The process evaluation of two alternative participatory ergonomics intervention strategies for construction companies

Visser, Sako; Molen, Henk F. van der; Sluiter, Judith K.; Frings‐Dresen, Monique H. W.

doi:10.1080/00140139.2018.1454514

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other researchers in the construction industry have also found mixed findings with respect to improvements in pain and injury and perceived physical effort after implementing ergonomic interventions, including participatory ergonomics programs [ 33 , 56 , 57 , 58 ]. In these studies, reasons for intervention failure were generally associated with the intervention not being delivered as intended or implemented at all of the sites [ 28 , 57 ]. In our study, intervention delivery occurred as per the protocol in four of the five sites during the intervention period.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of a Total Worker Health® Intervention on Commercial Construction Sites

Peters¹,

Grant²,

Rodgers

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the efficacy of an integrated Total Worker Health® program, “All the Right Moves”, designed to target the conditions of work and workers’ health behaviors through an ergonomics program combined with a worksite-based health promotion Health Week intervention. A matched-pair cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted on ten worksites (five intervention (n = 324); five control sites (n = 283)). Worker surveys were collected at all sites pre- and post- exposure at one- and six-months. Linear and logistic regression models evaluated the effect of the intervention on pain and injury, dietary and physical activity behaviors, smoking, ergonomic practices, and work limitations. Worker focus groups and manager interviews supplemented the evaluation. After controlling for matched intervention and control pairs as well as covariates, at one-month following the ergonomics program we observed a significant improvement in ergonomic practices (B = 0.20, p = 0.002), and a reduction in incidences of pain and injury (OR = 0.58, p = 0.012) in the intervention group. At six months, we observed differences in favor of the intervention group for a reduction in physically demanding work (B = −0.25, p = 0.008), increased recreational physical activity (B = 35.2, p = 0.026) and higher consumption of fruits and vegetables (B = 0.87, p = 0.008). Process evaluation revealed barriers to intervention implementation fidelity and uptake, including a fissured multiemployer worksite, the itinerant nature of workers, competing production pressures, management support, and inclement weather. The All the Right Moves program had a positive impact at the individual level on the worksites with the program. For the longer term, the multi-organizational structure in the construction work environment needs to be considered to facilitate more upstream, long-term changes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of a Total Worker Health® Intervention on Commercial Construction Sites

Peters¹,

Grant²,

Rodgers

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While it is important to train workers in ergonomic factors, training alone is not deemed effective without determining interventions to limit the effects of such work. Ergonomic interventions are better addressed during the design stages but should consider the life cycle of the project [12,13].…”

Section: Ergonomic Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Health (OH) Practices in South African Construction

Smallwood

Deacon

2020

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health hazards in construction include: ergonomic stresses such as bending, lifting and repetitive movement and vibration; environmental stresses such as heat, sun, noise, poor illumination, and wet or damp work; skin and respiratory exposure to chemicals and dust, as well as mental stress among managers, supervisors, and workers. In South Africa, these may add to the health problems experienced by construction workers because of poor community health, substance abuse, and inadequate health services. A selfadministered questionnaire survey was conducted among the professional category of construction health and safety (H&S) practitioners to determine OH issues in construction. Findings include: the extent to which OH aspects were identified by respondents on projects in 2017 indicates that construction entails exposure to a range of OH hazards and risk; the degree of OH knowledge and awareness is limited as opposed to extensive; the source of OH knowledge is informal; there is a need for OH to be embedded in tertiary built environment programmes, OH continuing professional development (CPD), and a construction industry OH standard, and OH practice notes.

show abstract

“…Because no ergonomics tool was implemented in the other companies, it is questionable whether the differences in use of ergonomics tools can be attributed to the different guidance strategies. In a process, evaluation of the intervention (Visser et al 2018) was shown that companies in the face-to-face guidance group even got more dose delivered of the intervention compared to the companies in the e-guidance group. Not following a systematic guidance strategy was found to be a barrier for the PE intervention (Van Eerd et al 2010) to implement ergonomics tools.…”

Section: Comparison Of the Guidance Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the effects of two alternative participatory ergonomics intervention strategies for construction companies

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve the use of ergonomics tools by construction workers, the effect of two guidance strategiesa face-to-face strategy (F2F) and an e-guidance strategy (EG)of a participatory ergonomics intervention was studied. Twelve construction companies were randomly assigned to the F2F group or the EG group. The primary outcome measure, the percentage of workers using ergonomics tools, and secondary outcome measureswork ability, physical functioning and limitations due to physical problemswere assessed using surveys at baseline and after 6 months. Additionally, a cost-benefit analysis was performed on company level. No differences in primary and secondary outcomes were found with the exception of the use of ergonomics tools to adjust working height (F2F þ1%; EG þ10%; p ¼ .001). Newly-implemented tools were used by 23% (F2F) and 42% (EG) of the workers (p ¼ .271). Costs were mainly determined by guidance costs (F2F group) or purchase costs (EG group). Practitioner Summary: Participatory strategies aim to stimulate behavioural change of stakeholders to increase the use of ergonomics tools. Two guidance strategiesface-to-face or e-mail interventionsamong construction companies were studied. Both guidance strategies led to an increase in the use of new ergonomics tools.

show abstract

The process evaluation of two alternative participatory ergonomics intervention strategies for construction companies

Abstract: ISRCTN73075751.

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of a Total Worker Health® Intervention on Commercial Construction Sites

A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of a Total Worker Health® Intervention on Commercial Construction Sites

Occupational Health (OH) Practices in South African Construction

Evaluation of the effects of two alternative participatory ergonomics intervention strategies for construction companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About