The role of contextual factors for musculoskeletal disorders in the New Zealand meat processing industry

Abstract

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are the leading cause of occupational injury internationally. In New Zealand, the highest incidence of MSD is in meat processing, accounting for over half the injury compensation costs for the sector. MSD in meat processing have proven highly resistant to physical, micro-level interventions, suggesting a new approach is required. This paper reports on part of a 2-year study looking at MSD in the New Zealand meat processing industry. The qualitative study involved interviews with 237 workers, management, union and safety personnel in 28 processing sites. These data were summarised into a list of contextual factors, which, it is postulated, may create conditions under which greater exposure to physical and psychosocial factors can occur in meat processing. Some of the contextual factors are recognised as problematic by the industry, but have not previously been associated with MSD risk. The paper concludes by reflecting on conducting MSD research with a focus on contextual factors and how this may influence MSD prevention. The manuscript provides industry-based data on MSD risk and outlines the approach used in its collection. Identifying contextual factors and understanding their role in creating MSD risk may help improve the acceptance and effectiveness of MSD interventions in industry.

An implementation evaluation of a qualitative culture assessment tool

“…While risk factors from all three groups can be considered as independent predictors of MSD, it is now well accepted that it is a combination of risk factors that result in MSD rather than one element of risk (Bongers, Ijmker, van den Heuvel, Blatter, 2006;Da Costa and Vieira, 2010;Hauke et al, 2011;NRC-IOM, 2001;Silverstein and Clark, 2004). Causation models continue to develop from industry-based research that also highlight some of the broader interactions that can occur in occupational settings, creating conditions under which MSD may be more likely to occur (for example, Faucett, 2005;Karsh, 2006;Lee et al, 2010;NRC-IOM, 2001;Tappin et al, 2008). Examples of such conditions might include supply chain influences on work scheduling and task exposure, and impacts of remunerations systems on workload, work pace and work hours.…”

“…Over the past two decades, work-related MSD research has increasingly focused on three groups of risk factors e individual, psychosocial, and physical, as well as interactions between them, in seeking to explain the continued high reported incidence of MSD in many industry sectors internationally (Bernard, 1997;NRC-IOM, 2001;Tappin et al, 2008). While risk factors from all three groups can be considered as independent predictors of MSD, it is now well accepted that it is a combination of risk factors that result in MSD rather than one element of risk (Bongers, Ijmker, van den Heuvel, Blatter, 2006;Da Costa and Vieira, 2010;Hauke et al, 2011;NRC-IOM, 2001;Silverstein and Clark, 2004).…”

The application of an industry level participatory ergonomics approach in developing MSD interventions

“…This however was simply ergonomics in action (Wilson, 2005) and is not described as participative. Further details on these two earlier stages of the study are reported in Tappin et al (2008aTappin et al ( , 2008b. A participative approach was adopted for the final stage of the study; the development of interventions for the industry.…”

Indicators of Work Accidents in Slaughter Refrigerators and Broiler Processing

“…This lack of information limits the planning and implementation of policies for the prevention of work accidents. Official data on occupational accidents do not accurately show the results of accidents and mishaps if a CAT is not issued (Kearney, 2010;Tappin et al, 2008;Reardon & Farina, 2010;Stearns et al, 1999).…”