NIOSH Experiment

8/10/2019 NIOSH Experiment

1/20

aEXPERIMENT SCORE SHEET

Report Attribute Max Pts Rubrics Pts

Problem 10 Problem is relevant to the experiment

Problem statement is clearly stated

Research Method 15 Procedure was described in detail

Participant profile was described

Number of participants is enough

Materials used were discussed

Results 25 Appropriate graphs were used

Graphs and tables have labels

Statistical tool used is appropriate

Descriptive statistics were presented

Graphs and tables were discussed in the text

No grammatical errors

Causes of the results obtained were mentioned

Discussion 30 Results obtained were related to past literature

Unexpected results and errors obtained were explained

Literature were cited correctly

Discussion was related to the problem of the experiment

No grammatical errors

Recommendations were given to improve the causes of the problem

Conclusion 10 Conclusions address the problem statement

Recommendations were given to improve the experiment

Bibliography 5 At least 5 relevant journal articles were cited

APA style was used to format bibliography

Bibliography was written correctly

Appendix 5 Appendices are appropriately labeled

Raw data are placed in the appendix

TOTAL SCORE


2/20

In Partial Fulfilment for

LBYIMEB

Experiment No. 5

NIOSH Lifting Equation

Submitted to:

Ms. Jazmin Tangsoc

Submitted by:

Maria Bernadette Aranguren

Benedict Dave Depamaylo

A R Timogtimog

August 19, 2014


3/20

I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Musculoskeletal disorders, especially back pains, that are attributed to manual lifting is

one of the leading occupational and health issue in the industries (Waters, Pultz-Anderson &

Garg 1994).

II. OBJECTIVES OF THE EXPERIMENT

The general goals of this experiment are:

1. To evaluate the lifting postures of the subjects using the National Institute of

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) lifting equation

2. To determine the possible musculoskeletal disorders of the subjects using Nordic

Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ)

3. To determine it the lifting index of the respondents are less than 1 for the origin and

the destination

4. To suggest feasible solutions to prevent musculoskeletal disorders due to improper

posture or poor of equipment

III. METHODOLOGY

A. Materials

The experiment was done using a video camera, tape measure and Nordic

Musculoskeletal Questionnaires (NMQs). The video camera was used in order to

document the posture and body movements of the respondents while lifting and the tape

measure was used to measure the distances and dimensions needed to compute the lifting

index of each subject. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire is a standardized

questionnaire that is used as a tool to analyze musculoskeletal symptoms in an

occupational health context (Kuorinka et al, 1987). The researchers used the

questionnaires in order to easily determine the body pains that the subjects are currently

having because of manual handling. An example of the NMQ can be seen at Appendix B.

B. Procedure and Methodology

a. Locale of the Experiment


4/20

The experiment was conducted at Agno Food Place at Agno Street, Malate, Manila

and at Motolite Branch at United Nations Avenue, Manila. All data were gathered on

August 12, 2014.

b. Distribution of task

All of the researchers were present during the day of the data gathering. One of the

researchers brought all of the needed equipment for the experiment (video camera, tape

measure and the NMQs). The other two researchers recorded the video and measured the

distances and dimensions needed for the experiment.

c. Collection of Data

All of the data were recorded within a day, August 12, 2014. There are five (5)

subjects in this experiment. Three subjects (3) are workers in Agno Food Place and two

(2) are workers from Motolite. The lifting job of the workers in Agno Food Place

involves boxes of beverages such mineral water and juices while lifting of the workers in

Motolite involves batteries of vehicles that they are selling. All of the subjects are male

with an age range of 2140 years old.

First, the respondents were asked to answer the NQM in order for the researchers toknow what musculoskeletal disorders or body pains they experiencing that are related to

their lifting task. The researchers also asked the workers for the duration and the

frequency of their lifting job. Then, the workers were documented via video while doing

their lifting tasks in order for the researchers to observe and assess the posture and

movement of the workers while lifting. Lastly, the researchers measured the horizontal

and vertical location for the origin and destination and the distance of lift for each

worker.


5/20

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Body Part Yes No

Left Right Both 7 days 12 months

Shoulder 1 4

Elbows 1 1 1 4

Wrists/Hands 5

Yes No

Yes only 7 days 12 months

Neck 1 4

Upper back 3 1 1 1

Low back 2 3

Hips/Thighs

(one or both)

5

Knees

(one or both)

1 1 3

Ankle/Feet

(one or both)

1 4

From the videos and also from the actual measurements the researchers conducted on August 12,

214, the researchers have used the NIOSH worksheet to get the NIOSH lifting indices of the five workers

observed for this experiment (See Appendix A).

Below is the summary of the lifting indices of the five workers and also the corresponding stress

level. Criteria on how to determine the stress level are from the NIOSH handout (Waters, Pultz-

Anderson & Garg 1994).

WorkerNIOSH Lifting Index Stress Level

Origin Destination Origin Destination

Agno Service Crew 1 1.0733 20.2259 Stress Level

Agno Service Crew 2 .0647 20.1062 Stress Level


6/20

Agno Service Crew 3 .0733 20.2259 Stress Level

Motolite Crew 1 0.2034 0.1286 Stress Level

Motolite Crew 2 0.2260 0.1357 Stress Level

Based From our calculations, the Agno Service Crew got the highest NIOSH lifting index of

more than 20 at the destination. This is due to the vertical distance of the load to the ground and also the

way they handle the load. As we have the observed, the crew carry the load by resting it on their right

shoulder. This is very dangerous for they are putting so much load to their right shoulder and also, the

researchers have observed that the crew puts down the load in a very low ground/ place and this is

believed to cause lower back pains.

The motolite crew however, have less than one lifting index which is good. The researchers also

observed that the motolite crew only carry small loads individually and carry big and heavy loads by

pairs. This is a good practice because the stress experienced by a crew from heavy loads are only half of

what the load actually would give them if they carry it individually.

V. IMPROVEMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

From the results the researchers got, we can say that some of the workers, specifically

the Agno service crew need help or improvements to their lifting task.

We cannot change the weight of their load because it is already on uniform boxes and

dividing the load would mean opening the box and dividing the water bottles inside into batches.

This would consume s much effort and time that it would not help at all.

One recommendation we could give to them is to acquire a cart high enough to lessen the

height in which the workers go down to place the boxes down on the ground. This will also make

their travel distance shorter because this will only require them to lift the boxes from the storage

to the cart and from the cart to the stall.

Although their lifting task is not that frequent, it would also be helpful of they use an on-

body personal lift assist device (PLAD).


7/20

Based on a journal article that talked about how this mechanism help the workers who do

lifting jobs, there was a significant difference in local muscular fatigue when workers used PLAD and

when they did not. Also, there was a decrease of 57% in endurance time for those who did not use the

PLAD(Lotz, Agnew, Godwin & Stevenson, 2009). These results imply that with the use of a PLAD,

workers will experience less fatigue and more endurance during their lifting tasks.

The researchers also observed that the workers tend to stoop when placing the load down which

is said to be the 'natural' way people put down loads (Authier et al. ,1996). This might be changed or

improved by lifting training programs although a study suggests that there is only little evidence that

support the effectiveness of these training programs (Straker, 2003). Despite this, the admin should still

try this to improve their workers health.

VI. CONCLUSION


8/20

VII. REFERENCES

JOURNALS

Authier, M.,Lortie,M.,Gagnon ,M.,1996. Manual handling techniques: comparing novices and

experts. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 17,419429 .

Kuorinka, I., Jonsson, B., Kilbom, A., Vinterberg, H., Bieringsorensen, F., Andersson, G., &

Jorgensen, K. (1987). Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of

musculoskeletal symptoms. Applied Ergonomics, 18(3), 233-237. doi:10.1016/0003-

6870(87)90010-X.

Lotz, C., Agnew, M., Godwin, A., & Stevenson, J. (2009). The effect of an on-body personal lift

assist device (PLAD) on fatigue during a repetitive lifting task. Journal Of

Electromyography And Kinesiology, 19(2), 331--340.

Straker, L. (2003). Evidence to support using squat, semi-squat and stoop techniques to lift low-

lying objects.International Journal Of Industrial Ergonomics, 31(3), 149--160.

Waters, T. R., Pultz-Anderson, V., & Garg, A. (1994). Applications Manual for the Revised

NIOSH Lifting Equation (94-110). Cincinnati, OH: US Department of Health and

Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for

Occupational Safety and Health.

BOOKS


9/20


10/20


11/20

Step 3. Compute the Lifting Index

Origin Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 12.5 /11.6467 = 1.0733

Destination Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = _12.5 /.6214 = 20.2259

Job Analysis Worksheet

Department Agno Service Crew Job Description The crew deliver _

Job Title Service Crew 2 boxes of water to Agno stalls who_

Analyst's Name Benedict _ order from them _

Date August 12, 2014 _ _

Step 1. Measure and Record Task Variables

Object Weight

Hand LocationVert.

Dist.

Angle Freq Time

CouplingOrigin Destination Origin Dest.

Lifts/

minHRS

Avg Max H V H V D A A F C

12.5 kg12.5

kg

30.4

8 cm

138

cm

550c

m0 cm

138

cm0 0 .0333 1 Poor


12/20

Step 2. Determine Multipliers and Compute RWL

RWL = LC x HM x VM x DM x AM x FM x CM

Origin RWL = 23 x

x

x

x 1 x 1 x 0.9= 11.7399

Destination RWL = 23 x

x

x

x 1 x 1 x 0.9 =0.6217


Origin Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 12.5 / 11.7399 = 1.0647

Destination Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 12.5 / 0.6217 = 20.1062


13/20


Department Agno Service Crew Job Description The crew deliver _

Job Title Service Crew 3 boxes of water to Agno stalls who_

Analyst's Name Benedict _ order from them _

Date August 12, 2014 _ _


Object Weight

Hand LocationVert.

Dist.

Angle Freq Time


Lifts/

minHRS


12.5 kg12.5

kg

30.4

8 cm

140

cm

550c

m

0 cm140

cm

0 0 .0333 1 Poor



Origin RWL = 23 x

x

x

x 1 x 1 x 0.9 = 11.6467


x

x

x 1 x 1 x 0.9 = 0.6214


14/20


Origin Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 12.5 /11.6467 = 1.0733

Destination Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = _12.5 /.6214 = 20.2259


15/20


Department Motolite Crew Job Description The crew brings _

Job Title Motolite Crew 1 the 25 x 26.5 x 23 batteries weighing

Analyst's Name Benedict _ 3 kg each to the customers who _

Date August 12, 2014 _ order at their outlet _


Object Weight

Hand LocationVert.

Dist.

Angle Freq Time


Lifts/

minHRS


3 kg 3 kg30.4

8 cm

98

cm

15.24

cm

0 cm 98 cm 0 0 .0667 1 Fair



Origin RWL = 23 x

x

x

x 1 x 0.97 x 1 = 14.7520


x

x

x 1 x 0.97 x 0.95 = 23.3323


16/20


Origin Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 3 /14.7520 = 0.2034

Destination Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 3 /23.3323 = 0.1286


17/20


Department Motolite Crew Job Description The crew brings _

Job Title Motolite Crew 2 the 25 x 26.5 x 23 batteries weighing

Analyst's Name Benedict _ 3 kg each to the customers who _

Date August 12, 2014 _ order at their outlet _


Object Weight

Hand LocationVert.

Dist.

Angle Freq Time


Lifts/

minHRS


3 kg 3 kg30.4

8 cm

98

cm

15.24

cm

0 cm 98 cm 0 0 .0667 1 Poor



Origin RWL = 23 x

x

x

x 1 x 0.97 x 0.9 =13.2768


x

x

x 1 x 0.97 x 0.9 = 22.1042


18/20


Origin Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 3 / 13.2768 = 0.2260

Destination Lifting Index = Weight/RWL = 3 /22.1042 = 0.1357


19/20

E. Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ)


20/20

F. NIOSH Job Analysis Worksheet

Documents

NIOSH Experiment