The 30-Inch View®

Q&A for the American Supply Association

Hello everyone,

Recently I conducted a webinar for the American Supply Association entitled “Ergonomics & Back Safety for Material Handling”.  There were a lot of questions during the event; many of which I simply didn’t have time to get to during the allotted time.  So, I thought I would answer them here, for the benefit of all readers.  If you missed the webinar and you are interested, you can find it at the ASA website.

I received several questions on the same topics, so I grouped them by theme.

Q:  If the NIOSH lifting equation does not apply to the job task, what other tools can be used?  Do you have any thoughts on the other "half" of lifting - high lifting (e.g. upper tier palletizing) - that affects shoulders more so than low back?  Engineering is somewhat obvious (lower the height) -- how about lifting methods?  Are there any good tools to analyze the risk to the shoulder from repeated overhead reaching tasks?   Are there any tools for one handed tasks?

A:  These types of questions are extremely common.  As the NIOSH Lifting equation is only applicable for two-handed lifts/lowers within certain parameters, a lot of companies get in touch with us inquiring about what more they can do to provide more in-depth risk analysis.  What is required is a comprehensive, quantitative tool that accounts for posture, force, frequency and duration.  There are several tools available in the public domain -  Humantech uses the BRIEF™ Survey which we use as a baseline quantification of ergonomic risk for every job, whether it contains lifting or not.  Often, tools like the NIOSH Lifting Equation are used as a supplement to this analysis, rather than a starting point.

Q:  Can you give us more details about the RWL calculation?  What is the formula for RWL again? What does each variable mean?

A:  Humantech offers a free webinar , entitled “Applying the NIOSH Lifting Equation.  You can register and view for free by following this link http://www.humantech.com/resources/media/

Q:  Does Humantech support the recent OSHA injury recording revision where the OSHA log no longer captures ergonomic illnesses?

A:  Humantech supports using injury/illness data as one means of determining the impact of work related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) on an organization, and to help determine where improvements efforts need to be focused.  In a recent interview published in EHS Today, acting Assistant Secretary for OSHA Jordan Barab stated “Musculoskeletal injuries are one of the biggest worker health and safety problem in this country.” And we agree with that.

Since 2004, the OSHA 300 log groups WMSD’s under “Injury” or “All other injuries.” This lack of specificity obscures the incidence of WMSD’s. OSHA is now proposing to better define musculoskeletal disorders for recordkeeping purposes and add a column on work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) to the OSHA 300 Log.

Yes, we agree that improved tracking will enable employers to dimension their problem and help to better determine where improvement efforts need to be focused.

Q:  Are shoes (the quality) a big factor in back issues?

A:  Quality or type of shoe (or shoe insert) does not increase the risk of developing a work-related musculoskeletal disorder (WMSD) of the back.  A WMSD is a cumulative trauma disorder that centers on movement at joint, rather than static postures.  However, proper footwear and interventions such as anti-fatigue matting may promote venous return from the lower extremities, resulting in increased comfort and decreased varicosity.

Q:  Can you recommend sources/ web-sites for  off-the shelf solutions such as you shared in the slides? There was a 3 wheel cart in one of your slides. Do you have information on where to purchase some recommended equipment?

A:  We like Alimed for both industrial and office ergonomic solutions.

Q:  Do you have any statistics on whether back braces (such as those worn at Home Depot) help prevent injuries?  What is your opinion on back belts?

A:  The Back Belt Working Group, formed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), reviewed scientific literature related to back belts. NIOSH is the federal Institute responsible for conducting research and making recommendations for the prevention of work-related injuries and illnesses. The Group's objective was to evaluate the adequacy of the data supporting the use of back belts to reduce work-related injuries in healthy, uninjured workers. The Group issued its report in July of 1994. The Working Group concluded that the effectiveness of using back belts to lessen the risk of back injury among uninjured workers remains unproven. NIOSH also stated that, because of limitations in the studies on the use of back belts, the results neither support nor refute the effectiveness of back belts in injury reduction.

Since the effectiveness of using back belts to reduce the risk of back injury remains unproven, NIOSH does not recommend the use of back belts to prevent injuries.  Visit the NIOSH website detailing back belts.

Additionally, Dr. Stu McGill at the University of Waterloo has done extensive research on this subject. He dedicates an entire chapter to it in his book “Low Back Disorders: Evidence Based Prevention and Rehabilitation”.  Find out more at Dr. McGill's website.

I would be more than happy to answer more of your questions.  Some questions I received were quite specific, so I will contact those participants directly to help with those situations.  Thanks for attending, and I appreciate your interest and enthusiasm!  

Kent Hatcher

khatcher@humantech.com

Welcome back, Ergonomics?

Personnel Concept’s 12/8 blog entry DOL Releases 2010 Agenda: Welcome Back, Ergonomics catches our attention. PC’s Gary McCarty states “Next, it’s eyeing the resurrection of the ergonomics standard that was rejected early in this decade…”

 

As ergonomics is a topic of keen interest to us, and particularly when it is connected to the Federal Government, we reviewed the DOL’s Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities for 2010 to see what Mr. McCarty found.

 

The Regulatory Plan, which is published as part of the fall edition of The Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, identifies regulatory priorities and contains additional detail about the most important significant regulatory actions that agencies expect to take in the coming year.

 

The DOL’s Statement detailing 12 strategic outcomes at 16,000 words in length is clearly comprehensive. But of note – the fact is not one of those 16,000 words is ergonomics.

 

We’re all better served when opinion is not disguised as fact.

Laptop Steering Wheel Desk?

We were shocked to see this product offered on Amazon, but then amused to see the photos and reviews added by "satisfied customers"

Behold....the Laptop Steering Wheel Desk.  That's right.  You heard correctly.

Thoughts?

Ergonomics/Human Factors in a Luxury Auto?

We love articles that start out by saying "The ergonomics department at BMW headquarters in Munich could turn fastening a Velcro strip into a four-step process with footnotes, ..."

Jump to the article here.  It has some fun with how starting some cars has gone so far beyond simply "turning a key".

Human Factors is a field of study that deals primarily with human-machine interface, focused on the psychological, social, physical, biological and safety characteristics of a user and compares it to the system the user is in.  At Humantech, we typically describe Human Factors as dealing with everything above the shoulders (decision making, etc.) , while traditional ergonomics deals with things below the shoulders (push/pull forces, reach distances, etc).

More Material Handling Solutions

In this month’s Professional Safety magazine, they highlight Rubbermaid’s new material handling product line with a range of application-specific designs.  

Jump to view this part of the Rubbermaid website by clicking here.

Experienced Material Handling Equipment

Contributed by Miguel Gonzalez from Humantech

Hello everyone,

If ergonomic improvements have stalled at your facility due to budget constraints, we wanted to direct you towards these resources that provide some "experienced" manual material handling equipment.

American Surplus Inc

www.americansurplus.com

(800) 989-7176

1 Noyes Avenue; East Providence, RI 02916

 

SJF Material Handling Equipment

www.sjf.com/specials.html

(320) 485-2824

211 Baker Ave. W; Winsted, MN 55395

Some thoughts on stretching to reduce work injuries

Contributed by Christy Lotz, CPE

The current ASSE online e-magazine The Monitor (http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/357229e6) includes an article titled Is Your Stretch and Flex Program Cutting-Edge?  In it, Deborah Reed (MOTR/L) quotes several studies with respect to the effectiveness of stretching at work on reducing injuries.  The article alludes to those injuries caused by poor ergonomic conditions.

After an extensive literature review, the author states that there is not a lot of evidence to support static stretching as a means of reducing injuries.  This is true for both an athlete and the industrial worker.  Stretching programs have recently become popular as a means to prevent injury in industry.  Sometimes these static stretches are performed in a group at the beginning of a shift or individually at the workstation throughout the shift. 

The author does state, and I am in agreement, that there is a clear difference between static and dynamic stretches.  Dynamic or ballistic stretching is more like a “warm-up” for the muscles as opposed to static stretching.  This is beneficial for both athletes and industrial workers.  The goal is to get the blood flowing to the muscles that will be taxed during the activity or work.  Blood flow is beneficial for a number of reasons including the transport of oxygen and nutrients to muscles and removal of waste.  This has a positive impact in terms of preventing injuries of muscle tissue.  Therefore, if you are going to provide any stretching program, it should be approached more like a “warm-up” session as opposed to just a static stretching program.  In addition, stretching throughout the day is much better than one session at the beginning of the shift, but that is not usually the approach in industry to these types of programs.

It is my experience that a well-designed workstation (i.e., based on good ergonomic principles) has an even bigger impact on injury reduction than a stretching program.  If a workstation is designed to keep the operator working in a neutral posture and reduce stressors that contribute to injury, the operator will feel a positive impact for an entire 8-hour shift.  Whereas a stretching program is often performed for the first 10-15 minutes of the shift and the effects are supposed to last for the remainder of the day.  Of the research cited in this article, none of the studies mentioned the benefits of short stretching periods for long durations of work.  The author compared the sports athlete to the industrial worker throughout the article, but an athlete often exercises for 2 hours per day, so stretching may show benefits, whereas an industrial worker works 8-hours per day so the benefits of stretching must last much longer and this impact is not shown in the cited articles.

Overall, I agree that ballistic stretching and warm ups throughout the shift is beneficial, but proper workstation setup (i.e., reducing the risk factors of MSD injuries), minimizes the need for employees to  warm up in the first place. Considering ergonomics early in the process will benefit the operator and show a more significant impact in terms of decreased cost and increased productivity.

October is National Ergonomics Month

Happy National Ergonomics Month!

Did you know that October is National Ergonomics Month? Beginning in 2003, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) designated October to formally recognize the countless hours of research that go into the ergonomics profession.  The goal is to promote the application of ergonomics through teaching, learning, networking, service, and fun!

 

Stay in the loop by becoming an HFES member today, or check out the National Ergonomics Month website at: http://hfesnem.org/

Thanks to Greg Cresswell of Humantech for this post.

Kebab Ergonomics (in Istanbul)

Submitted by Kevin Perdeaux, Humantech Consultant

I was recently traveling through Turkey, and was amazed at the number of kebab shops.  This staple snack includes shredded chicken, beef or lamb from a vertical rotating spit, packed into bread with onions, tomatoes, lettuce and topped off with lemon juice and salt.

With such high demand, kebab shopkeepers spend hours with their arms at shoulder level shaving meat with large knifes and cutting utensils; a definite ergonomic risk! This shop decided to replace the manual tools with an electric planar to ease meat shaving and improve task efficiency.

We are always interested to hear about improved work engineering from outside North America, so feel free to post any photos or stories.

Learning from your other successful processes

A common misconception in industry is that an unsuccessful ergonomics process is due to a lack of the necessary tools to make it successful.  However, many companies have the tools in house to advance their ergonomics initiatives - they just need to recognize the successes from their other processes and apply the same concepts to their ergonomics initiative!

A recent article from EHSToday  focuses on the success of Hospira Inc. (Injectable Pharmaceuticals) at reducing their carbon footprint and overall environmental waste. There are a number of steps that can be taken from this article that are often related to flourishing ergonomics processes as well:

1. Set goals and create leading metrics (risk reduction, number of individuals trained, number of “red” jobs) – the first step in any ergonomics process is to set goals that are achievable and measurable. Without this, the success of an ergonomics process has to rely on lagging metrics (e.g. injury reduction) which can take years to measure accurately.

2. Management support and approval – ensure management has a strong desire to make the process successful. Put information into terms they can stand behind (return on investment, waste reduction, increased productivity). With management buy-in, the uphill battle becomes a smooth sail.

3. Financial sense – everyone needs to understand the importance of ergonomics to the bottom line and to the safety of operators. With workers compensation costs often costing millions of dollar annually, it is easy to realize that if your ergonomics process is costing you money, you’re doing it wrong.

4. Follow a process (plan, do, check, act) – create and follow a model to be able to continuously improve. This will allow you to easily identify opportunities for improvement and ensure that the most effective countermeasures are implemented.

5. Employee involvement – employees are the absolute experts at their jobs and often have the best improvement ideas.  Their involvement is therefore a key element to the success of an ergonomics initiative. Focusing on the 30-inch view between the operators and their work environment will often result in cost savings due to rework, increased productivity, and overall improved morale.

Following these steps is a great way to kick-off an ergonomics process.

Submitted by Christy Lotz, CPE