeopleliketotalkaboutwhatgoeswellratherthanwaitingforinjury/incidenttooccur;itwasdiscoveredthatparticipantsenthusiasticallysharedperspectivesoutliningstrategiesthatworkedwellduringday-to-dayactivities.

RelevancetoPractitionersPractitionerswithaninterestinalternativeapproachesforinjurypreventionandmitigatingstubbornriskscanbenefitfromthisappliedresearchapproach.ApplyingtheprinciplesofAARtounderstandhowpositiveworkplacesystemfactorscanbereplicatedandenhancedtoincreasewhatgoesrightonthejobratherthanjustmanagingnegativeoutcomes,canproduceeffective,sustainableresults.

References

1. Schön,DonaldA.(1983).Thereflectivepractitioner:howprofessionalsthinkinaction.NewYork:BasicBooksISBN046506874X.OCLC8709452

2. Miles,M.B.,&Huberman,A.M.(1994).Qualitativedataanalysis2nded.ThousandOaks:SagePublications.

Customer/SupplierPractices:Forester,

Nursery

IndustryPractices

CompanyCulture:SustainabilityorExtraction

Safetymanagementsystem

Crewmanagementpractices

Education(coaching,mentoring,training)

Individualstrategies

Figure1:PerformanceShapingFactors

108

Field-basedelectromyographytoassessshouldermuscleactivityduringrepetitivetasks:anapplicationinappleorchards

OrnwipaThamsuwan1*,KitGalvin2,MariaTchong-French2,MargaretHughes3,Katherine

Gregersen4,PabloPalmandez2,MariaNegrete2,PeterW.Johnson21UniversityofSaskatchewan,Saskatoon,SK,Canada;2UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA,USA;3Intel

Corporation,Hillsboro,OR,USA;4WashingtonStateDepartmentofLaborandIndustries,Olympia,WA,USA

IntroductionSemi-automatedmobileorchardplatformshavebeenimplementedinindustrializedorchardstohelpwiththinning,pruningandharvestingtreefruits.Withthistechnology,workerscanstandonaheight-adjustableplatformwhiletheplatformtransportstheworkersalongtreerows(Figure1).Althoughmobileorchardplatformscouldpreventinjuriesduetoworkersfallingfromladderandmayimproveworkposture,(1)itisunknownwhethertheymayintroducenewergonomicriskfactorsduetostaticrepetitivemovementinaconstrictedspace.Thehighworkrepetitioncouldleadtochronicmuscleinjuries.(2)

Surfaceelectromyography(EMG)isanon-invasivetechniqueforestimatingmuscularload.Itmaynotbesuitableforagriculturaluseduetoenvironmentalissuessuchassweatingresultinginlossofskin-electrodeconnection.EMGsignalqualityneedstobeexaminedtopermitderivingmuscleactivityparameters.

Objectivesofthisstudywere(1.)todevelopmethodstomeasureshoulderEMGinagriculturalsettinganddetecterrorsinEMGsignalsand(2.)toinvestigatedifferencesinshouldermuscleactivitiesofworkersduringharvestingapplesusingamobileorchardplatformcomparedtothetraditionalmethodofusingaladder.

MethodsTwenty-fourfarmworkerswithatleastoneseasonofappleharvestingexperienceparticipatedinthestudy.Eightworkersusedladders(“ladder”group),eightusedasemi-automatedorchardplatform(“platform”group),andtheeightharvestedappleswhilewalking(“ground”group).

Figure1:MobileOrchardPlatform Figure2:EMGDataCollectionSystem Figure3:ReferenceActivityforEMGNormalization

UppertrapeziusEMGwascollectedat1,000Hzusingpre-gelleddisposableelectrodes(BlueSensorN;Ambu;Ballerup,Denmark)connectedtoabattery-powereddatalogger(BiomonitorME6000;MegaElectronicsLtd.;Kuopio,Finland)thattheparticipantsworeontheirlowback(Figure2).Anti-sweatadhesive,whichincludesbenzointincture,wasappliedtosecureskin-electrodeconnection.EMGsignalswerefilteredusinga2nd-orderButterworthdual-pass10-350Hzbandpassfilter.Root-mean-square(RMS)amplitudesofthefilteredsignalswerecalculatedforevery125-millisecondwindow.Foreachsecond,the1stpercentile(PCT)ofRMSsignalsandmedianpowerfrequency(MDF)ofthefilteredsignalswascalculated.Asuddenandprolongedincreaseordecrease

109

inthe1stPCTorMDFovertimewasinspectedandusedtoindicatewhenskin-electrodeconnectionwaslost.

The10thpercentilesofRMSamplitudeswereusedtorepresentthelevelsofstaticmuscleactivities.EMGamplitudeswerenormalizedtothereferencevoluntarycontractions,whichwereperformedasastandardizedreferencestaticactivityofstretchingeacharmforwardandholdingastaticloadof0.91kg(Figure3).Staticmuscleactivitiesduringonlythefirsthourwereusedtocomparethethreeharvestingmethods.DifferencesweretestedusingANOVAwithharvestingmethodandbodysideasmaineffects,participantsasarandomeffect,andatypeIerrorof0.05.

Findings

SystematicshiftsinMDFand/orthe1stPCToftheEMGindicatedthetimewhenelectrodescameoffparticipants’skin(Figure4).Datainthree“ladder”participantsandone“ground”participantcouldnotbeusedduetothelossofEMG-skinconnectionbeforetheendofthefirstworkhour.Withtheremainingdata,staticmuscleactivitieswerenotsignificantlydifferentacrossharvestingmethodsorsideofbody(Figure5).

Figure4(left):Medianpowerfrequencyand1stpercentileRMSamplitudeofEMGinworkday.

Figure5(below):Staticmuscleactivities,10thpercentileofEMGamplitude,normalizedtoreferencevoluntaryactivity;DM=dominantbodyside,ND=non-dominantbodyside.

Discussion

Thisstudycharacterizedmuscleactivityinachallengingenvironment.Anti-sweatskinpreparationhelpedmaintainelectrodeconnections.However,thewaysomeparticipantscarriedaladderontheirshoulderstillcausedelectrodestocomeoffparticipants’skin.TheEMGerrordetectiontechniquedevelopedinthisstudymadethecollecteddatastillusablefor80%oftheparticipants.

Staticmuscleactivityisanindicatoroftherepetitivenatureofappleharvestingtask.Harvestingmethoddidnothaveasignificanteffectonstaticmuscleactivitiesinthisstudy.Thatis,theuseofmobileorchardplatformmaynotintroducetheergonomicriskfactorofstaticrepetitivetasks.

References1. ThamsuwanO,JohnsonPW.Comparingupperarmandbackposturalexposuresbetweenapple

harvestingwithladdersandmobileplatform.In:ProceedingsoftheHumanFactorsandErgonomicsSociety.2015.p.1252–6.

2. Sjøgaard G, Søgaard K. Muscle injury in repetitive motion disorders. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1998;351(JULY):21–31.

110

Evaluationofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplicationsforspectralanalysisbycomparinginternalandexternalmicrophones

CyrusLee,RaishamShahzad,MohammadAbdoli-Ermaki

SchoolofOccupationalandPublicHealth,RyersonUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,Canada

AbstractNoiseisaprevalenthealthhazardaffectingmanyworkersinvariousindustriesaroundtheworld.Themanagementofnoiseispredicatedonaccurateandreliablemeasurementsofnoise,andthereforethequalityandprecisionofequipmentisparamount.Ourinitialstudytestedtheaccuracyandviabilityofsmartphonesoundlevelmeterapplications(apps).TeniOSandAndroidsmartphoneswereusedtoconductnoiselevelmanagementonfiveappsfromeachrespectiveplatform.Fivedifferentsoundsignalswereusedtorepresenttheentirespectrumpresentinanoccupationalenvironment(60,70,80,90dBA)foratotalof1000tests.AcalibratedLarsonDavisLxTsoundlevelmeterwasusedasareference.Thisstudyconcludesthatmostappsarelimitedforuseasscreeningtoolsandcannotbeusedforaccuratedeterminationofnoiselevels.Buildingonthisstudy,investigatorslooktofurtherthisstudybytestingtheaccuracyofexternalandinternalmicrophonesfor1/1octavebandanalysiswhichresemblestheconditionsofworkenvironments.

IntroductionNoiseisaconstantandongoinghealthhazardacrossmanyworkplacesandindustriesworldwide.Theeffectivemanagementofnoise-relatedhealtheffectsispredicatedonaccuratemeasurementsofnoiselevels.Inourinitialstudy,theaccuracyandfeasibilityofsmartphonesoundlevelmeter(SLM)applications(apps)usedformonitoringnoiseinoccupationalandenvironmentalscenariosweretested.TeniOSandAndroidsmartphoneswereusedtoconductnoiselevelmeasurementswithfiveappsoneachrespectiveplatform.Thesewereconsideredarepresentativesampleofthemostpopularsmartphonesatthetimeoftesting.FivedeviceswereiOSandfivewereAndroid.Theinclusioncriteriafortheselectedappsrequiredoctavebandanalysisandtheabilitytosaverecordeddataforsubsequentanalysis.Fivedifferentsoundsignalswereusedtorepresenttheentirespectrumpresentinanoccupationalenvironmentatfourdifferentreferencenoiselevels(60,70,80,and90dBA).Atotalof1000testswerecollected.AcalibratedLarsonDavisLxTsoundlevelmeterwasusedasreference.ResultssuggestthatappsontheiOSplatformhavelessvariationassociatedwithnoiselevelmeasurementsandarethusmorereliableandaccuratethanAndroidapps.However,thisstudyconcludesthatmostappsontheiOSplatformarecurrentlylimitedforuseasscreeningtoolsandcannotbeusedforaccuratedeterminationofnoiselevels.Ourpresentstudyaimstocomparetheaccuracyofexternalandinternalmicrophonesoftheeightdifferentoctavesforanalysisthatresemblesworkplaceconditions.

MethodsTendifferentsmartphoneswerecollectedfromstudentsontheRyersonUniversity

111

(Toronto,Ontario)campus.FiveiOSandfiveAndroidappswiththeabilityofoctavebandanalysisweredownloadedandinstalledonthedevicesfortesting.PriortoeachtestingsessiontheSLMwascalibratedusingaLarsonDavisCAL200calibrator.Thetwoexternalmicrophones(DaytonAudioiMM-6microphoneandMicWi436microphone)werecalibratedusingtheappscalibrationfunctionwithreferencetotheLarsonDavisLxTSLM.Allsmartphonecasesandcoverswereremovedpriortotestingtopreventanypossibleinterferencewithmicrophonesandthemicrophoneswereorientedtowardsthespeaker.Backgroundsoundlevelmeasurementsneverexceeded40dBA.SmartphonesandthereferenceSLMweremountedontripodsataheightof91cmandadistanceof100cmfromthespeaker.AnAppleMacBookPro(containingallsoundfiles)connectedtoaPioneerAVreceiver(ModelVSX-524-K)andfivePolkaudioloudspeakers(fourofwhichwereofmodelRM6751andtheothermodelRM6752)wereusedtogeneratethesignals.Noiselevelwasmanuallycontrolledusingthevolumeknobofthereceiver.Signalsweregeneratedat60,70,80and90dBA.SoundlevelswereconfirmedusingaLarsonDavisLxTSLM(factorycalibratedtwoweekspriortotesting).Threedifferentsoundsignals(sweepingsound,anoffice,andanindustrialworkenvironment)weregeneratedintheexperimentalsetup.Singlemeasurementswererecordedforeachapp,oneachsmartphonemodel,ateachnoiselevelforallthreesoundsignalstotalingonehundredmeasurementsperappandsixhundredmeasurementsintotal.

DiscussionThesoundrangeof60-90dBAwasusedtorepresentthemostlikelyoccupationalnoiseexposurelevelspresentinreallifescenarios.Directionalitywasnottakenintoconsiderationinthisstudy,aspilotstudytestingshowednosignificantdifferenceintheresults.Furthermore,duringthepilotstudyrepeatedmeasurementsweretakenontworandomlychosensmartphones(onefromeachplatform)usingallfiveappsatallfoursoundlevelsandforallfivesoundsignals.Resultsshowednosignificantdifferencebetweenrepeatedmeasurements,thereforeconductingrepeatedmeasurementsoneachdevicewasconsiderednotnecessary.

RelevancetoPractitionersIndustrialgradesoundlevelmetersareexpensiveindustrialtoolsthatrequireacertainlevelofcareandmaintenance.Soundlevelmetersareanintegratetoolintherecognitionandmanagementofnoiserelatedhealtheffects.Inthisstudy,weareaccessingtheviabilityofanalternativeoptiontoindustrialgradesoundlevelmetersintheformofsmartphones.Smartphoneshavebecomeacornerstoneofeverydaylifewiththeirmultifaceteduses;whichmakesthemapotentialalternativethatcanbeaccessibleandeconomicallyfeasible.

112

PAPERSESSION11:ERGONOMICSINHEALTHCARE

Day4–Oct18th

10:30-12:00

PaperSession11ErgonomicsinHealthcare

AmyDoanMedicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorPerceptionsNicholasLaDelfaQuantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresDuringmanualpillcrushingJosieBlakeThefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)RyanSmileyCasestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation

113

Medicaldeviceuserinterfacesandblame:useandusererrorperceptions

AmyDoan,Dr.RatvinderGrewalLaurentianUniversity,Sudbury,ON,Canada

Computer-HumanInteractionLabatLaurentian(CHILL)

IntroductionIntoday’shealthcareenvironments,theriseofthenumberandincreasingsophisticationofmedicaldevicespresentsanincreasedriskofmedicaldeviceerroroccurrence.Widespreadbeliefthattheuseristheprimarycauseofmedicaldeviceerroristhecurrentmindsetforamajorityofindividualsinthehealthcareenvironment(1)(2)(3).Theculturesurroundingtheword‘error’intheseenvironmentsperpetuatesblameanddecreasestheconfidenceandmoraleofthosewhohavecreatedsuchanerror(4).Asaresultofthismindset,theactofretrainingandremindingtheuser“tobemorecareful”inordertoencouragevigilancetopreventfutureeventsandsubsequentlyreducethefrequencyoferrorsrelatedtomedicaldeviceusageistypicallyemployed(4)(5).Thecurrentmindsetsurroundingtheblameoftheuserrelatedtoallmedicaldeviceerrorsneedstoshifttowardsevaluatingthemedicaldevice’sroleincreatingtheseerrors(2)(6).Thismeta-studyaimstoidentifythefrequencyofmedicaldevicerelatederrorsthathavebeenclassifiedasresultingfromanerrororiginationfromtheuseofthedeviceortheuserofthedevice.

MethodsThismeta-studyaimedtoevaluatepertinentliteraturesurroundingtheoutcomesofmedicaldeviceuserinterfaceerrorsandtheirresultingrootcauseclassifications.Articlesselectedforthismeta-studywerenotlimitedtoaspecificpublishingdate.Theselectedarticleswereevaluatedanduncoveredusingthefollowingdatabases:GoogleScholar,CumulativeIndexofNursingandAlliedHealthLiterature(CINHAL)andPubMedusingacombinationofthekeywords:“medicaldevice”,“useerror”,“usererror”,“userinterfaceerror”,“errorclassification”and“blame”.

FindingsThedatabasesearchresultsprovedtoproducelimitedresultsthatpertainedtothisareaofinterest.However,thedatabasesearchyielded7articlesthatwereincludedinthismeta-study.Twoarticlesthatwereexploredcontainedscenariosinwhichelementsofbiasandblameculturemayhaveincorrectlyconcludedthattheuserandnottheuseofthemedicaldevicewasthecauseofanerror(7)(8).Inaddition,articleswereuncoveredwhichexpressedtheneedtoclearlydefineuseandusererrorwithinthehealthcarecontextinordertoproperlyclassifyerroneouseventsinordertopreventtheiroccurrenceandimprovepatientandusersafety(9)(10)(11).Andlastly,twoarticleswereuncoveredthatproposedthaterroneousrootcauseswerebeingincorrectlyclassifiedduetobiasesthatexisttowardsusersofdevicesinhealthcareenvironmentsduetothenatureofblameculture(12)(13).These7articlesmay

114

indicateapotentialeffectthatblamecultureinhealthcareenvironmentshaveoneffectivelyclassifyingmedicaldeviceerrorsappropriately.

DiscussionAneedcurrentlyexiststoproperlyclassifyerroneousmedicaldeviceeventssothatallmembersinthehealthcaresectorcanincreasetheirknowledgeoftheprevalenceofmedicaldeviceuseandusererrorandhowtobestlearnfromtheseerroneousevents.Inaddition,allowingtheincorporationofbiasedassessoropinionsisproblematicconsideringtheheavyblameculturethatexistsinhealthcarewhichoftenallocatestheblameoferrorstowardshumancounterpartsinvolved(13).Inaddition,varyinglevelsofworkexperiencethatanassessorhascaninfluencewhattheyperceivetobetherootcauseofanerroraswellastheseverityandseriousnessofanerror.Throughthiscurrenttechnique,itiseasytounderstandhowasingleerroneouseventinvolvingamedicaldevicecanbeinterpretedandcategorizedintoseveraldifferenttypesoferrorswithdifferentrootcauses.Thiscreatesaproblemwithclassificationconsistency,accuracyandconfusionintheliteratureaswellasinthehealthcareenvironment.

References1. BonneyW.Medicalerrors:Moralandethicalconsiderations.JHospAdm.2013Dec8;3(2):80.2. CouncilNR,EducationDofBandSSand,IntegrationConH-S,CareContheRofHFinHH.TheRoleof

HumanFactorsinHomeHealthCare:WorkshopSummary.NationalAcademiesPress;2010.322p.3. KarshB-T,ScanlonM.WhenIsaDefibrillatorNotaDefibrillator?WhenIt’sLikeaClockRadio….The

ChallengeofUsabilityandPatientSafetyintheRealWorld.AnnEmergMed.2007Oct1;50(4):433–5.4. GroberED,BohnenJMA.Definingmedicalerror.CanJSurg.2005Feb;48(1):39–44.5. JohnsonTR,TangX,GrahamMJ,BrixeyJ,TurleyJP,ZhangJ,etal.AttitudesTowardMedicalDeviceUse

ErrorsandthePreventionofAdverseEvents.JtCommJQualPatientSaf.2007Nov1;33(11):689–94.6. MedicineIof,AmericaConQofHCin.ToErrIsHuman:BuildingaSaferHealthSystem.

NationalAcademiesPress;2000.312p.7. LamsdaleA,ChisholmS,GagnonR,DaviesJ,CairdJ.AUsabilityEvaluationofanInfusionPumpby

NursesUsingaPatientSimulator.ProcHumFactorsErgonSocAnnuMeet.2005Sep1;49(11):1024–8.

8. PotterP,WolfL,BoxermanS,GraysonD,SledgeJ,DunaganC,etal.Understandingthecognitiveworkofnursingintheacutecareenvironment.JNursAdm.2005Aug;35(7–8):327–35.

9. GinsburgLR,ChuangY-T,RichardsonJ,NortonPG,BertaW,NgDTandP.CategorizingErrorsandAdverseEventsforLearning:AProviderPerspective[Internet].HealthcareQuarterly.2009[cited2018Mar12].Availablefrom:http://www.longwoods.com/content/20984/print

10. MattoxE.MedicalDevicesandPatientSafety.CritCareNurse.2012Aug1;32(4):60–8.11. WardJR,ClarksonPJ.Ananalysisofmedicaldevice-relatederrors:prevalenceandpossiblesolutions.J

MedEngTechnol.2004Jan1;28(1):2–21.12. ChippsE,WillsCE,TandaR,PattersonES,ElfrinkV,BrodnikM,etal.RegisteredNurses’Judgmentsof

theClassificationandRiskLevelofPatientCareErrors.JNursCareQual.2011Dec;26(4):302.13. FurnissD,MasciP,CurzonP,MayerA,BlandfordA.Exploringmedicaldevicedesignandusethrough

layersofDistributedCognition:Howaglucometeriscoupledwithitscontext.2015[cited2018Mar12];Availablefrom:http://repositorio.inesctec.pt/handle/123456789/5430

115

Quantifyingupperextremitymuscleexposuresduringmanualpillcrushing

NicholasLaDelfa1*,ArchanaKunasegaram2,RachelWhittaker3,ClarkDickerson31UniversityofOntarioInstituteofTechnology,Oshawa,Ontario,Canada

2UniversityofToronto,Toronto,Ontario,Canada3UniversityofWaterloo,Waterloo,Ontario,Canada

Introduction

Thenursingoccupationsuffersfromahighprevalenceofwork-relatedmusculoskeletaldisorders(1),withinjuriestothelowbackandshoulderrepresentingthemostcommonandseverereported claims (2). Nurses in long-term care homes oftenadministerseveralmedicationsthroughouttheirshift(3).Toaidinconsumption,pillsareoftencrushedintoafinepowderusing a manual device (Figure 1). Despite the forceful andrepetitivemusculareffortanecdotallyreportedbynurseswhoperformthisactivityregularly,thephysicaldemandsgermanetothistaskhaveyettobequantified.Thepurposeofthisstudywastoquantifytheupperextremitymuscleexposureswhileoperating a pill-crushing device in a variety of job-relevantsimulatedexperimentalconditions.

MethodsEighteenhealthyfemaleparticipantswereinstrumentedwithsurfaceelectromyography(EMG)over12musclesofthedominantarm(Figure2).Severalmusclespecificmaximumvoluntarycontractionswereconductedtoelicitmaximumvoluntaryexcitations(MVEs).EMGsignalsweredigitallysampledat1500Hz,de-biased,linearenveloped,andnormalizedtoMVEstorepresentproportionalmuscleactivation(%MVE).Inastandingposture,participantsusedaSilentKnight™devicetocrushpillsin18factorialconditions, defined by: working height (87, 102, or 117 cm), device orientation (parallel orperpendicular to the sagittal plane) and pill quantity (1, 3 or 5 pills). Amplitude probabilitydistributionfunctions(APDFs)wereusedtocomputeconditionstatic(P=0.1),median(P=0.5)andpeak (P=0.9)muscle exposure levels.EMGamplitudes (%MVE)were compared to recommendedmaximum acceptable efforts (%MAE) at the static (2.5%), median (15.3%) and peak (42.5%)exposure levels (4), with a value above 1.0 indicating an exposure ratio above recommendedergonomicslimits.Separate3(height)x3(pill#)x2(orientation)factorialANOVAswereconductedonthestatic,medianandpeakexposureratiosforeachmuscle,butonlystaticdemandsarepresentedhereastheyweremostimplicated.Tukey’sHSDcomparisons(p<0.05)wereusedtoassessfactorleveldifferencesposthoc.FindingsOverallStatic,Median&PeakMuscleExposures:Collapsedacrossallconditions,exposureratioswerehighestatstaticlevelsincomparisontomedianandpeakexposures(Figure2).ThestaticlimitsexceededtheMAEthresholds(1.0exposureratio)inthesupraspinatus(1.30),pectoralismajor(1.07)anduppertrapezius(1.65)muscles.Medianandpeakloadinghadanexposureratiobelow0.63inallmusclesstudiedexpectforthetriceps,whichwastheonlymuscletoexhibititshighestexposureratioforpeakloading(0.66).EffectofHeight,PillNumber&DeviceOrientation:Themostprominentfindingwasaninteractionbetweenworkingheightandpillnumberformiddle(p<0.05,ω2=0.02)andposterior(p<0.05,ω2=0.03)deltoids,uppertrapezius(p<0.04,ω2=0.05)andpectoralismajor(p<0.04,0.03)(Figure3),aswellastricepsandflexorcarpiulnaris(notshown).

116

Middledeltoid,posteriordeltoidanduppertrapeziusactivationsweresignificantlyhigheratthe117cmheightincomparisontothelow87cmheights.Pectoralismajorwastheonlymusclethathadanincreasedexposureratio(1.16)atthe87cmheightincomparisontothe117cm,andthemagnitudeofthisdifferenceincreasedwiththenumberofpillsbeingcrushed(1.25for3pillsand1.35for5pills).Deviceorientationhadamarginaleffectonmuscleactivity.Theparallelorientationresultedinhigher muscle activity for upper trapezius (by 27%) and pectoralis major (by 45%), but theperpendicularorientationresultedinhigheractivityformiddledeltoid(by12%)andFCU(by18%).

DiscussionThisstudydiscoveredhighlevelsofstaticmuscleloadingwhenperformingmanualpillcrushinginavariety of occupationally relevant conditions. Static muscle exposures above 2.5%MVE indicateprolonged, lower levelmuscle loading,andarerisk factors for thedevelopmentofmuscle fatigueover the course of an 8-hourworkday (4,5). Thework surface height and number of pills beingcrushedwereimportantfactorsthatinfluencedthestaticshouldermuscleactivations.Inmostcases,workingatapproximatelya50thpercentilefemale’shipheight(87cm)reducedthelevelofmuscleactivity,oftentimestobelowtheMAElimit,comparedtohigherheights.Aperpendicularlyorienteddevice required substantially lower muscle activity in some shoulder muscles, with marginaldifferencesoccurring inmusclesof theelbowandwrist.Futureresearchshouldevaluatespecificposturalandjointloadingdemandsduringpillcrushingwork,aswellasdifferentdeviceorientations(e.g.45°relativetosagittal), to furtherestablishbestpractices fornurseswhoperformthisworkregularly.

RelevancetoPractitionersThisstudyisoneofthefirsttoprovidequantitativedataonthemuscleloadingexperiencedduringpillcrushing.Givenpopulationdemographics,thistaskwillcontinuetobefrequentlyperformedbylong-termcarenurses.Thesedatacaninformspecificdesignrecommendationstoreducemuscularactivitywhileperformingpillcrushing.Specifically,whenamotorizedpillcrusherisunavailableornotpreferred,manualpillcrushingshouldbeconductedwiththefewestamountofpillspossible,withthedeviceorientedperpendicularlytothesagittalplaneatapproximatelyhipheight(~87cmfora50thpercentilefemale).

References1)Shamian,J.(2003).Int.J.Sociol.Soc.Policy,23(8/9);2)Owen,B.D.,Keene,K.,&Olson,S.(2002).Int.J.Nurs.Stud.,39(3),295–302;3)Reinhard,S.etal.(2006).NursingOutlook,54(2),74-80;4)Potvin,J.R.(2012).Hum.Factors,54(2),175–188;5)Jonsson,B.(1982).J.HumanErgol.11,73-88.

117

Thefundamentalsofergonomicswinagain:adjustingthepatient(work)tothenurse(worker)

JosieBlake1*

1Taylor’dErgonomicsIncorporated,Cambridge,Ontario,Canada

BackgroundAccommodatingworkerswithlimitationscanbeachallenge,especiallywhentheworkisunpredictableorvariable.Nurses,andotherworkersinthehealthcareindustry,aresusceptibletobackinjuriesduetovaryingpatientabilities,staturesandconditions,andtheworkplaceenvironment.Afteraseriousinjury,permanentdamagehasbeendone,andoften,permanentlimitationsareputinplacetofurtherprotecttheworkerfromdoingmoredamage.Theemployermustaccommodatetheselimitations,whilecontinuingtoprovidepatienttreatment.

ProblemThispaperpresentsacasestudyoftwonurseswhohavebackinjuries,withlimitationsasextremeas“nobackbendingatall”,and“noovershoulderwork”.Priortotheassessment,thenurseswerenotperformingallduties,astheyfeltthatsomeofthetasksrequiredsignificantbackbendingandwereoutsideoftheircapabilities.Thetaskof“earsyringing”wasthenurses’mostsignificantconcern.Asaresult,theclinicwasunabletoperformanyearsyringeservices.TheErgonomistwascontactedtoassessthesuitabilityoftheentirejobforthetwonurses,andprovidesolutionstoallowthenursestoreturntofullduties.

ContextThispaperisacasestudythatreviewsaprojectundertakenbyaconsultingergonomist.Thenurses’supervisorandtheclinic’sHRspecialistcontactedtheconsultingErgonomisttoassistwithidentifyingsolutionstoallowthetwoexperiencednurses,workingfulltimeatafamilyhealthclinic,toreturntoperformingallduties,includingearsyringing.ThesupervisorandHRspecialistalsoaskedtheErgonomisttoidentifyanyothertasksthatmaybeoutsideofthenurses’capabilities,andtoprovidesolutionsfortheseconcernsaswell.Thenurseswerepresentthroughouttheentireassessment,andprovidedinputonrecommendations.Theassessmentandreportswerecompletedoveratotalof4days.Afterthereportswerecompleted,thesupervisorandHRspecialistworkedwithouttheconsultingergonomisttosourcetheproductsrecommendedinthereport.

ActionsTheergonomistobserved,measured,andphotographedthejob,completingadetailedphysicalandcognitivedemandsanalysis.Sheinterviewedandobservedthetwonurseswithpermanentmedicallimitations,andalsoclarifiedsomeoftheirlimitationswiththeirtreatinghealthcareproviders.Theergonomistcomparedthephysicaldemandsofeachessentialdutywitheachofthenurses’capabilitiesandlimitations.Ifthedutywasunsuitablefortheemployee,theergonomistworkedwiththenursestoidentifyaccommodationsthatwouldallowthenursestoworkwithintheircapabilities.Theergonomistresearchedappropriateproductsfromlocalvendors,andprovidedspecificdimensionsanddetailsonproductfeaturestoassistthesupervisorandHRspecialistinpurchasingthemostappropriateproducts.

118

OutcomesTheergonomistmetwiththestakeholdersintheprojecttodiscussthefindingsandaccommodationsforbothnurses.Thekeystakeholderswerepleasedwiththeobjectiveassessmentofthesuitabilityofthejobforeachofthenurses,andtheaccommodationsidentifiedbytheErgonomistweredeemedreasonable.Thenursesreturnedtofulltimeduties,aftertherecommendationshadbeenimplemented.Theaccommodationsalsobenefittedothernursesatthefamilyhealthclinic,inparticular,aheight-adjustablechair/bedasallnursesarenowabletoadjustthepatienttoacomfortableheighttoperformalltreatments.

DiscussionSolutionsconsideredthetwonurses’specificlimitations,considerationsfortherestofthenursesandstaffinthehealthteam,patientaccessibility,andcost.Oneofthechallengeswastofindaheight-adjustablechair/bedthatwouldallowsufficientclearanceandaccessibilityinthesmallpatientassessmentroom.Nursesandsupervisorshadtotrialseveralconfigurationsbeforefindinganappropriatelayout.Otherchallengesincludedkeepingallcommonlyuseitemsstoredbelowshoulderheight,sourcingastepstoolwithsufficientheightbutwaslight-weightenoughtobeliftedandcarriedwithinthenurses’capabilities,andlimitinguseofthestepstooltoretrievelesscommonlyuseitems.Afollowupwasscheduledtoensurethatthechangesimplementedmettheintentofthereport.

RelevancetoPractitionersDevelopingrecommendationstoaccommodateinjuredemployeescanbechallenging,butevenmoresowhentheemployees’jobinvolvesworkingwithpatientswhoalsoneedaccommodations.Thiscasestudyisuniqueinthatthesolutionscouldnotinanywayinconvenienceorincreasedemandsforthepatientswhoreceivecare.

119

Casestudy:BCEHSpatienthandlingequipmentimplementation

RyanSmileyPHSA/BCEHS,Vancouver,BC,Canada

Background

In2014WorkSafeBC(WSBC)issuedorderstoProvincialHealthServicesAuthority(PHSA)anditsagency,BritishColumbiaEmergencyHealthServices(BCEHS)toeliminateorminimizeriskofmusculoskeletalinjury(MSI)toparamedics.Asystematicreviewwascompleted,andbeginningin2017,BCEHShasbeentransitioningtopoweredpatienthandlingequipmenttoreduceriskofinjuryassociatedwithpatientliftingtasks.

ProblemParamedicsareknowntoperformregularunsafepatientandequipmenthandlingtasksassociatedwithahighprevalenceofMSI(1).BCEHSstretchershavehistoricallybeenmanuallyoperatedtoraiseandlowertheirheight;andload/unloadinandoutofambulances.Additionally,paramedicsarecommonlyinjuredliftingpatientswithoutliftingequipment.

TheobjectiveofthiscasestudyistohighlightcontrolsimplementedalongwithchallengesthatBCEHShasexperiencedalongthewaywithsuchalargescaleequipmentrollout.

ContextBCEHSisaprovince-wideambulanceservicethatemploysover3,600paramedicsat193stationsusing511groundambulances,4helicoptersand7airplanes.BCEHSparamedicscompletedover900,000responsesin2017,andarethelargestemergencyhealthcareproviderinCanada.

ActionsIn2014,PHSAergonomicscompletedanergonomicsassessmentincludinghistoricalinjuryanalysisanddeterminedthatthetopthreeinjurycausingactivitieswereloadingandunloadingthestretcherintheambulance,liftingandloweringthestretcher/patient,andmanuallyliftingpatients(seeTable1).Recommendationstotheorganizationincludedimplementingpoweredequipmenttomechanizethesetasks.Asthecosttoimplementthisequipmentissignificant,abusinesscasewasdevelopedtodeterminepossiblereductionsininjuryrelatedcosts,showinganexpectedreturnoninvestmentwithin7yearspostimplementation.AsimilaroutcomewasfoundbyArmstrong(2),althoughthispaperwasnotavailableatthetimethebusinesscasewascompleted.AsseveralambulanceservicesinCanadahaveimplementedpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadingsystemsshowinginjuryreductions,justificationwasneededforBCEHStomoveaheadwithpowerloadingsystems.ThefactthatloadingandunloadingthestretcherintheambulancewastheleadingcauseofBCEHSMSIbyalargemargin,asolidfoundationtojustifyimplementationofpowerloadingsystemsexisted.Furthermore,ourowninternaltrialofpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadingsystemsfailedtoshowinjuryreduction.PHSAErgonomicsalsocompletedride-alongsandmeetingswithYork(powerloadequipped)andBrantford(powerstretcherwithnopowerload)ambulanceservicesinOntario.Thisqualitativereviewconfirmedthatpowerloadsystemsaresuperiorinreducingrisktoparamedics.InJuly2016,anorganizationaldecisionwasmadetoprocurethisequipment,resultingintheselectionofStrykerpowerstretchersandloadingsystems,andMangarElkliftingcushions.

120

OutcomesAfter16WSBCinspectionreportsbeginninginDecember2014and15responsesbyBCEHS/PHSA,theMSIreductionorderwasdeemedcompliedinFebruary2018.ThisoccurredafterBCEHSdemonstratedsignificantimplementationprogressandacomprehensiveplanandcommitmenttoimplementpowerstretchersandcushionsinallgroundambulancesbyJuly2018,andpowerloadsystemsinallgroundambulancesbyMarch2020.

AsofMay2018,approximatelyhalfoftheresponsevolumeisusingpowerstretchersandpowerloadsystemswithalargepercentageoftheremainingresponsesbeingcompletedwithpowerstretcherswithoutpowerloadsystems.Itisarguablytooearlytolookatchangesininjuryratesassociatedwiththeseactivitiesasequipmentimplementationbeganinmid-2017,withagradualimplementationtimeline.However,in2017BCEHShasseentimelossincidentincreasesinload/unloadstretcher,significantreductionsinlift/lowerstretcher,andslightreductionsinpatientlifting.BCEHSwillmonitorincidentdatacloselymovingforward.

Table1:2014-17TimeLossIncidentsarelistedbyactivitytype.Powerstretcher,loadingsystemandliftingcushionimplementationstartedinspringof2017,andwillbecompletedprovinciallyin2020.

DiscussionTheimplementationofpoweredstretchersandloadingsystemsareanticipatedtoprofoundlyreduceBCEHSParamedicMSIincidentsandcostsinpartbecausethereisnootherwaytoperformtheseactivitiesthanbyusingpowerwiththepushofabutton.Incontrast,whiletheMangarElkliftingcushionreducesriskofinjurywhenitisused,itstillrequirestheparamedicstobringthispieceofequipmentfromtheambulancetothesceneandmakethedecisiontouseit.WeanticipatesomechallengesaroundtheprovincewithparamedicstakingtimetousetheElk,butbelieveitisacriticaltoolforparamedicstohaveavailable.

Duetofinancialandlogisticalreasons,thepowerstretchersandliftingcushionswereimplementedbeforepowerloadsystemsinmanycases.ThisresultsinParamedicsloadingheavierpowerstretchersmanuallyuntilinstallationofthepowerloadiscomplete.Theincreasedloadsrequiretwoparamedicstomanuallyloadandunloadthestretchers,buttheywerenotdesignedtobeusedthisway.Loading/unloadingisphysicallymoreawkwardanddeterminingwhenthestretcherhasbeenpulledoutoftheambulancefarenoughismoredifficult,increasingriskofthestretcherfallingoutoftheambulance.

References1. RobertsM.H.,SimM.R.,BlackO,SmithP.Occupationalinjuryriskamongambulanceofficers

andparamedicscomparedwithotherhealthcareworkersinVictoria,Australia:analysisofworkers'compensationclaimsfrom2003to2012.Occup.Environ.Med.2015;72:489-95.

2. ArmstrongD,FerronR,TaylorC,McLeodB,FletcherS,MacPheeRetal.Implementingpoweredstretcherandloadsystemswasacosteffectiveinterventiontoreducetheincidenceratesofstretcherrelatedinjuriesinaparamedicservice.AppliedErgonomics.2017;62:34-42.

2014 2015 2016 2017Load/UnloadStretcher 79 95 76 86 Liftingstretcherintoandoutoftheambulance.

LiftPatientwithoutequipment 39 43 55 42 Includesinjuriesoccurringwhenliftingapatienttothestretcherfromthefloor,chair,toilet,orvehicle.

Lift/LowerStretcher 72 55 56 33 Manuallyraisingandloweringthestretcherandincidentswherethestretcherdropsunexpectedly.

TOTALOverexertionIncidents 341 379 372 331 AllBCEHSincidentsrelatedtopatientandequipmenthandlingresultinginMSI.

TOTALBCEHSIncidents 525 555 549 506 AllBCEHSincidents.

Activity NumberofTimelossIncidents ActivityDescription

121

IndexofAuthors

A

AlanCudlip,42AlexieDennie,35AlisonC.McDonald,42AlisonGodwin,62,73AllisonStephens,28,56AlyssaBrunton,85AlyssaSmith,35AmandeepSingh,87AmyDoan,113AndrewHamilton-Wright,37AndrewTao-AnWong,40ArchanaKunasegaram,115

B

BehdinNowrouzi-Kia,35BehzadBashiri,97BrandonVance,62,85BrentLievers,92BruceOddson,92,101

C

CalebLeduc,62CarolineDignard,35CarolynKnight,73CarolynnKallitsis,64CarrieTaylor,58CatherineTrask,16,97CélineLarivière,35SamuelCharbonneau,31ChristinaCort,56ClarissaSawyer,106ClarkR.Dickerson,42,94ClémentBouet,51ColinD.McKinnon,94CoreyBouwmeester,101CourtneyLessel,35CourtneyNickel,73CyrusLee,110

D

DanielViggiani,49DianaDeCarvalho,75

E

EliseHuet,71

EmmaTung,42EricPoon,40EricWill,49ErikaZiraldo,37,71

G

ChantalGauvin,31GiberingMougnol,47GrahamMayberry,53,90GulerArasan,40

H

HannahArthurs,71HarrisonKloke,40HarwinderSingh,87HeatherKahle,83,106

J

JackP.Callaghan,42,49,53,90,94JacquelineToner,69Jean-FrancoisMauger,44JeffM.Barrett,49JennyColman,83,106JessieLeith,71JimR.Potvin,66JoanneHodder,64JoshuaLange,51JosieBlake,117JudyVillage,22

K

KatherineGregersen,108KathrynE.Sinden,77KatieA.Goggins,92KaylaFewster,53,90KevinGillespie,81KitGalvin,108KristinaZucchiatti,58

L

LakhwinderPalSingh,87LisaSchutt,35LucyHart,26

M

MallorieLeduc,62,96,99

122

MamikoNoguchi,90DenisMarchand,31MargaretHughes,108MariaNegrete,108MariaTchong-French,108MariahMartinShein,51MarieLaberge,11MartySmets,60MathieuTremblay,47MatthewBarrett,75MaximeMcGrath,47MichelLarivière,35MicheleOliver,37,71MikeGlinka,90MohammadAbdoli-Eramaki,40,110MonaFrey,75MonikaTiszberger,35

N

NancyL.Black,47NancyLightfoot,99NatalieCarscadden,25NeilMansfield,7NicholasLaDelfa,115NicholasPatrick,60

O

OrnwipaThamsuwan,108

P

PabloPalmandez,108PamelaKengne,47PascalImbeault,44PatrickNeumann,22,23PegScherzinger,104PeterW.Johnson,108

R

RachelWhittaker,115RaishamShahzad,110

RatvinderGrewal,113ReganBolduc,77RichardGasaway,6,15RichardWells,27RonHouse,99RyanGraham,44RyanSmiley,119

S

SandraDorman,62SaraSayed,77SarbjitSingh,87SashaBrown,83StephanMilosavljevic,97StevenFischer,60

T

TammyEger,35,62,92TanyaMorose,24TiannaBeharriel,44TomBigda-Peyton,106TrevorSchell,29LudovicTuduri,31

U

UshaKuruganti,69

V

VanceMcPherson,25VarinderSingh,87

W

WantuirJunior,44WayneAlbert,69

Z

IgorZovile,31