•Ergonomic risk assessment in lashing and unlashing operations within container terminals.•Identification of workers hazardous activities within container terminals.•Process mapping and task analysis ...to prevent operators’ musculoskeletal disorders.•Simulation coupled with ergonomic methods and analytical hierarchy process.•Analytical Hierarchy Process as decision making methodology for operations ranking and priority of interventions.
Tasks and procedures involving lashing/unlashing operators have evident ergonomic criticalities but looking at the scientific background and on actual regulations there is a lack of attention toward procedures for a full ergonomic risk assessment. There are no scientific articles, no normative and standards that report ergonomic assessments for lashing and unlashing operations. According to this research gap, the proposed research seeks to contribute at different levels: carrying out a context analysis on how lashing and unlashing operations are carried out; identifying tools and methodologies that can support a comprehensive ergonomic analysis; combining the elements mentioned above in a risks assessment framework for ergonomic evaluation and prioritization. While pursuing such goals, the authors came up with a risk assessment framework based on simulation coupled with ergonomic methods and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). An application of the framework has been conducted in an Italian container terminal in 2021. First, processes and tasks have been analyzed to develop a simulation model capable of reproducing the evolution over the time of the real system. As next step, the ergonomic issues related to lashing/unlashing operations have been identified by applying the ergonomic methods through the simulation model. Finally, AHP has been used to rank, in an analytical way, critical ergonomic operations and to establish priority of interventions. The identification of critical ergonomic issues along with their analytical prioritization provide operations management as well as normative and standard makers with meaningful inputs towards greater standardization of procedures, based on ergonomic factors, in container terminal sector.
Para realizar las evaluaciones de los modelos y métodos ergonómicos y saber cuál o cuáles aplicar son las interrogantes más comunes, por lo cual la presente investigación tiene como objetivo evaluar ...distintos modelos y métodos para conocer los factores claves de mejoras en los puestos de trabajo. Se realizó una revisión bibliográfica siendo desde el punto de vista metodológico un estudio de carácter descriptivo. Se determinó que los métodos aplicados evalúan los esfuerzos en función de las posturas que determinan los trastornos musculo-esqueléticos de manera general indicando solamente los niveles de riesgos sin considerar acciones de cambio, y en cuanto a los modelos, estos se enfocan hacia la seguridad, la calidad y la productividad laboral para incrementar la efectividad de las mejoras. Finalmente, se presenta un modelo holístico que sintetiza las variables claves para evaluaciones y acciones de mejora en el sector básico de la industria del aluminio primario.
Palabras Clave: Evaluación, Métodos Ergonómicos, Puestos de Trabajo, Trastornos Musculo-Esqueléticos.
Referencias
1Spanish Ergonomics Association, «AEE,» 2019. En línea. Available: http://ergonomos.es/ergonomia.php#:~:-text=According to the Spanish Association of, effectiveness%2C safety and well-being.
2J. A. Diego-Mas, «Ergonautas. Universidad Politécnica de Valencia,» 2015. En línea. Available: https://www.ergonautas. upv.es/metodos/reba/reba-ayuda.php.
3Organización Mundial de la Salud, «Organización Mundial de la Salud,» 08 Febrero 2021. En línea. Available: https://www.who.int/es/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/musculoskeletal-conditions.
4M. García Gómez y R. Castañeda López, «Enfermedades Declaradas en Hombres y Mujeres en España en 2004.,» Revista Española de Salud Pública, nº 4, pp. 361-375, 2006.
5Instituto Nacional de Seguridad e Higiene en el Trabajo (INSHT), «Posturas de trabajo: evaluación del riesgo,» España, 2015.
6CENEA, «CENEA La ergonomía laboral del s.XXI,» 30 Octubre 2020. En línea. Available: https://www.cenea.eu/metodo-evaluacion-ergonomica-rula-conoces-los-riesgos-de-una-incorrecta-aplicacion/.
7Osalan. Instituto Vasco de Seguridad y Salud Laborales, «Análisis bibliográfico y comparación de metodologías existentes a nivel internacional,» 2012.
8S. Nogareda Cuixart y I. Dalmau Pons, «NTP 452: Evaluación de las condiciones de trabajo: carga postural,» Madrid, 1995.
9B. M. Olvera Morán y M. I. Samaniego Zamora, «El desarrollo ergonómico a través de posturas forzadas en trabajo rutinario,» Polo del Conocimiento, vol. 5, nº 9, 2020.
10Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, «Ergonautas,» 2015. En línea. Available: https://www.ergonautas.upv.es/metodos-evaluacion-ergonomica.html.
11M. C. Barba Morán , Campos de Aplicación de la Pericial Ergonómica, Madrid: Tébar S.L., 2007.
12M. G. Obregón Sánchez, Métodos Ergonómicos, México: Grupo Editorial Patria, 2016.
13I. Sánchez Barragán, «Prevencionar,» 30 Noviembre 2017. En línea. Available: https://prevencionar.com/2017/11/30/evaluacion-la-carga-fisica-postural-owas-rula-reba/#:~:text=Los%20m%C3%A9todos%20OWAS%2C%20RULA%20y,evaluar%20la%20carga%20f%C3%ADsica%20postural.&text=La%20evaluaci%-C3%B3n%20de%20esos%20factores,m%C3%A9todo%20OCRA%20(m.
14N. Stanton, A. Hedge, K. Brookhuis, E. Salas y H. Hendrick, Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), Florida: RC PRESS, 2004.
15M. C. Escalante, M. Nuñez Bottini y H. Izquierdo Ojeda, «Evaluación ergonómica en la producción. Caso de estudio: Sector Aluminio, Estado Bolívar. Venezuela,» Actualidad y Nuevas Tendencias, vol. VI, nº 21, pp. 73-90, 2018.
16S. Asensio Cuesta, J. Bastante Ceca y J. A. Diego Más, Métodos de Evaluación Ergonómica Para el Análisis Postural, Madrid: Paraninfo, 2012.
17A. Anaya Velasco, «Modelo de Salud y Seguridad en el Trabajo con Gestión Integral para la Sustentabilidad de las organizaciones (SSeTGIS),» Ciencia & trabajo, vol. 19, nº 59, 2017.
18Y. Rodríguez Ruíz, E. Pérez Mergarejo y R. Montero Martinez, «Modelo de Madurez de Ergonomía para Empresas (MMEE),» El Hombre y la Máquina, nº 40, pp. 22-30, 2012.
19H. Kalkis y Z. Roja, «Modelo estratégico para la implementación de la ergonomía en la gestión de operaciones,» Revista de Ergonomía, vol. 6, 01 Enero 2016.
20W. Rostykus y R. Barker, «EHSToday,» 04 Mayo 2018. En línea. Available: https://www.ehstoday.com/health/article/21919619/iso-45001-a-model-for-managing-workplace-ergonomics.
21F. G. Arias, El Proyecto de Investigación, Sexta ed., Caracas: Episteme, 2016.
22J. B. Dominguez Granda, Manual de Metodología de la Investigación Científica, Tercera ed., Chimbote: Universidad Católica Los Ángeles de Chimbote, 2015.
Aim was to analyze working capacities of visually impaired persons by means of complex electrophysiological and ophthalmic ergonomics eye examination.
Materials and methods. Standard clinical ...ophthalmologic examination (visual acuity measurement, refractometry, biomicroscopy, ophthalmoscopy) as well as electrophysiological (electrooculography, electrical sensitivity of the eye, critical flicker fusion frequency) and ophthalmic ergonomics tests (accommodation measurement, professional testing using automated system «Proftest-1») were performed.
Results. Complex electrophysiological and ophthalmic ergonomics tests were performed in 20 visually impaired persons. Their results revealed direct correlation between electrophysiological and ophthalmic ergonomics indices.
Conclusion. Working capacities of visually impaired persons can be assessed reliably using complex electrophysiological and ophthalmic ergonomics eye examination only.
From our perspective, to work as an ergonomist for the design of working systems, not only means to analyse the activity but also means to facilitate its inclusion in the design process through ...proposals which might result in changes in the monitoring of the project and in the design activities. In this article, we will argue that different ways can be chosen to think and define the status and the stakes of the analysis of workers’ activity for the design process. Our purpose is to start to clarify and classify these different ways from our own and probably limited perspective. Through literature review and our own experience, we identify three main positions: the ergonomist can try to anticipate the workers’ activity in their working situations. He (she) can support the design of flexible devices which direct (support and control) the action in situ. He (she) can try to catch and articulate in a same process the development of both the situation and the activity. These different positions result in different understanding of the design process mainly in its temporal dimension. They also result in different ways of building the social relations and the place of the ergonomist within the design project.
Human Factors and Ergonomic Methods Jacko, Julie A; Yi, Ji Soo; Sainfort, François ...
Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics,
2012, 2012-03-07
Book Chapter
This chapter contains sections titled:
Introduction
HF/E Research Process
Types of Methods and Approaches
Conclusions
Appendix: Exemplary Studies of HF/E Methodologies
References
Redesigned use, a designer's dilemma KANIS, H.; WENDEL, I. E. M.
Ergonomics,
04/1990, Letnik:
33, Številka:
4
Journal Article, Conference Proceeding
Recenzirano
In this study the marketing of a new design for a current product turns out to be problematic. The product concerned is a one-serve coffeecreamer cup. The novelty of the design concerns the method of ...use: the new method design is meant to prevent the frequently experienced spilling of coffee milk. However, existing user habits appear to be strongly adhered to, with the result that familiar actions spoil the benefits aimed at. The less familiar people are with the use of coffeecreamer cups the more receptive they seem to be to the new design. These effects appear to be completely overlooked by the designers. Thus the redesign unintentionally addresses a group of users that is not particularly interesting from a marketing point of view. Here conflicting requirements boil down to a designer's dilemma: close resemblance of a new design to existing products can completely ruin improvements in product-use, whilst dissimilarity with the products that are intended to be replaced may heavily frustrate a successful introduction on the market. Radical steps in redesign may be realizable here only if accompanied by due attention in the marketing process to the new features, in order to dissociate users from fixed habits.
In complexity science, the many models thinking philosophy argues for a multi-method approach to complex problems. This article investigates whether the use of multiple systems ergonomics methods to ...examine the same problem is useful, or whether using different approaches creates incompatible analyses. Five systems ergonomics analyses of road trauma are examined and their key insights extracted. The extent to which these insights are compatible with one another and can be integrated when attempting to reduce road trauma is assessed. The findings indicate that applying several systems ergonomics methods to the same problem is useful, as multiple insights are developed and deficiencies in one approach are countered by the others. Importantly, the case study demonstrates that the insights gained are compatible and support the development of holistic systems thinking-based interventions. In conclusion it is recommended that a many systems ergonomics model thinking approach be adopted by ergonomists working in complex problem spaces.
Practitioner Summary: Many model thinking uses multiple methods to understand complex problems. We explore whether this is beneficial in systems ergonomics. Five models of road trauma, developed using five systems ergonomics methods, are examined. The findings demonstrate that a many model systems ergonomics approach produces a diverse but complimentary set of insights.
Advances in virtual reality technology present new opportunities for human factors research in areas that are dangerous, difficult, or expensive to study in the real world. The authors developed a ...new pedestrian simulator using the HTC Vive head mounted display and Unity software. Pedestrian head position and orientation were tracked as participants attempted to safely cross a virtual signalized intersection (5.5 m). In 10% of 60 trials, a vehicle violated the traffic signal and in 10.84% of these trials, a collision between the vehicle and the pedestrian was observed. Approximately 11% of the participants experienced simulator sickness and withdrew from the study. Objective measures, including the average walking speed, indicate that participant behavior in VR matches published real world norms. Subjective responses indicate that the virtual environment was realistic and engaging. Overall, the study results confirm the effectiveness of the new virtual reality technology for research on full motion tasks.
•Advances in virtual reality technology present new opportunities for human factors research.•The HTC Vive head mounted display would be an effective tool for pedestrian behavior research on full motion tasks.•Subjective responses indicated that the virtual environment was realistic and engaging.•Objective measures indicated that participant behavior in VR matches previously published real world norms.
Our review addresses one of the most used, but debated, topics in Ergonomics: Situation Awareness (SA). We examine and elaborate upon key SA models. These models are divided into individual SA, team ...SA and systems SA categories. Despite, or perhaps because of, the debates surrounding SA it remains an enduring theme for research and practice in the domain of Ergonomics, now for over two decades. A contingent approach, which seeks to match different models of SA to different types of ergonomics problem, enables the differences between positions to be revealed and reconciled, and the practitioner guided towards optimum methodological solutions.
Practitioner Summary: Measuring SA in individuals, teams and systems has become a key objective in Ergonomics. One single approach to SA does not fit all problems encountered. This review shows the importance of considering all three types of models and achieving a match between them and the problem at hand.
Healthcare practitioners, patient safety leaders, educators and researchers increasingly recognise the value of human factors/ergonomics and make use of the discipline's person-centred models of ...sociotechnical systems. This paper first reviews one of the most widely used healthcare human factors systems models, the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model, and then introduces an extended model, 'SEIPS 2.0'. SEIPS 2.0 incorporates three novel concepts into the original model: configuration, engagement and adaptation. The concept of configuration highlights the dynamic, hierarchical and interactive properties of sociotechnical systems, making it possible to depict how health-related performance is shaped at 'a moment in time'. Engagement conveys that various individuals and teams can perform health-related activities separately and collaboratively. Engaged individuals often include patients, family caregivers and other non-professionals. Adaptation is introduced as a feedback mechanism that explains how dynamic systems evolve in planned and unplanned ways. Key implications and future directions for human factors research in healthcare are discussed.
Practitioner Summary: SEIPS 2.0 is a new human factors/ergonomics framework for studying and improving health and healthcare. It describes how sociotechnical systems shape health-related work done by professionals and non-professionals, independently and collaboratively. Work processes, in turn, shape patient, professional and organisational outcomes. Work systems and processes undergo planned and unplanned adaptations.
PDF
