This article explores how effectively practitioners use Chile’s official tool to assess upper limbs injuries at work. We compared trained experts and non-experts using real-world exercises. Both groups had trouble identifying work tasks and rated risks differently. Experts achieved moderately higher overall performance scores (4.6 ± 0.7 vs. 4.1 ± 0.5, p < .05), but showed no significant difference in critical decision-making agreement with expert consensus (Mann–Whitney test, p > .05). These results suggest the problem may lie in the tool itself, not just in how people are trained. We recommend enhanced tool design, clearer instructions, and more practical examples to help users apply the tool consistently. Improving the tool’s structural design could make risk assessments more accurate and reliable in real workplaces.
BaoS.SpielholzP.HowardN.SilversteinB. (2009). Application of the Strain Index in multiple task jobs. Applied Ergonomics, 40(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.01.013
2.
CastellucciH. I.VivianiC.HernándezP.BravoG.MartínezM.IbacacheJ.BartschÁ. (2021). Developing countries and the use of ISO standard 11228-3 for risk management of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs (WRMSDs-ULs): The case of Chile. Applied Ergonomics, 96(June), Article 103483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103483
Diego-MasJ.-A.Alcaide-MarzalJ.Poveda-BautistaR. (2017). Errors using observational methods for ergonomics assessment in real practice. Human Factors, 59(8), 1173–1187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720817723496
5.
DrinkausP.SesekR.BloswickD. S.MannC.BernardT. (2005). Job level risk assessment using task level ACGIH hand activity level TLV scores: A pilot study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics: JOSE, 11(3), 263–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2005.11076648
6.
EliassonK.LindC. M.NymanT. (2019). Factors influencing ergonomists' use of observation-based risk-assessment tools. Work, 64(1), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-192972
7.
EliassonK.PalmP.NymanT.ForsmanM. (2017). Inter- and intra-observer reliability of risk assessment of repetitive work without an explicit method. Applied Ergonomics, 62, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.02.004
8.
GargA.MooreJ. S.KapelluschJ. M. (2017). The composite Strain index (COSI) and cumulative Strain index (CUSI): Methodologies for quantifying biomechanical stressors for complex tasks and job rotation using the revised strain index. Ergonomics, 60(8), 1033–1041. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2016.1246675
9.
HayesA. F.KrippendorffK. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664
10.
ILO Convention 187. (2011). Convention concerning the promotional framework for occupational safety and health (Convention No. 187). ILO. International Labour Organization. (2011).
11.
ISO. (2007). ISO 11228-3. Ergonomics - manual handling - Part 3: Handling of low loads at high frequency. ISO.
12.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/30.3.411
13.
KrippendorffK. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
14.
Ministerio de Salud. (2012).Norma Técnica de Identificación y Evaluación de Factores de Riesgo Asociados a Trastornos Musculoesqueléticos Relacionados al Trabajo (TMERT) de Extremidades Superiores. MINSAL. Available: chrome-.extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.ssmso.cl/tmpArchivos/comunicaciones/CAIF/NORMATIVAS_Y_REGLAMENTOS/NORMA_TECNICA_DE_INDENTIFICACION_Y_EVALUACION_DE_FACTORES_DE_RIESGOS_DE_TRASTORNOS_MUSCULOESQUELETICOS_RELACIONADOS_AL_TRABAJO_%28TMERT%29.pdf.
15.
Ministerio de Salud. (2024). Versión 2 del Protocolo de vigilancia ocupacional por exposición a factores de riesgo de Trastornos musculoesqueléticos del Ministerio de Salud. MINSAL. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.minsal.cl/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PROTOCOLO-DE-VIGILANCIA-OCUPACIONAL-POR-EXPOSICION-A-FACTORES-DE-RIESGO-DE-TRASTORNOS-MUSCULOESQUELETICOS-FINAL_V2.pdf.
16.
NymanT.RhénI.-M.JohanssonP. J.EliassonK.KjellbergK.LindbergP.FanX.ForsmanM. (2023). Reliability and validity of six selected observational methods for risk assessment of hand intensive and repetitive work. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(8), 5505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20085505
17.
OakmanJ.WealeV.KinsmanN.NguyenH.StuckeyR. (2022). Workplace physical and psychosocial hazards: A systematic review of evidence informed hazard identification tools. Applied Ergonomics, 100, Article 103614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103614
18.
OlivS.GustafssonE.BalochA. N.HagbergM.SandénH. (2019). The Quick Exposure Check (QEC) --- Inter-rater reliability in total score and individual items. Applied Ergonomics, 76, 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.11.005
19.
O'ReillyH.Van EerdD. (2024). Including the ergonomist's voice in integrating MSD prevention and psychological health and safety: Challenges, tools, and considerations. Applied Ergonomics, 122, Article 104405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104405
20.
RhénI. M.ForsmanM. (2020). Inter- and intra-rater reliability of the OCRA checklist method in video-recorded manual work tasks. Applied Ergonomics, 84(September 2019), 103025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103025
21.
SchwartzA. H.AlbinT. J.GerberichS. G. (2019). Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the rapid entire body assessment (REBA) tool. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 71(March 2018), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.02.010
22.
Superintendencia de Seguridad Social. (2023). Estadísticas de Accidentabilidad 2022. Unidad de Estudios y Estadísticas, SUSESO.
23.
TakalaE. P.PehkonenI.ForsmanM.HanssonG. A.MathiassenS. E.NeumannW. P.SjøgaardG.VeierstedK. B.WestgaardR. H.WinkelJ. (2010). Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 36(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.2876
