Workers are an important factor in the implementation of a construction project. Applying ergonomic postures for workers in the projects is necessary to minimize the risk of work accidents and the risk of experiencing musculoskeletal disorders (MsDs). The use of lightweight brick for wall construction is relatively new and is in great demand by construction industries in Indonesia. During wall construction, workers do repetitive activities such as bending, kneeling, holding tools, or tilting the body. These activities potentially increase the risk of injury and musculoskeletal disorders. This study aims to assess the work posture of workers on the wall construction using lightweight brick and to analyze the high-risk activities. The wall construction work assessment included five stages of activities, (1) material transfer, (2) practical columns making and installation, (3) lightweight brick adhesive dough-making process, (4) lightweight bricks laying, and (5) lightweight brick plaster. The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) method was used to evaluate the working posture. This method was developed to investigate the risk of abnormalities that workers will potentially experience. Based on the RULA employee assessment worksheet, the research results showed that 69% of workers have a high-risk level of work posture and 31% have low-risk levels of work posture. There are three activities with a high-risk level, namely, material transfer, lightweight brick laying, and lightweight brick plaster. At the same time, practical column making and installation work and lightweight brick adhesive dough-making processes are at a low-risk level. According to the RULA risk level, action is required to investigate and immediately improve activities with a high-risk level. If workers continue to work with the same posture, they will be at risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders related to the neck, trunk, and wrists in the near future. Correcting the worker’s posture can be done by improving work position, process, and workplace layout.
DOCUMENT
Office well-being aims to explore and support a healthy, balanced and active work style in office environments. Recent work on tangible user interfaces has started to explore the role of physical, tangible interfaces as active interventions to explore how to tackle problems such as inactive work and lifestyles, and increasingly sedentary behaviours. We identify a fragmented research landscape on tangible Office well-being interventions, missing the relationship between interventions, data, design strategies, and outcomes, and behaviour change techniques. Based on the analysis of 40 papers, we identify 7 classifications in tangible Office well-being interventions and analyse the intervention based on their role and foundation in behaviour change. Based on the analysis, we present design considerations for the development of future tangible Office well-being design interventions and present an overview of the current field and future research into tangible Office well-being interventions to design for a healthier and active office environment.
DOCUMENT
CC-BY Applied Ergonomics, 2021, March https://www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-ergonomics Purpose: To analyze progression of changes in kinematics and work physiology during progressive lifting in healthy adults.Methods: Healthy participants were recruited. A standardized lifting test from the WorkWell Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) was administered, with five progressive lifting low series of five repetitions. The criteria of the WorkWell observation protocol were studied: changes in muscle use (EMG), heart rate (heart rate monitor), base of support, posture and movement pattern (motion capture system). Repeated measures ANOVA’s were used to analyze changes during progressive workloads.Results: 18 healthy young adults participated (8 men, 10 women; mean age 22 years). Mean maximum weight lifted was 66 (±3.2) and 44 (±7.4) kg for men and women, respectively. With progressive loads, statistically significant (p < 0.01) differences were observed: increase in secondary muscle use at moderate lifting, increase of heart rate, increase of base of support and movement pattern changes were observed; differences in posture were not significant.Conclusions: Changes in 4 out of 5 kinematic and work physiology parameters were objectively quantified using lab technology during progressive lifting in healthy adults. These changes appear in line with existing observation criteria.
MULTIFILE
