Bao Stephen, Spielholz Peregrin, Howard Ninica, Silverstein Barbara
Safety and Health Assessment and Research for Prevention (SHARP) Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Olympia, WA 98504, USA.
Appl Ergon. 2009 Jan;40(1):56-68. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2008.01.013. Epub 2008 Mar 11.
Six different methods to calculate the Strain Index (SI) scores for jobs with multiple forces/tasks were developed. Exposure data of 733 subjects from 12 different worksites were used to calculate these SI scores. Results show that using different SI computation methods could result in different SI scores, hence different risk level classifications. However, some simpler methods generated SI scores were comparable to the more complicated composite SI method. Despite differences in the scores between the six different SI computation methods, Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients of 0.61-0.97 were found between the methods. With some confidence, ergonomic practitioners may use simpler methods, depending on their specificity requirement in job evaluations and available resources. Some SI computation methods may tend to over-estimate job risk levels, while others may tend to under-estimate job risk levels, due to different ways used in obtaining the various SI parameters and computations.
针对具有多种力量/任务的工作，开发了六种不同的计算应变指数（SI）分数的方法。使用来自12个不同工作场所的733名受试者的暴露数据来计算这些SI分数。结果表明，使用不同的SI计算方法可能会导致不同的SI分数，从而导致不同的风险水平分类。然而，一些更简单的方法生成的SI分数与更复杂的综合SI方法相当。尽管六种不同的SI计算方法之间的分数存在差异，但这些方法之间的斯皮尔曼等级相关系数在0.61至0.97之间。根据工作评估中的具体要求和可用资源，人体工程学从业者可以有一定信心地使用更简单的方法。由于获取各种SI参数和计算所使用的方式不同，一些SI计算方法可能倾向于高估工作风险水平，而其他方法可能倾向于低估工作风险水平。
