The construction of buildings is risky for workers’ musculoskeleton.
OBJECTIVE:
This study aims to calculate the significance of risk associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
METHOD:
600 workers from 20 construction sites were surveyed using the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (modified) and their performance was assessed at seven construction-tasks using RULA and REBA sheets. SPSS v. 26 and R programming were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS:
The mean value of workers’ age was 28.4381 years, with 8.8205 working months/year and 65USDs monthly earnings. Maximum reporting of body discomfort was by workers of window/door framing. Workers’ BMI (35–44 kg/m2) and break duration ( 15 minutes) prompted neck pain with OR 7.79 (95% CI 1.135-53.587) and OR 1.179 (95%CI 0.231–6.014) respectively. Bagging was dangerous for the ankle with OR 9.881 (95% CI 5.140–18.994), and window/door framing for feet with OR 2.057 (95% CI 1.196–3.539). The mean value of the RULA grand score ranged from 5.89 (lowest for ‘leveling’) to 9.25 (highest for ‘demolishing’), and the REBA sheet between 8–11 for all seven studied work-stages.
CONCLUSION:
Workers’ upper and lower limbs are affected by the work-stages they perform and the social lifestyle they live in. These findings from 600 workers are sufficient to be generalized for intervention.
RabbaniAAhmedS. Ergonomic analysis of material handling for a residential building at rourkela. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series A.2020 Dec; 101(4): 689-99.
2.
SadeghiFAsilianHBaratiL. Evaluation of the body posture of factory workers in Ahwaz Rolling Industry. Behbood Journal.2006; 6(1): 34-41.
3.
KumarS. Theories of musculoskeletal injury causation. Ergonomics.2001 Jan 1; 44(1): 17-47.
4.
HokmabadiRAFallahH. Ergonomic assessment of musculoskeletal disorders risk factors in construction workers by PATH Method. 2013; 5(1): 55-61.
5.
ChenJQiuJAhnC. Construction worker’s awkward posture recognition through supervised motion tensor decomposition. Automation in Construction.2017 May 1; 77: 67-81.
6.
StattinMJärvholmB. Occupation, work environment, and disability pension: a prospective study of construction workers. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health.2005 Mar; 33(2): 84-90.
7.
FeriandiYBudimanBRespatiTRomadhonaN. Risk of musculoskeletal injury in the back area on small industrial workers. InMedical Technology and Environmental Health2020 Aug 13 (pp. 180-183). CRC Press.
8.
SharanDRajkumarJSJoseJA. Workshop: How to Diagnose and Treat a Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorder. In Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018) Volume III: Musculoskeletal Disorders 20 2019 (pp. 1-6). Springer International Publishing.
9.
SloanKRobertsonJFergussonMSpratfordW. An evaluation of human stabbing performance to inform the standardisation of textile damage examinations: Do simulation trials correlate to reported stabbings? Forensic Science International.2020 Jul 1; 312: 110305.
10.
GonsalvesNJOgunseijuOOAkanmuAANnajiCA. Assessment of a passive wearable robot for reducing low back disorders during rebar work. J. Inf. Technol. Constr.2021 Nov 4; 26(2021): 936-52.
11.
AnwerSLiHAntwi-AfariMFWongAY. Associations between physical or psychosocial risk factors and work-related musculoskeletal disorders in construction workers based on literature in the last 20 years: A systematic review. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics.2021 May 1; 83: 103113.
12.
RoyD. Occupational health services and prevention of work-related musculoskeletal problems. In Handbook on Management and Employment Practices 2022 Feb 25 (pp. 547-571). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
13.
LiGBuckleP. Current techniques for assessing physical exposure to work-related musculoskeletal risks, with emphasis on posture-based methods. Ergonomics.1999 May 1; 42(5): 674-95.
14.
McAtamneyLCorlettEN. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Applied Ergonomics.1993 Apr 1; 24(2): 91-9.
15.
ManghisiVMUvaAEFiorentinoMBevilacquaVTrottaGFMonnoG. Real time RULA assessment using Kinect v2 sensor. Applied Ergonomics.2017 Nov 1; 65: 481-91.
DawsonAPSteeleEJHodgesPWStewartS. Development and test–retest reliability of an extended version of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ-E): a screening instrument for musculoskeletal pain. The Journal of Pain.2009 May 1; 10(5): 517-26.
18.
PughJDGelderLWilliamsAMTwiggDEWilkinsonAMBlazevichAJ. Validity and reliability of an online extended version of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ-E2) to measure nurses’ fitness. Journal of Clinical Nursing.2015 Dec; 24(23-24): 3550-63.
19.
MotamedzadeMAshuriMRGolmohammadiRMahjubH. Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment outputs from rapid entire body assessment and quick exposure check in an engine oil company.
20.
TalapatraSParvezMSSahaPKibriaMG. Assessing the impact of critical risk factors on the development of musculoskeletal disorders: a structural equation modelling approach. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science.2024 May 3; 25(3): 343-68.
21.
McCambridgeJWittonJElbourneDR. Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: new concepts are needed to study research participation effects. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.2014 Mar 1; 67(3): 267-77.
22.
BrazilCKPottorffTAMillerMRysMJ. Using the rapid upper limb assessment to examine the effect of the new hotel housekeeping California standard. Applied Ergonomics.2023 Jan 1; 106: 103868.
23.
MorkenTMagerøyNMoenBE. Physical activity is associated with a low prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders in the Royal Norwegian Navy: a cross sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2007 Dec; 8: 1-8.
24.
GrabaraMSadowska-KrȩpaE. Musculoskeletal disorders and the physical activity of territorial army soldiers during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2021 Dec; 22: 1-8.
25.
DerosBMDaruisDDKhamisNKMoşhamadDDaudSFAmdanSMAbd AzizRJamalN. Prevalence of work related musculoskeletal disorders SympČtoms among construction workers: a case study in MalayČsia. Iranian Journal of Public Health.2014; 43(Supple 3): 53-7.
26.
ParidaRRayPK. Study and analysis of occupational risk factors for ergonomic design of construction worksystems. Work.2012 Jan 1; 41(Supplement 1): 3788-94.
27.
RayPKParidaRSahaE. Status survey of occupational risk factors of manual material handling tasks at a construction site in India. Procedia Manufacturing.2015 Jan 1; 3: 6579-86.
28.
LopNSSallehNMZainFMSaidinMT. Ergonomic risk factors (ERF) and their association with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among Malaysian construction trade workers: concreters. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences.2019 Sep; 9(9): 1269-82.
29.
RyuJZhangLHaasCTAbdel-RahmanE. Motion data based construction worker training support tool: Case study of masonry work. InISARC. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction2018; (Vol. 35, pp. 1-6). IAARC Publications.
30.
KulkarniVSDevalkarRV. Postural analysis of building construction workers using ergonomics. International Journal of Construction Management.2019 Nov 2; 19(6): 464-71.
31.
GajbhiyeMTBanerjeeDNandiS. Postural evaluation of construction labourers engaged in excavation work using newly developed NERPA method and its validation through REBA and WERA methods. InAdvances in Mechanical Engineering: Select Proceedings of ICAME2020 Jun 30 (pp. 253-261). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
32.
YuYYangXLiHLuoXGuoHFangQ. Joint-level vision-based ergonomic assessment tool for construction workers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management.2019 May 1; 145(5): 04019025.
33.
DomingoJRDe PanoMTEcatDASanchezNACustodioBP. Risk assessment on Filipino construction workers. Procedia Manufacturing.2015 Jan 1; 3: 1854-60.
34.
ZhuZDuttaADaiF. Exoskeletons for manual material handling – A review and implication for construction applications. Automation in Construction.2021 Feb 1; 122: 103493.
35.
ParkHJJeongBY. Older male construction workers and sustainability: Work-related risk factors and health problems. Sustainability.2021 Nov 28; 13(23): 13179.
