A Study for the Appropriateness of the Different Reference Points in the Analysis of Working Posture

Day Sung Kim; Chol Hong Kim

주제분류

...

저널정보

저자정보

Day Sung Kim (한국산업안전보건공단)
Chol Hong Kim (Institute of Labor Science,Inchoeon)

이용수
내서재: 0

내서재에 추가
되었습니다. 내서재에서
삭제되었습니다.

초록·키워드

오류제보하기

Objective & Background: When applying various evaluation tools that analyze work posture risk through observation, accurate measurement of body flexion angle is very important. Method: This study investigated differences and appropriateness of 5 different existing reference points commonly used in the analysis of the work posture. Twenty five ergonomist and trained professionals were participated in this study. A Same flexion angle was utilized for the evaluation of risk assessment of musculoskeletal disorders using five different reference points to investigate the degree of difference between them. To investigate how different the observers’ preferred flexion angle measuring methods were compared to the ISO 11226 Reference Posture, a virtual body model was constructed using the Poser 6.0 program. Six types of body flexion postures were constructed, and since neck flexion differs according to body angle, five types of neck flexion postures were constructed with the trunk bending 20° forward, making up a total of 30 virtual flexion postures. Results: Results showed that the observers used personally preferred reference points instead of reference points recommend in the evaluation tools. Also the results revealed the their seems to be 6 types of flexion angle for the trunk and 11 types of measurement methods for the neck flexion angle in the form of personally preferred reference points. The results showed that a mean difference of 14°(4~23°) occurred in the trunk, and a mean difference of 20°(-8~51°) occurred in the neck. To increase accuracy when using the 5 evaluation tools in combination, the ISO 11226 standards, observers’ preferred flexion posture standards, and common flexion posture standards of the evaluation tools were compared with the reference points of the 5 evaluation tools. Results showed considerable variance in angle difference for each evaluation tool. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, considering the angle difference between the flexion angle reference points of the evaluation tool and the reference points selected by the observers, it is concluded that instead of personally preferred reference points, the standardized reference points to enhance the accuracy and the objectivity. Application: The result of this study can be used as reference guide to develop the standardized reference point in the future.

#Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders #Analysis of Working posture #Standardized reference points