The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work

På svenska

Author

  • Esa-Pekka Takala
  • Irmeli Pehkonen
  • Mikael Forsman
  • Gert-Åke Hansson
  • Svend Erik Mathiassen
  • W. Patrick Neumann
  • Gisela Sjogaard
  • Kaj Bo Veiersted
  • Rolf H. Westgaard
  • Jorgen Winkel

Summary, in English

Objectives This systematic review aimed to identify published observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures in occupational settings and evaluate them with reference to the needs of different users. Methods We searched scientific databases and the internet for material from 1965 to September 2008. Methods were included if they were primarily based on the systematic observation of work, the observation target was the human body, and the method was clearly described in the literature. A systematic evaluation procedure was developed to assess concurrent and predictive validity, repeatability, and aspects related to utility. At least two evaluators independently carried out this evaluation. Results We identified 30 eligible observational methods. Of these, 19 had been compared with some other method(s), varying from expert evaluation to data obtained from video recordings or through the use of technical instruments. Generally, the observations showed moderate-to-good agreement with the corresponding assessments made from video recordings; agreement was the best for large-scale body postures and work actions. Postures of wrist and hand as well as trunk rotation seemed to be more difficult to observe correctly. Intra- and inter-observer repeatability were reported for 7 and 17 methods, respectively, and were judged mostly to be moderate or good. Conclusions With training, observers can reach consistent results on clearly visible body postures and work activities. Many observational tools exist, but none evaluated in this study appeared to be generally superior. When selecting a method, users should define their needs and assess how results will influence decision-making.

Publishing year

2010

Language

English

Pages

3-24

Publication/Series

Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health

Volume

36

Issue

1

Document type

Journal article review

Publisher

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health

Topic

  • Environmental Health and Occupational Health

Keywords

  • workload
  • risk assessment
  • posture
  • review

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 0355-3140