Introduction: Although, there is a current regulatory framework for optimal manual handling of loads to preserve health conditions in the industrial sector, technical assessment and the use of certain instruments are still required for the diagnosis of occupational hazards. This study aimed to identify the occupational hazards associated with manual load handling in industry workers and estimate those resulting from postural stress. Methods: Fifty-two (52) industry workers took part in this cross-sectional study. All participants were evaluated using the Manual Handling Guide and the Reba assessment tool. Subjects were characterized, and risks associated with different tasks were detected. Results: 59.6% of workers were between 18 and 45 years old. Lifting, lowering, and transporting loads activities had a repetitive task risk of 94%, exceeding the weight limit in 85.7% of cases. Pushing and pulling activities, mostly showed a working postural risk of 82% and a high perception of initial effort (Borg> 8). Reba score warned to intervene immediately in both types of tasks. Conclusion: Risk from the manual handling of loads found in this study constitutes an alert that suggests reviewing compliance with the current regulation, as well as effective use of working pauses and the improvement of strategies to minimize physical efforts used by workers.
Introduction Within the occupational field, changes in the characteristics of work have revealed risks associated with static, repetitive work and litle physical activity, which together with individual health conditions of workers can trigger diseases and musculoskeletal disorders. Objectives To obtain a preliminary characterization of workers in an industrial area, including their health and working conditions. Methods This is a cross-sectional study with a quantitative approach, developed with 69 men who worked in the industrial area of Viña del Mar, Chile. A clinical and occupational evaluation was carried out with the application of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire as well as the Standardized Nordic Questionnaire. Results The following risk factors were identified: 53.6% of the workers were smokers, 92.8% presented low levels of physical activity, and 70.3% reported feeling pain in body segments that were physically required during their work tasks. Among all workers, 63% were overweight according to their body mass index and 62% presented high systolic pressure. Pain was mostly detected in the spine, and it was slightly associated with forklif operation by older workers (t-test p < 0.05). Conclusions Workers were in the presence of cardiovascular and occupational risks. It is necessary to promote timely education and training on health conditions and to evaluate risks associated with machinery operation in order to prevent work-related pain.
Introducción: Las evaluaciones de opción múltiple constituyen el instrumento ampliamente usado en ciencias para evaluar al estudiantado; sin embargo, la reciente pandemia exigió adaptar este tipo de instrumento al entorno virtual. Este contexto requirió valorar la calidad de los instrumentos mediante índices de discriminación, consistencia interna y relacionarlo con el rendimiento académico. Objetivo: Evaluar los instrumentos de evaluación empleados en modalidad online durante la pandemia por COVID-19, y el rendimiento de los estudiantes en ciencias de la salud. Método: Se realizó la revisión de los 5 instrumentos de la asignatura Estructura y Función formados por 290 bancos de preguntas aleatorias para evaluar cada contenido en estudiantes de primer año durante el 2020 en la escuela de ciencias de la salud en la Universidad Viña del Mar. Se analizaron los datos obtenidos a partir de la plataforma virtual y se interpretaron los índices de discriminación, facilidad, eficiencia discriminativa, consistencia interna y rendimiento académico mediante un informe que fue compartido con los docentes para identificar los parámetros de calidad y validez. Resultados: Del total de bancos de preguntas evaluados, un 70.2% de las preguntas presentaron adecuada discriminación y solo un 5.6% debieran ser eliminadas. El certamen dos obtuvo el menor rendimiento promedio 3.9 ± 0.99; sin embargo, presentó la consistencia interna más alta: 81%. Al comparar todos los instrumentos se observó una mejora gradual en la formulación, reflejada en el examen final, en el que además el rendimiento académico concuerda con el promedio del semestre 4.2 ± 0.92. Conclusiones: El rendimiento académico debe ponderarse en relación con la calidad del instrumento formulado en el que, a menor índice de facilidad, existe una mayor consistencia interna, representado por la mayor eficiencia discriminativa de las preguntas. El proceso de diseño y formulación de los instrumentos debe cuidar y examinar estas pautas para resguardar criterios de calidad.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.