PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
Tytuł artykułu

Application of a Screening Method in Assessing Occupational Safety and Health of Computer Workstations

Treść / Zawartość
Identyfikatory
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
Employers and workers need concrete guidance to plan and implement changes in the ergonomics of computer workstations. The Näppärä method is a screening tool for identifying problems requiring further assessment and corrective actions. The aim of this study was to assess the work of occupational safety and health (OSH) government inspectors who used Näppärä as part of their OSH enforcement inspections (430 assessments) related to computer work. The modifications in workstation ergonomics involved mainly adjustments to the screen, mouse, keyboard, forearm supports, and chair. One output of the assessment is an index indicating the percentage of compliance items. This method can be considered as exposure assessment and ergonomics intervention used as a benchmark for the level of ergonomics. Future research can examine whether the effectiveness of participatory ergonomics interventions should be investigated with Nappara.
Rocznik
Strony
167--174
Opis fizyczny
Bibliogr. 28 poz.
Twórcy
autor
  • Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Helsinki, Finland
autor
  • Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland
  • Regional State Administrative Agency for Southern Finland, Helsinki, Finland
Bibliografia
  • 1.Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Valtioneuvoston päätös näyttöpäätetyöstä [Government Decree of VDU (computer) work] (1405/1993). Helsinki, Finland: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health; 1993. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/1993/19931405.
  • 2.Council Directive of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment (90/270/EEC). OJ. 1990;L156:14–8. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1990:156:0014:0018:EN:PDF.
  • 3.Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Act on occupational safety and health enforcement and cooperation on occupational safety and health at workplaces (as amended by Act 701/2006) (44/2006). Helsinki, Finland: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health; 2006. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/2006/en20060044.pdf.
  • 4.Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Occupational health care act (1383/2001). Helsinki, Finland: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health; 2001. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/2001/en20011383.pdf.
  • 5.Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Working with display screen equipment (DSE). London, UK: HSE; 2012. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg36.pdf.
  • 6.Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Computer workstations. Washington, DC, USA: OSHA; 2012. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/computerworkstations/index.html.
  • 7.European Committee for Standardization (CEN). Safety of machinery—ergonomic design principles—part 1: terminology and general principles (Standard No. EN 614-1+A1:2006). Brussels, Belgium: CEN; 2009.
  • 8.Lansikallio R, Rasa PL, Ketola R, Myyri-Partanen K. An assessment method of ergonomics in VDU work in the occupational health and safety supervision. In: Rafnsdottir GL, Gunnarsdottir H, Sveindottir B, editors. Proceedings NES 2003, 35th Annual Conference of the Nordic Ergonomics Society. Reykjavik, Iceland: Svansprent; 2003. p. 252–4.
  • 9.SAS Institute. SAS user’s guide. Version 9. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute; 2005.
  • 10.Lord RG, Diefendorff, JM, Schmidt AM, Hall RJ. Self-regulation at work. Annu Rev Psychol. 2010;61:543–68.
  • 11.Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, Mahood Q. Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon. 2008;39(3):342–58.
  • 12.Theberge N, Neumann WP. Doing “organizational work”: expanding the conception of professional practice in ergonomics. Appl Ergon. 2010;42(1):76–84.
  • 13.Pehkonen I, Takala EP, Ketola R, Viikari-Juntura E, Leino-Arjas P, Hopsu L, et al. Evaluation of a participatory ergonomic intervention process in kitchen work. Appl Ergon. 2008;40(1):115–23.
  • 14.Wilson JR. Fundamentals of ergonomics in theory and practice. Appl Ergon. 2000;31(6):557–67.
  • 15.Bruhn A. The inspector’s dilemma under regulated self-regulation. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2006;4(2):3–23.
  • 16.Bruhn A. Occupational unity or diversity in a changing work context? The case of Swedish labour inspectors. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2009;7(2):31–50.
  • 17.Ketola R, Toivonen R, Häkkänen M, Luukkonen R, Takala EP, Viikari-Juntura E. Effect of ergonomic intervention in work with video display units. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2002;28(1):18–24.
  • 18.Ketola R. Physical workload as a risk factor for symptoms in the neck and upper limbs: exposure assessment and ergonomic intervention. J Sports Sci Med. 2004;3 Suppl 5:1–46. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.jssm.org/suppls/5/Suppl5pdf.pdf.
  • 19.Lindegard A, Karlberg C, Wigaeus-Tornqvist E, Toomingas A, Hagberg M. Concordance between VDU-users’ ratings of comfort and perceived exertion with experts’ observations of workplace layout and working postures. Appl Ergon. 2005;36(3):319–25.
  • 20.Nevala-Puranen N, Pakarinen K, Louhevaara V. Ergonomic intervention on neck, shoulder and arm symptoms of newspaper employees in work with visual display units. Int J Ind Ergon. 2003;31(1):1–10.
  • 21.Robertson M, Amick BC 3rd, DeRango K, Rooney T, Bazzani L, Harrist R, et al. The effects of an office ergonomics training and chair intervention on worker knowledge, behavior and musculoskeletal risk. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(1):124–35.
  • 22.Fountain LJK. Examining RULA’s postural scoring system with selected physiological and psychophysiological measures. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):383–92. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8018.
  • 23.Toomingas A, Nilsson T, Hagberg M, Hagman M, Wigaeus Tornqvist E. Symptoms and clinical findings from the musculoskeletal system among operators at a call centre in Sweden—a 10-month follow-up study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):405–18. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8020.
  • 24.Oehme O, Schmidt L, Luczak H. Comparison between the strain indicator HRV of a head-based virtual retinal display and LC-head mounted displays for augmented reality. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):419–30. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8021.
  • 25.Wolska A. Visual strain and lighting preferences of VDT users under different lighting systems. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):431–40. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8022.
  • 26.Ullman J, Kangas N, Ullman P, Wartenberg F, Ericson M. A new approach to the mouse arm syndrome. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):463–77. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8025.
  • 27.Robertson, MM, O’Neill MJ, Reducing musculoskeletal discomfort: effects of an office ergonomics workplace and training intervention. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):491–502. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8027.
  • 28.Ziefle M. Sitting posture, postural discomfort, and visual performance: a critical view on the interdependence of cognitive and anthropometric factors in the VDU workplace. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2003;9(4):503–14. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/8028.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.baztech-dc4f9b2b-8c5b-4c30-8a68-c8db2271705d
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.