지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2024.2
- 수록면
- 61 - 73 (13page)
- DOI
- 10.5143/JESK.2024.43.1.61
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Objective: We assessed the evaluation reliability of the most commonly used metrics in domestic musculoskeletal assessments, namely OWAS, RULA, and REBA. Our focus was on their ability to accurately measure localized task loads. Moreover, we aimed to investigate the suitability of the metric developed by the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service in 2014 for identifying risk factors in upcoming investigations into musculoskeletal disorders.
Background: Many previous studies had indicated low correlation coefficients (＜0.5) among these metrics, suggesting varying evaluation outcomes. These studies made it difficult to draw a comprehensive decision on which method was better or more suitable for a situation.
Method: We conducted observational research at an air filter manufacturing factory, focusing on 32 specific unit tasks with high workloads. The evaluations of the metrics were conducted by three ergonomics experts with over 5 years of experience in risk factor investigations of MSDs and consulting. In this paper, assessments using OWAS, RULA, and REBA were performed for the 32 tasks. Additionally, according to the KLWC (Korea Local Workload Checklist) metric, workload scores for six body parts (neck, shoulder/upper arm, elbow/forearm, hand/wrist, waist/hip, knee/ankle) were recorded. Through this process, we conducted a comparative analysis of the correlation and reliability among each evaluation metric.
Results: Inter-rater reliability (Cohen’s kappa value) among OWAS, RULA, and REBA metrics for the 32 unit tasks was not high. This underscores the critical role of technique selection in identifying musculoskeletal disorders. An analysis of diagnostic ability for localized loads, based on 192 measurements from the 6 body part KLWC scores, revealed that all three metrics were insufficient in detecting cases with localized loads. Finally, the 2014 KLWC metric demonstrated significant potential for application in risk factor investigations related to musculoskeletal burden tasks.
Conclusion: It was identified that a more accurate and effective investigation should be conducted using the KLWC metric in the investigation of risk factors for the musculoskeletal disorders in Korea.
Application: The results of this paper can be utilized in decision-making for the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service and for improving work environments. They can also provide assistance in the selection and enhancement of evaluation metrics.
Background: Many previous studies had indicated low correlation coefficients (＜0.5) among these metrics, suggesting varying evaluation outcomes. These studies made it difficult to draw a comprehensive decision on which method was better or more suitable for a situation.
Method: We conducted observational research at an air filter manufacturing factory, focusing on 32 specific unit tasks with high workloads. The evaluations of the metrics were conducted by three ergonomics experts with over 5 years of experience in risk factor investigations of MSDs and consulting. In this paper, assessments using OWAS, RULA, and REBA were performed for the 32 tasks. Additionally, according to the KLWC (Korea Local Workload Checklist) metric, workload scores for six body parts (neck, shoulder/upper arm, elbow/forearm, hand/wrist, waist/hip, knee/ankle) were recorded. Through this process, we conducted a comparative analysis of the correlation and reliability among each evaluation metric.
Results: Inter-rater reliability (Cohen’s kappa value) among OWAS, RULA, and REBA metrics for the 32 unit tasks was not high. This underscores the critical role of technique selection in identifying musculoskeletal disorders. An analysis of diagnostic ability for localized loads, based on 192 measurements from the 6 body part KLWC scores, revealed that all three metrics were insufficient in detecting cases with localized loads. Finally, the 2014 KLWC metric demonstrated significant potential for application in risk factor investigations related to musculoskeletal burden tasks.
Conclusion: It was identified that a more accurate and effective investigation should be conducted using the KLWC metric in the investigation of risk factors for the musculoskeletal disorders in Korea.
Application: The results of this paper can be utilized in decision-making for the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service and for improving work environments. They can also provide assistance in the selection and enhancement of evaluation metrics.
목차
1. Introduction
2. Method
3. Results
4. Conclusion
References
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
국부 근골격 작업부하에 의한 작업자세 평가방법의 신뢰성 검토 및 문제점 제시
곽원택
,
김진호
,
박재희
대한인간공학회 학술대회논문집
2021
.11
압력센서를 이용한 족저압 측정 및 자세 분석에 관한 연구
홍주희
,
최대영
,
김경호
대한전기학회 학술대회 논문집
2015
.02
인간공학적 평가 기법(OWAS,RULA,REBA,QEC)의 비교
이관석
,
염정원
,
허학무
외 3명
대한인간공학회 학술대회논문집
2009
.11
유해요인조사 제도의 고찰 및 발전방향
정병용
대한인간공학회지
2007
.05
관절각의 관찰 추정에서 촬영각에 따른 오차 분석
이인석
대한인간공학회 학술대회논문집
2006
.10
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-24-02-089486228