The 19thTriennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2015) is currently running in Melbourne Australia with 900 delegates, of which 600 are from outside Australia. It offers a fascinating (online) library of ergonomic and occupational health and safety (OHS) research. Below is a sample of the research on offer picked, largely, at random.
It seems unnecessary to state that ergonomics is an essential part of the knowledge base of safety and production but ergonomics still seems to be a “dark art” to many. This is acknowledged by many in the sector and is summarised well by Ruurd N. Pikaar
“After many years, working as a HF professional, the author concludes that the value of ergonomics is far beyond health and safety issues. The primary goal of HFE is contributing to human centred (re)design of systems (Dul et.al, 2012). The primary goal should not be to identify problems -things that others did wrong and correct the problems within the limitations of an already implemented system.” (page 6, paper 88)
One of the hottest issues in ergonomics at the moment seems to be the issue of sedentary office work. The IEA2015 trade show had lots of sellers of standing or variable desks. One researcher in this area is Leon Straker of Curtin University who, in preparation for a symposium, wrote:
“Employers and occupational health and safety authorities are working to provide safe systems of work for workers with currently high occupational sedentary exposure.” (paper/abstract 79)
Starker and others wrote that their:
“….findings suggest low-back pain may be a potential barrier for changes in sedentary behaviour among office workers in interventions…” (page 2, paper 1908)
and, in a different paper on an experimental design laboratory study, that under-desk cycling [Ed. didn’t know such devices existed] :
“… appeared to have minimal impact on subjective alertness or objectively measured creative problem solving.” (page 2, paper 1909)
Other research relates directly to our understanding of productivity. A team of researchers provided “the first estimates for productivity loss among young workers in Australia” and found evidence that “health conditions had a significant impact on productivity loss” (paper 213).
Research from Sweden provided support for a healthy workplace in which cooperation and respect feature:
“…preliminary results show that the interviewees described the physical factors (such as facilities and equipment) as a fundamental foundation in the working environment. Furthermore, the interviewees also described that psychosocial factors (eg. good relationships with colleagues and job satisfaction) and organizational factors at work (eg. communication, leadership and participation) to be of great importance to create a healthy working environment and support wellbeing at work. In almost all of the focus groups, a good relationship with colleagues was the single factor that spontaneously was mentioned first as a descriptor for a healthy working environment.” (paper 249)
Not surprisingly, work-related musculo-skeletal disorders (WMSD) featured in a lot of the research and congress discussion. Research from Washington State, found, among other factors, that:
“Injured workers had a low level of awareness of the risks of developing a WMSD, a tendency to frame work-related pain as customary and blame themselves for the onset.” (paper 291)
It is suggested this tendency exists outside Washington State and may indicate a need to approach workers who may suffer some pain in a different way or to reframe the OHS conversation.
Some researchers from the United States looked at manual handling on construction sites and:
“… believe Prevention through Design (PtD) is necessary to develop and implement effective SH&E strategies for today’s construction workforce. Lowering the RWL [Recommended Weight Limits] of manual lifting tasks in construction increases the need for improved safety and ergonomic planning and designing phases.” (paper 343)
PtD is a concept that the broader OHS profession will be hearing more of in the future as Safety in Design becomes more targeted.
The IEA should be congratulated for making such a range of information available. Much of it provides no solutions but almost all of it provides clues or the evidence from which solutions can be developed. The “library” is only a small example of the information available for a significant body of knowledge.
Kevin Jones attended the Congress as a media representative.
Tagged: health and safety, International Ergonomics Association, occupational health and safety, OHS
