The use of laboratory and participatory ergonomic research models to investigate working posture in industry
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Consensus on physical mechanisms linking work posture to discomfort and disorder risk has not been reached. The objective of this dissertation was to use a series of laboratory studies to identify measurements associated with discomfort and disorder risk in lower limb, back and neck/shoulder regions, and assess how these measurement outcomes differ between standing, seated and sit-standing postures. Participatory intervention methods were also used to investigate workplace factors that impact on posture selection and rotation. In the core set of investigations, healthy participants performed an industrially-modelled box-folding task over three 34-minute sessions in standing, seated and sit-standing postures (developed using a novel foot stand) while lower limb vascular parameters, trunk and upper limb muscular parameters, postural kinetics and discomfort were measured. Links between discomfort in various body regions and changes in the vascular, muscular and kinetic outcomes were investigated within and between postures. Investigation at a partner enterprise was conducted using 'participatory ergonomics' investigation methods and establishment of an "Ergonomics Team". Results show that during standing work, increases in blood volume and postural sway are associated with lower limb discomfort, and initially higher levels of shared activation between bilateral hip musculature are associated with higher levels of back discomfort. In comparison to standing, seated work leads to improved lower limb vascular and discomfort outcomes, but increases muscular demands and discomfort in the back and neck/shoulder regions. Also in comparison to standing, the sit-standing posture led to improved lower limb outcomes, with no significant differences in back and neck/shoulder outcomes. Together, findings reveal that each posture has positive and negative consequences. Data suggests that frequent (15-20min) rotation between postures may prevent onset of unwanted effects. Meanwhile, early investigations at the workplace revealed key policy, work organization and design issues that influenced the choice of appropriate laboratory methods and may affect knowledge uptake related to posture selection and rotation in the plant. As such, an integrated, participatory ergonomics approach may be optimal in ensuring that relevant laboratory methods are developed to produce usable knowledge for the workplace, and key knowledge translation strategies are in place for dissemination back to the workplace.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle