Sala Emma, Cipriani Lorenzo, Bisioli Andrea, Paraggio Emilio, Tomasi Cesare, Apostoli Pietro, De Palma Giuseppe
Unit of Occupational Health, Occupational Hygiene, Toxicology and Prevention, University Hospital ASST Spedali Civili, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Unit of Occupational Health and Industrial Hygiene, Department of Medical Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Bioengineering (Basel). 2023 May 11;10(5):580. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering10050580.
Several methods with which to assess the risk of biomechanical overload of the upper limb are described in the literature.
We retrospectively analysed the results of the risk assessment of the biomechanical overload of the upper limb in multiple settings by comparing the application of the Washington State Standard, the threshold limit values (TLV) proposed by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), based on hand-activity levels (HAL) and normalised peak force (PF), the Occupational Repetitive Actions (OCRA) checklist, the Rapid Upper-Limb Assessment (RULA), and the Strain Index and Outil de Repérage et d'Evaluation des Gestes of INRS (Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité).
Overall, 771 workstations were analysed for a total of 2509 risk assessments. The absence of risk demonstrated for the Washington CZCL, used as the screening method, was in good agreement with the other methods, with the sole exception of the OCRA CL, which showed at-risk conditions in a higher percentage of workstations. Differences in the assessment of the frequency of actions were observed among the methods, while their assessments of strength appeared to be more uniform. However, the greatest discrepancies were observed in the assessment of posture.
The use of multiple assessment methods ensures a more adequate analysis of biomechanical risk, allowing researchers to investigate the factors and segments in which different methods show different specificities.
文献中描述了几种评估上肢生物力学过载风险的方法。
我们通过比较华盛顿州标准、美国政府工业卫生学家会议（ACGIH）基于手部活动水平（HAL）和标准化峰值力（PF）提出的阈限值（TLV）、职业重复动作（OCRA）检查表、快速上肢评估（RULA）以及法国国家科研与安全研究所（INRS）的应变指数和动作识别与评估工具（Outil de Repérage et d'Evaluation des Gestes）在多种场景下的应用，回顾性分析了上肢生物力学过载风险评估的结果。
总体而言，共分析了771个工作站，进行了总计2509次风险评估。用作筛查方法的华盛顿CZCL显示无风险，这与其他方法高度一致，唯一例外的是OCRA CL，该方法显示处于风险状态的工作站比例更高。各方法在动作频率评估上存在差异，而在力量评估上似乎更为一致。然而，在姿势评估中观察到的差异最大。
使用多种评估方法可确保对生物力学风险进行更充分的分析，使研究人员能够调查不同方法显示出不同特异性的因素和部位。
