An evaluation of methods assessing the physical demands of manual lifting in scaffolding
Applied Ergonomics: human factors in technology and society , Volume 36 - Issue 2 p. 213- 222
Four methods assessing the physical demands of manual lifting were compared. The scaffolding job was evaluated and three distinct scaffolding tasks were ranked using: (1) the revised NIOSH lifting equation (NIOSH method), (2) lifting guidelines for the Dutch construction industry (Arbouw method), (3) rapid appraisal of the NIOSH lifting equation (practitioners' method), and (4) systematic observations. For the three first-mentioned methods the same dataset was used; observation took place in a different setting in the same company. At job level, all methods indicated that ergonomic interventions are required to protect scaffolders from an increased risk for low back pain. The NIOSH, Arbouw and practitioners' method resulted in a similar ranking order of tasks (transport>construction>dismantlement). In contrast, the observational method gave transport the lowest ranking. The underlying cause was probably that the observational method is more sensitive to durations of tasks and lifting within tasks than the three other methods.
|Applied Ergonomics: human factors in technology and society|
|Organisation||Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam|
van der Beek, A.J, Mathiassen, S.E, Windhorst, J, & Burdorf, A. (2005). An evaluation of methods assessing the physical demands of manual lifting in scaffolding. In Applied Ergonomics: human factors in technology and society (Vol. 36, pp. 213–222). doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.012