Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2023
Comparison of ACGIH lifting threshold limit values to validated low back disorder lifting assessment methods outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hafez Khaled, Jorgensen Michael J, Amick Ryan Z
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Work-related low back pain (LBP) increases the workforce disability and healthcare costs. This study evaluated the LBD risk level associated with handling the ACGIH TLVs in lifting tasks corresponding to various horizontal and vertical zones.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the low-risk ACGIH TLV to risk outcomes from various validated lifting assessment methods, including the OSU LBD Risk Model, NIOSH Lifting Equation, and LiFFT.
METHODS: Twenty-four subjects were recruited for this study to perform various lifting conditions. The various ergonomic assessment methods were then used to obtain the risk assessment outcomes.
RESULTS: The selected assessment methods showed that the ACGIH-defined TLVs are associated with less than high-risk for LBD for all the assessed tasks. The findings showed a moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.477) among the various assessment methods risk outcomes. The highest correlation (ρ= 0.886) was observed between the NIOSH Lifting Equation and LiFFT methods risk assessment outcomes.
CONCLUSION: The findings showed that ACGIH-defined TLVs possesses less than high-risk for LBD. The outcomes of the selected ergonomic assessment methods moderately agree to each other.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the low-risk ACGIH TLV to risk outcomes from various validated lifting assessment methods, including the OSU LBD Risk Model, NIOSH Lifting Equation, and LiFFT.
METHODS: Twenty-four subjects were recruited for this study to perform various lifting conditions. The various ergonomic assessment methods were then used to obtain the risk assessment outcomes.
RESULTS: The selected assessment methods showed that the ACGIH-defined TLVs are associated with less than high-risk for LBD for all the assessed tasks. The findings showed a moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.477) among the various assessment methods risk outcomes. The highest correlation (ρ= 0.886) was observed between the NIOSH Lifting Equation and LiFFT methods risk assessment outcomes.
CONCLUSION: The findings showed that ACGIH-defined TLVs possesses less than high-risk for LBD. The outcomes of the selected ergonomic assessment methods moderately agree to each other.