uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Reliability and criterion validity of an observation protocol for working technique assessments in cash register work
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Sciences, Occupational and Environmental Medicine. (Arbets- och miljömedicin)ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9354-6704
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Sciences, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
Univ Gavle, Ctr Musculoskeletal Res, Dept Occupat & Publ Hlth Sci, Gavle, Sweden.
Karolinska Inst, Inst Environm Med, Unit Occupat Med, Stockholm, Sweden; Stockholm Cty Council, Ctr Occupat & Environm Med, Stockholm, Sweden .
2016 (English)In: Ergonomics, ISSN 0014-0139, E-ISSN 1366-5847, Vol. 59, no 6, 829-839 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We evaluated the intra- and inter-observer reliability and criterion validity of an observation protocol, developed in an iterative process involving practicing ergonomists, for assessment of working technique during cash register work for the purpose of preventing upper extremity symptoms. Two ergonomists independently assessed 17 15-min videos of cash register work on two occasions each, as a basis for examining reliability. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing these assessments with meticulous video-based analyses by researchers. Intra-observer reliability was acceptable (i.e. proportional agreement >0.7 and kappa >0.4) for 10/10 questions. Inter-observer reliability was acceptable for only 3/10 questions. An acceptable inter-observer reliability combined with an acceptable criterion validity was obtained only for one working technique aspect, 'Quality of movements'. Thus, major elements of the cashiers' working technique could not be assessed with an acceptable accuracy from short periods of observations by one observer, such as often desired by practitioners. Practitioner Summary: We examined an observation protocol for assessing working technique in cash register work. It was feasible in use, but inter-observer reliability and criterion validity were generally not acceptable when working technique aspects were assessed from short periods of work. We recommend the protocol to be used for educational purposes only.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 59, no 6, 829-839 p.
Keyword [sv]
Repetitivt arbete, muskeloskeletala besvär
National Category
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified Environmental Health and Occupational Health
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-276838DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1098734ISI: 000380150600010PubMedID: 26538287OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-276838DiVA: diva2:903532
Funder
Swedish Retail and Wholesale Development Council, 2008:2
Available from: 2016-02-16 Created: 2016-02-16 Last updated: 2017-10-19
In thesis
1. Efficient methods for assessment of physical load at work
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Efficient methods for assessment of physical load at work
2016 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2016. 22 p.
National Category
Environmental Health and Occupational Health
Research subject
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-278965 (URN)
Presentation
2016-03-11, Konferensrummet Arbets- och miljömedicin, Ulleråkersvägen 38-40, Uppsala, 10:00 (Swedish)
Supervisors
Funder
Swedish Retail and Wholesale Development Council, 2008:2Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2012-1202
Available from: 2016-03-11 Created: 2016-02-26 Last updated: 2016-03-11Bibliographically approved
2. Methods to assess physical load at work: With a focus on the neck and upper extremities
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Methods to assess physical load at work: With a focus on the neck and upper extremities
2017 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

To prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), useful, reliable and valid methods for assessing physical workload and risks for MSDs are needed. Ergonomists often assess work by short visual observations without a specific tool. A branch-specific tool was developed for assessing working technique during cash register work (BAsiK observation protocol).

Inclinometers are an alternative for assessing upper arm postures - over several days. Ergonomists need guidelines explaining how to analyze and interpret such data.

The aim was to examine and investigate methods for assessing physical load at work, with focus on the neck and upper extremities.

In Paper:

I, the reliability and criterion validity of the BAsIK observation protocol were assessed.

II, the reliability of risk assessments of repetitive work, based on visual observations performed by 21 ergonomists without a specific tool, was assessed.

III, whole-day inclinometer measurements of upper arm elevation were compared between work and leisure, across 13 different occupations – before and after arm elevations during sitting time was excluded.

IV, the association between inclinometer-based upper arm elevation and neck/shoulder pain was assessed among 654 blue-collar workers.

 

The intra-observer reliability of the BAsIK protocol was deemed acceptable, but only 3 of 10 questions in the protocol showed acceptable inter-observer reliability, and 3 showed acceptable criterion validity.

Neither the inter- or intra-observer reliability of risk assessment without any specific method was acceptable for any upper body regions.

None of the occupation groups, in paper III, had higher proportion of time with arm elevation during work than leisure. However, when arm elevation during sitting was excluded, 8 occupation groups had higher proportion of time with elevated arms during work than leisure.

Whole-workday inclinometer-based upper arm elevation was not associated with neck/shoulder pain within the assessed population.

   The results indicate that, in most cases, a single visual observation of a work sequence is not a reliable means of assessing repetitive work. A large proportion of arm elevation may derive from sitting time. At low exposure levels, arm elevation per se may not be a risk factor for neck/shoulder pain.

This must be taken into account when evaluating the risk for MSDs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2017. 52 p.
Series
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine, ISSN 1651-6206 ; 1388
Keyword
risk assessment, physical load, upper extremities, ergonomics
National Category
Environmental Health and Occupational Health
Research subject
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-329801 (URN)978-91-513-0118-1 (ISBN)
Public defence
2017-12-14, Konferensrummet Arbets- och miljömedicin, Daghammarskjölds väg 60, Uppsala, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Funder
AFA Insurance, 150035Swedish Retail and Wholesale Development Council, 2008:2Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2012-1202
Available from: 2017-11-17 Created: 2017-10-19 Last updated: 2017-11-17

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Palm, Peter

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Palm, PeterJosephson, Malin
By organisation
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
In the same journal
Ergonomics
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specifiedEnvironmental Health and Occupational Health

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 186 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf