Drinkaus Phillip, Sesek Richard, Bloswick Donald, Bernard Tom, Walton Bob, Joseph Brad, Reeve Gordon, Counts Joyce Hall
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9208, USA.
Work. 2003;21(2):165-72.
This paper compares the ergonomic risk assessment of a task for the upper extremities as determined by Rapid Upper Extremity Assessment (RULA) and the Strain Index (SI). The ergonomic risk to the upper extremities of 244 automotive assembly plant tasks were evaluated using RULA and SI. The outcomes of each tool were compared for each task. Results from this study provide practical insight into the methods used in each tool. This study compared only the ergonomic risk outputs from each tool; it does not pursue the question of which tool best predicts injury. The kappa score was 0.11, indicating little agreement between the outputs of the two tools. This is supported by the lack of monotonicity with a gamma score of 0.1. These results indicate that the risk assessment outcome of these two ergonomic assessment tools for the upper extremities do not agree.
本文比较了通过快速上肢评估(RULA)和应变指数(SI)确定的上肢任务的人体工程学风险评估。使用RULA和SI对244项汽车装配厂任务的上肢人体工程学风险进行了评估。对每项任务比较了两种工具的结果。本研究结果为每种工具所使用的方法提供了实际见解。本研究仅比较了两种工具的人体工程学风险输出;并未探讨哪种工具最能预测损伤的问题。kappa评分为0.11,表明两种工具的输出之间几乎没有一致性。伽马评分为0.1,缺乏单调性也支持了这一点。这些结果表明,这两种上肢人体工程学评估工具的风险评估结果不一致。