Factors influencing ergonomists' use of observation-based risk-assessment tools.
Kristina Eliasson, Carl Mikael Lind, Teresia Nyman
PMID 31450532WHAT IT FOUND
Swedish occupational health ergonomists, mostly physiotherapists, often assessed workplace risks reactively after injuries and relied on experience.
Few research-based observation tools were used, and interventions were rarely evaluated.
Key findings
01Assignments were often initiated after employees reported musculoskeletal problems or after clinical treatment.
02The Swedish Work Environment Authority provisions were used by all respondents, and ergonomists with additional ergonomics education used more observation tools; ease of use, ease of communication to the client, and being easy for the client to interpret were important attributes.
03Effects of risk-reducing measures were seldom evaluated; only in-house ergonomists reported systematic before-and-after evaluation using the same tools.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The analysed questionnaire sample was 70, or 28% of the 251 who opened the newsletter, so respondents may have been more interested in risk assessment than non-responders. Only 12 interviews were conducted, although they included in-house and external ergonomists from several sectors. The study was limited to Swedish occupational health ergonomists who were members of a physiotherapy association, so findings may not apply to other countries, professions or organisations. The questionnaire did not provide specific information about the content of additional ergonomics education, so it is unclear which educational features support tool use. The study describes ergonomists use of tools, not whether the tools improved worker health or reduced risk.
Declared interests
No conflicts of interest were reported. The study was supported by AFA Insurance and the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that observation-based risk-assessment tools are ineffective. The study reports how Swedish ergonomists used them, not whether they reduced musculoskeletal risk or improved patient outcomes.