Displaying all 12 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Khalid HM
    Appl Ergon, 2006 Jul;37(4):409-18.
    PMID: 16764817
    To develop product portfolios and affective design we need to understand the diversity in user needs. The challenge is how to predict what users want and how they will behave. One approach is to understand user emotions and affective needs, and predict successful product design that can match the needs. This paper discusses affect and its link to cognition. To provide a context, several theories are presented. A framework is described that incorporates characteristics of users, tasks, products, and use environment. The goal is to highlight the importance of emotions in enhancing the value of products. This research field, which we call Hedonomics, is new. There are many challenges in developing valid and reliable measurements of affect, which can influence human factors research as well as design.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  2. Thatcher A, Yeow PH
    Ergonomics, 2016;59(2):167-78.
    PMID: 26307437 DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1066876
    Sustainability issues such as natural resource depletion, pollution and poor working conditions have no geographical boundaries in our interconnected world. To address these issues requires a paradigm shift within human factors and ergonomics (HFE), to think beyond a bounded, linear model understanding towards a broader systems framework. For this reason, we introduce a sustainable system of systems model that integrates the current hierarchical conceptualisation of possible interventions (i.e., micro-, meso- and macro-ergonomics) with important concepts from the sustainability literature, including the triple bottom line approach and the notion of time frames. Two practical examples from the HFE literature are presented to illustrate the model. The implications of this paradigm shift for HFE researchers and practitioners are discussed and include the long-term sustainability of the HFE community and comprehensive solutions to problems that consider the emergent issues that arise from this interconnected world.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  3. Sukadarin EH, Deros BM, Ghani JA, Mohd Nawi NS, Ismail AR
    Int J Occup Saf Ergon, 2016 Sep;22(3):389-98.
    PMID: 27173135 DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2016.1156924
    INTRODUCTION: This review describes standardized ergonomics assessment based on pen-and-paper observational methods for assessing ergonomics risk factors.

    OBJECTIVE: The three main objectives are to analyze published pen-and-paper observational methods, to extract and understand the risk levels of each method and to identify their associated health effects.

    METHODOLOGY: The authors searched scientific databases and the Internet for materials from 1970 to 2013 using the following keywords: ergo, posture, method, observational, postural angle, health effects, pain and diseases. Postural assessments of upper arms, lower arms, wrists, neck, back and legs in six pen-and-paper-based observational methods are highlighted, extracted in groups and linked with associated adverse health effects.

    RESULTS: The literature reviewed showed strengths and limitations of published pen-and-paper-based observational methods in determining the work activities, risk levels and related postural angles to adverse health effects. This provided a better understanding of unsafe work postures and how to improve these postures.

    CONCLUSION: Many pen-and-paper-based observational methods have been developed. However, there are still many limitations of these methods. There is, therefore, a need to develop a new pen-and-paper-based observational method for assessing postural problems.

    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  4. Ng YG, Shamsul Bahri MT, Irwan Syah MY, Mori I, Hashim Z
    J Occup Health, 2014;55(5):405-14.
    PMID: 23892641
    OBJECTIVES: Production agriculture is commonly associated with high prevalence of ergonomic injuries, particularly during intensive manual labor and during harvesting. This paper intends to briefly describe an overview of oil palm plantation management highlighting the ergonomics problem each of the breakdown task analysis.

    METHODS: Although cross-sectional field visits were conducted in the current study, insight into past and present occupational safety and health concerns particularly regarding the ergonomics of oil palm plantations was further exploited. Besides discussion, video recordings were extensively used for ergonomics analysis.

    RESULTS: The unique commodity of oil palm plantations presents significantly different ergonomics risk factors for fresh fruit bunch (FFB) cutters during different stages of harvesting. Although the ergonomics risk factors remain the same for FFB collectors, the intensity of manual lifting increases significantly with the age of the oil palm trees-weight of FFB.

    CONCLUSIONS: There is urgent need to establish surveillance in order to determine the current prevalence of ergonomic injuries. Thereafter, ergonomics interventions that are holistic and comprehensive should be conducted and evaluated for their efficacy using approaches that are integrated, participatory and cost-effective.

    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  5. Hoe VC, Urquhart DM, Kelsall HL, Sim MR
    PMID: 22895977 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008570.pub2
    BACKGROUND: Work-related upper limb and neck musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are one of the most common occupational disorders around the world. Although ergonomic design and training are likely to reduce the risk of workers developing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs, the evidence is unclear.

    OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of workplace ergonomic design or training interventions, or both, for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs in adults.

    SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group Database and Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register to July 2010, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health database, and International Occupational Safety and Health Information Centre database to November 2010.

    SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ergonomic workplace interventions for preventing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs. We included only studies with a baseline prevalence of MSDs of the upper limb or neck, or both, of less than 25%.

    DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We included studies with relevant data that we judged to be sufficiently homogeneous regarding the intervention and outcome in the meta-analysis. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach.

    MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs (2397 workers). Eleven studies were conducted in an office environment and two in a healthcare setting. We judged one study to have a low risk of bias. The 13 studies evaluated effectiveness of ergonomic equipment, supplementary breaks or reduced work hours, ergonomic training, a combination of ergonomic training and equipment, and patient lifting interventions for preventing work-related MSDs of the upper limb and neck in adults.Overall, there was moderate-quality evidence that arm support with alternative mouse reduced the incidence of neck/shoulder disorders (risk ratio (RR) 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.99) but not the incidence of right upper limb MSDs (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.66); and low-quality evidence that this intervention reduced neck/shoulder discomfort (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.41; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.12) and right upper limb discomfort (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.63 to -0.06).There was also moderate-quality evidence that the incidence of neck/shoulder and right upper limb disorders were not reduced when comparing alternative mouse and conventional mouse (neck/shoulder RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.19 to 2.00; right upper limb RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.72), arm support and no arm support with conventional mouse (neck/shoulder RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.24; right upper limb RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.51 to 2.29), and alternative mouse with arm support and conventional mouse with arm support (neck/shoulder RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.12; right upper limb RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.36).There was low-quality evidence that using an alternative mouse with arm support compared to conventional mouse with arm support reduced neck/shoulder discomfort (SMD -0.39; 95% CI -0.67 to -0.10). There was low- to very low-quality evidence that other interventions were not effective in reducing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs in adults.

    AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate-quality evidence to suggest that the use of arm support with alternative mouse may reduce the incidence of neck/shoulder MSDs, but not right upper limb MSDs. Moreover, we found moderate-quality evidence to suggest that the incidence of neck/shoulder and right upper limb MSDs is not reduced when comparing alternative and conventional mouse with and without arm support. However, given there were multiple comparisons made involving a number of interventions and outcomes, high-quality evidence is needed to determine the effectiveness of these interventions clearly. While we found very-low- to low-quality evidence to suggest that other ergonomic interventions do not prevent work-related MSDs of the upper limb and neck, this was limited by the paucity and heterogeneity of available studies. This review highlights the need for high-quality RCTs examining the prevention of MSDs of the upper limb and neck.

    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  6. Sen A, Richardson S
    J Hum Ergol (Tokyo), 2007 Dec;36(2):45-50.
    PMID: 18572794
    Personal computers are one of the commonest office tools in Malaysia today. Their usage, even for three hours per day, leads to a health risk of developing Occupational Overuse Syndrome (OOS), Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS), low back pain, tension headaches and psychosocial stress. The study was conducted to investigate how a multiethnic society in Malaysia is coping with these problems that are increasing at a phenomenal rate in the west. This study investigated computer usage, awareness of ergonomic modifications of computer furniture and peripherals, symptoms of CVS and risk of developing OOS. A cross-sectional questionnaire study of 136 computer users was conducted on a sample population of university students and office staff. A 'Modified Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) for office work' technique was used for evaluation of OOS. The prevalence of CVS was surveyed incorporating a 10-point scoring system for each of its various symptoms. It was found that many were using standard keyboard and mouse without any ergonomic modifications. Around 50% of those with some low back pain did not have an adjustable backrest. Many users had higher RULA scores of the wrist and neck suggesting increased risk of developing OOS, which needed further intervention. Many (64%) were using refractive corrections and still had high scores of CVS commonly including eye fatigue, headache and burning sensation. The increase of CVS scores (suggesting more subjective symptoms) correlated with increase in computer usage spells. It was concluded that further onsite studies are needed, to follow up this survey to decrease the risks of developing CVS and OOS amongst young computer users.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods
  7. Radin Umar RZ, Sommerich CM, Lavender SA, Sanders E, Evans KD
    Ergonomics, 2018 Sep;61(9):1173-1186.
    PMID: 29757713 DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2018.1475016
    Sound workplace ergonomics and safety-related interventions may be resisted by employees, and this may be detrimental to multiple stakeholders. Understanding fundamental aspects of decision-making, behavioural change, and learning cycles may provide insights into pathways influencing employees' acceptance of interventions. This manuscript reviews published literature on thinking processes and other topics relevant to decision making and incorporates the findings into two new conceptual frameworks of the workplace change adoption process. Such frameworks are useful for thinking about adoption in different ways and testing changes to traditional intervention implementation processes. Moving forward, it is recommended that future research focuses on systematic exploration of implementation process activities that integrate principles from the research literature on sense-making, decision-making, and learning processes. Such exploration may provide the groundwork for development of specific implementation strategies that are theoretically grounded and provide a revised understanding of how successful intervention adoption processes work. Practitioner summary: Adoption and acceptance of workplace changes may be facilitated through sound implementation strategies. This manuscript explores several principles of sense-making and decision-making processes that can potentially be used by industrial practitioners to inform the design and development of implementation strategies for interventions that improve workplace ergonomics and safety.

    ABBREVIATIONS:  Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs); National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA); Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  8. Hoe VC, Urquhart DM, Kelsall HL, Zamri EN, Sim MR
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018 10 23;10:CD008570.
    PMID: 30350850 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008570.pub3
    BACKGROUND: Work-related upper limb and neck musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are one of the most common occupational disorders worldwide. Studies have shown that the percentage of office workers that suffer from MSDs ranges from 20 to 60 per cent. The direct and indirect costs of work-related upper limb MSDs have been reported to be high in Europe, Australia, and the United States. Although ergonomic interventions are likely to reduce the risk of office workers developing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs, the evidence is unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was last published in 2012.

    OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of physical, cognitive and organisational ergonomic interventions, or combinations of those interventions for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs among office workers.

    SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), SPORTDiscus, Embase, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health database, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, to 10 October 2018.

    SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ergonomic interventions for preventing work-related upper limb or neck MSDs (or both) among office workers. We only included studies where the baseline prevalence of MSDs of the upper limb or neck, or both, was less than 25%.

    DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We included studies with relevant data that we judged to be sufficiently homogeneous regarding the interventions and outcomes in the meta-analysis. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach.

    MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs (2165 workers). We judged one study to have a low risk of bias and the remaining 14 studies to have a high risk of bias due to small numbers of participants and the potential for selection bias.Physical ergonomic interventionsThere is inconsistent evidence for arm supports and alternative computer mouse designs. There is moderate-quality evidence that an arm support with an alternative computer mouse (two studies) reduced the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs (risk ratio (RR) 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.99), but not the incidence of right upper limb MSDs (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.66); and low-quality evidence that this intervention reduced neck or shoulder discomfort (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.41; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.12) and right upper limb discomfort (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.63 to -0.06).There is moderate-quality evidence that the incidence of neck or shoulder and right upper limb disorders were not considerably reduced when comparing an alternative computer mouse and a conventional mouse (two studies; neck or shoulder: RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.19 to 2.00; right upper limb: RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.72), and also when comparing an arm support with a conventional mouse and a conventional mouse alone (two studies) (neck or shoulder: RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.12 to 6.98; right upper limb: RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.96).Workstation adjustment (one study) and sit-stand desks (one study) did not have an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort, compared to no intervention.Organisational ergonomic interventionsThere is very low-quality evidence that supplementary breaks (two studies) reduce discomfort of the neck (MD -0.25; 95% CI -0.40 to -0.11), right shoulder or upper arm (MD -0.33; 95% CI -0.46 to -0.19), and right forearm or wrist or hand (MD -0.18; 95% CI -0.29 to -0.08) among data entry workers.Training in ergonomic interventionsThere is low to very low-quality evidence in five studies that participatory and active training interventions may or may not prevent work-related MSDs of the upper limb or neck or both.Multifaceted ergonomic interventionsFor multifaceted interventions there is one study (very low-quality evidence) that showed no effect on any of the six upper limb pain outcomes measured in that study.

    AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found inconsistent evidence that the use of an arm support or an alternative mouse may or may not reduce the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs. For other physical ergonomic interventions there is no evidence of an effect. For organisational interventions, in the form of supplementary breaks, there is very low-quality evidence of an effect on upper limb discomfort. For training and multifaceted interventions there is no evidence of an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort. Further high-quality studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of these interventions among office workers.

    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  9. Khan SA, Chew KY
    PMID: 23547959 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-118
    Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are one of the main occupational health hazards affecting dental practitioners. This study was conducted to assess the prevalence of Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorder (WMSD) amongst dental students. Possible correlations with the working environment and ergonomics taught in Malaysian dental schools were also sought.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  10. Reddy SC, Low CK, Lim YP, Low LL, Mardina F, Nursaleha MP
    Nepal J Ophthalmol, 2013 Jul-Dec;5(2):161-8.
    PMID: 24172549 DOI: 10.3126/nepjoph.v5i2.8707
    INTRODUCTION: Computer vision syndrome (CVS) is a condition in which a person experiences one or more of eye symptoms as a result of prolonged working on a computer.
    OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of CVS symptoms, knowledge and practices of computer use in students studying in different universities in Malaysia, and to evaluate the association of various factors in computer use with the occurrence of symptoms.
    MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross sectional, questionnaire survey study, data was collected in college students regarding the demography, use of spectacles, duration of daily continuous use of computer, symptoms of CVS, preventive measures taken to reduce the symptoms, use of radiation filter on the computer screen, and lighting in the room.
    RESULTS: A total of 795 students, aged between 18 and 25 years, from five universities in Malaysia were surveyed. The prevalence of symptoms of CVS (one or more) was found to be 89.9%; the most disturbing symptom was headache (19.7%) followed by eye strain (16.4%). Students who used computer for more than 2 hours per day experienced significantly more symptoms of CVS (p=0.0001). Looking at far objects in-between the work was significantly (p=0.0008) associated with less frequency of CVS symptoms. The use of radiation filter on the screen (p=0.6777) did not help in reducing the CVS symptoms.
    CONCLUSION: Ninety percent of university students in Malaysia experienced symptoms related to CVS, which was seen more often in those who used computer for more than 2 hours continuously per day.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods
  11. Loo HS, Yeow PH
    Appl Ergon, 2015 Nov;51:383-91.
    PMID: 26154237 DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.007
    The research aims to address the physically loading task and quality and productivity problems in the brazing of coils of air-handler units. Eight operators participated in two intervention studies conducted in a factory in Malaysia to compare the status quo brazing with (1) the use of a new twin-brazing torch that replaced the single-brazing gun and (2) brazing in a sitting position. The outcome measures are related to quality, productivity, monetary costs, body postures and symptoms. After baseline, Interventions I and II were applied for 3 months respectively. The results show a 58.9% quality improvement, 140% productivity increase and 113 times ROI. There was also a reduction in poor work postures e.g. in the raising of the arms and shoulders; bending, twisting and extending of the neck; and bending of left and right wrists, and the back. This research can be replicated in other factories that share similar processes.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
  12. Rahman MN, Rani MR, Rohani JM
    Work, 2012;43(4):507-14.
    PMID: 22927603 DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-1404
    The aim of this study was to investigate the work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) among workers in wall plastering jobs within the construction industry.
    Matched MeSH terms: Human Engineering/methods*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (tengcl@gmail.com)

External Links