Field Quantification of Physical Exposures of Police Officers in Vehicle Operation

• Autorzy: McKinnon C. D. , Callaghan J. P. , Dickerson C. R.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Mobile police officers perform many of their daily duties in their vehicles. Combined workspace inflexibility and prolonged driving create potential musculoskeletal injury risks. Limited research exists that quantitatively describes postural and load exposures associated with mobile police work. The purpose of this study was to characterize officer activity during a typical workday and identify opportunities for ergonomic intervention. Digital video of traffic officers (N = 10) was used to classify postures according to work activity. Cumulative time in 10 activities was calculated, and a time-history of driver activity documented. Most (55.5 ± 13.4%) time was out of the vehicle, and 22.3 ± 10.5% was spent in single-arm driving. On paper documentation and mobile data terminal use were identified as in-car activities that may benefit from targeted interventions. The primary contribution of this study is characterization of daily mobile police activity and the identification of possible intervention strategies to mitigate physical exposure levels.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

police officers; driving; activity characterization; mobile data terminal

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: Vol. 17, No. 1
• Strony: 61--68
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 24 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

McKinnon C. D.

• Faculty of Applied Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

autor

Callaghan J. P.

• Faculty of Applied Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

autor

Dickerson C. R.

• Faculty of Applied Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

Bibliografia

• 1.Anderson GS, Plecas D, Segger T. Police officer physical ability testing—revalidating a selection criterion. Policing. 2001;24(1):8–31.
• 2.Porter JM, Gyi DE. The prevalence of musculoskeletal troubles among car drivers. Occup Med. 2002;52(1):4–12.
• 3.Brown JJ, Well GA, Trottier AJ, Bonneau J, Ferris B. Back pain in a large Canadian police force. Spine. 2003;23(7):821–7.
• 4.Donnelly CJ, Callaghan JP, Durkin JL. The effect of an active lumbar support system on the seating comfort of officers in police fleet vehicles. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2009;15(3):295–307.
• 5.Magnusson ML, Pope MH, Wilder DG. Areskoug B. Are occupational drivers at an increased risk for developing musculoskeletal disorders? Spine. 1996;21(6):710–7.
• 6.Mirbod SM, Yoshida H, Jamali M, Masamura K, Inaba R, Iwata H. Assessment of hand-arm vibration exposure among traffic police motorcyclists. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1997;70:22–8.
• 7.Gyi DE, Porter JM. Musculoskeletal problems and driving in police officers. Occup Med (Lond). 1998;48:153–60.
• 8.Hampton P, Langham M. A contextual study of police car telematics: the future of in-car information systems. Ergonomics. 2005:48(2):109–18.
• 9.Association of Workersʼ Compensation Boards of Canada. Statistical data (1998–2005). 2007. Retrieved June 30, 2008, from: http://www.awcbc.org/en/statistics.asp.
• 10.United States Department of Labor. Occupational injuries and illnesses—industry data (1998–2005). Retrieved June 30, 2008, from: http://www.bls.gov/iif/.
• 11.Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB). 05 statistical supplement [to the WSIB 2005 annual report]. Toronto, ON, Canada: WSIB; 2005. Retrieved December 9, 2010, from: http://www.wsib.on.ca/wsib/wsibobj.nsf/LookupFiles/DownloadableFile2005StatisticalSupplement/$File/2278A_StatSup.pdf.
• 12.Mergl C, Klendauer M, Mangen C, Bubb H. Predicting long term riding comfort in cars by contact forces between human and seat (Paper No. 2005-01-2690). Warrendale PA, USA: SAE International; 2005.
• 13.Porter JM, Porter CS, Lee VJA. A survey of driver discomfort. In: Lovesey EJ, editor. Contemporary ergonomics. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1992. p. 262–7.
• 14.Beach TM, McDonald KA, Coke SK, Callaghan JP. Gender responses to automobile and office sitting—influence of hip, hamstring, and low-back flexibility on seated postures. Ergonomics Open Journal. 2008;1:1–9.
• 15.Dunk NM, Callaghan JP. Gender-based differences in postural responses to seated exposures. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005;20:1101–10.
• 16.Gyi DE, Porter JM. Interface pressure and the prediction of car seat discomfort. Appl Ergon. 1999;30:99–107.
• 17.Carcone SM, Keir PJ. Effects of backrest design on biomechanics and comfort during seated work, Appl Ergon. 2007;38:755–64.
• 18.Durkin JL, Harvey A, Hughson RL, Callaghan JP. The effects of lumbar massage on muscle fatigue, muscle oxygenation, low back discomfort, and driver performance during prolonged driving. Ergonomics. 2006;49:28–44.
• 19.Reed MP, Manary MA, Flannagan CAC, Schneider LW. Effects of vehicle interior geometry and anthropometric variables on automotive driving posture. Hum Factors. 2000;42(4):541–52.
• 20.Magnusson ML, Pope MH. A review of the biomechanics and epidemiology of working postures. J Sound Vib. 1998;215(4):965–76.
• 21.Nussbaum MA, Clark LL, Lanza MA, Rice KM. Fatigue and endurance limits during intermittent overhead work. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 2001;62:446–56.
• 22.Nussbaum MA. Static and dynamic myoelectric measures of shoulder muscle fatigue. Eur J App Physiol. 2001;85:299–309.
• 23.Milani N. Mobile computing ergonomics, part 2. Police Fleet Manager. 2008;Sept–Oct: 10–13.
• 24.Brewer B. Mobile computing lessons learned. Police Fleet Manager. 2008;Jan–Feb:22–5.