In 1985, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) convened an ad hoc committee of experts who reviewed the current literature on lifting, recommend criteria for defining lifting capacity, and in 1991 developed a revised lifting equation. Subsequently, NIOSH developed the documentation for the equation and played a prominent role in recommending methods for interpreting the results of the equation. The 1991 equation reflects new findings and provides methods for evaluating asymmetrical lifting tasks, lifts of objects with less than optimal hand-container couplings, and also provides guidelines for a larger range of work durations and lifting frequencies than the 1981 equation. This paper provides the basis for selecting the three criteria (biomechanical, physiological, and psychophysical) that were used to define the 1991 equation, and describes the derivation of the individual components (Putz-Anderson and Waters 1991). The paper also describes the lifting index (LI), an index of relative physical stress, that can be used to identify hazardous lifting tasks. Although the 1991 equation has not been fully validated, the recommended weight limits derived from the revised equation are consistent with or lower than those generally reported in the literature. NIOSH believes that the revised 1991 lifting equation is more likely than the 1981 equation to protect most workers.
Objectives
Most studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence and prevalence among workers have been limited by small sample sizes or restricted to a small subset of jobs. We established a common CTS case definition and then pooled CTS prevalence and incidence data across six prospective studies of musculoskeletal outcomes to measure CTS frequency and allow better studies of etiology.
Methods
Six research groups collected prospective data at >50 workplaces including symptoms characteristic of CTS and electrodiagnostic studies (EDS) of the median and ulnar nerves across the dominant wrist. While study designs and the timing of data collection varied across groups, we were able to create a common CTS case definition incorporating both symptoms and EDS results from data that were collected in all studies.
Results
At the time of enrollment, 7.8% of 4321 subjects met our case definition and were considered prevalent cases of CTS. During 8833 person-years of follow-up, an additional 204 subjects met the CTS case definition for an overall incidence rate of 2.3 CTS cases per 100 person-years.
Conclusions
Both prevalent and incident CTS were common in data pooled across multiple studies and sites. The large number of incident cases in this prospective study provides adequate power for future exposure– response analyses to identify work- and non-work-related risk factors for CTS. The prospective nature allows determination of the temporal relations necessary for causal inference.
A mew approach for estimating metabolic rates for manual materials handling jobs is presented. This approach was applied to 48 different jobs. The model validation showed a correlation coefficient of 0.95 between the measured and predicted metabolic rates. The coefficient of variation (standard error/sample mean) was 10.2 percent.
Background
Between 2001 and 2010, five research groups conducted coordinated prospective studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence among US workers from various industries and collected detailed subject-level exposure information with follow-up of symptoms, electrophysiological measures and job changes.
Objective
This analysis examined the associations between workplace biomechanical factors and incidence of dominant-hand CTS, adjusting for personal risk factors.
Methods
2474 participants, without CTS or possible polyneuropathy at enrolment, were followed up to 6.5 years (5102 person-years). Individual workplace exposure measures of the dominant hand were collected for each task and included force, repetition, duty cycle and posture. Task exposures were combined across the workweek using time-weighted averaging to estimate job-level exposures. CTS case-criteria were based on symptoms and results of electrophysiological testing. HRs were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models.
Results
After adjustment for covariates, analyst (HR=2.17; 95% CI 1.38 to 3.43) and worker (HR=2.08; 95% CI 1.31 to 3.39) estimated peak hand force, forceful repetition rate (HR=1.84; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.86) and per cent time spent (eg, duty cycle) in forceful hand exertions (HR=2.05; 95% CI 1.34 to 3.15) were associated with increased risk of incident CTS. Associations were not observed between total hand repetition rate, per cent duration of all hand exertions, or wrist posture and incident CTS.
Conclusions
In this prospective multicentre study of production and service workers, measures of exposure to forceful hand exertion were associated with incident CTS after controlling for important covariates. These findings may influence the design of workplace safety programmes for preventing work-related CTS.
Implementation of patient-handling devices along with a comprehensive program can be effective in reducing MSDs among nursing personnel. Strategies to expand usage of patient-handling devices in most health care settings should be explored.
Background-Between 2001 and 2010, six research groups conducted coordinated multiyear, prospective studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence in US workers from various industries and collected detailed subject-level exposure information with follow-up symptom, physical examination, electrophysiological measures and job changes.
This study was conducted to determine how well the TLV for HAL and the SI predict risk of CTS using a prospective cohort design with survival analysis. Both the TLV for HAL and the SI were found to predict risk of CTS when adjusted for relevant covariates.
A prospective epidemiologic study was conducted in two units (140 beds and 57 nursing assistants) of a nursing home to demonstrate the efficacy of an ergonomic intervention strategy to reduce back stress to nursing personnel. The total programme involved the following: determining patient handling tasks perceived to be most stressful by the nursing assistants (NAs); performing an ergonomic evaluation of these tasks; and conducting a laboratory study to select patient transferring devices perceived to produce less physical stress than existing manual patient-handling methods. The intervention phase included training NAs in the use of these devices, modifying toilets and shower rooms, and applying techniques to patient care. Immediately after completing the intervention programme, a post-intervention analysis (which lasted eight months in unit 1 and four months in unit 2) was performed. A biomechanical evaluation of the physical demands required to perform stressful patient-handling tasks showed that the mean compressive force on the L5/S1 disc, the mean hand force required to make a transfer, and the strength requirements (expressed as percentage female population capable) were 1964 N, 122 N, and 83% after intervention as compared to 4751 N, 312 N, and 41% before intervention. Subjectively, the mean rating of perceived exertion was less than 'very light' after intervention as compared to between 'somewhat hard' and 'hard' before intervention. Overall, the mean acceptability rates for the walking belt and the mechanical hoist were 81% and 87% for patient transfers. The incidence rate for back injuries prior to the intervention, 83 per 200,000 work-hours, decreased to 47 per 200,000 work-hours after the intervention. There were no injuries resulting in lost or restricted work days during the last four months of the post-intervention. It is concluded that an appropriate ergonomic intervention programme offers great promise in reducing physical stress and risk of low-back pain to nursing personnel. However, large-scale studies in different nursing homes are needed to confirm the above findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.