Ezposure Assessment Strategies
In studies describing exposure-response relations in occupational ergonomics, as well as in intervention studies, exposure needs to be quantified as accurately and precisely as possible. When assessing physical work load (biomechanical exposure), direct technical measurements are commonly accepted to be superior to observations and self-reports of exposure with respect to the validity of the obtained data. Also, direct measurements are believed to be less inflicted by errors caused by the measurement instrument itself. A number of studies in ergonomics have documented or compared the properties of different measurement instruments e.g. (Spielholz, et al. 2001), while often with a limited selection of variables that rarely includes measures of exposure variation over time (Mathiassen 2006). However, using a valid instrument for assessing exposure does not per se guarantee a precise exposure estimate. Exposure varies within and between subjects, which leads to inherently uncertain estimates of exposure, in particular if sampling periods are short (Hoozemans, et al. 2001;Trask, et al. 2008) and/or few subjects are included (Mathiassen, et al. 2002). Short measurement periods (less than 60 minutes) and a limited population is a shortcoming of many ergonomic studies. Also, the allocation in time of measurement efforts is important to the precision of the outcome; thus, consecutive sampling of muscle activity in the upper trapezius has proven to be inefficient compared to sampling at fixed intervals (Mathiassen, et al. 2003). Thus, the size of the data set, the allocation of measurement efforts, and uncertainty originating in the measurement instrument per se, all influence the precision of an exposure estimate and hence need to be considered when designing exposure assessment strategies and interpreting the resulting data. Exposure modelling, i.e. estimation of exposure using valid determinants (Loomis and Kromhout 2004), has been used in a number of studies aiming at achieving correct exposure data at a low cost. While this is a developing approach in ergonomics, some studies have shown discouraging results of attempts to improve job exposure estimation by using task records as a determinant instead of the occupational title, known to be a very weak exposure determinant (Svendsen, et al. 2005). Strategies for assessing ergonomics exposures that adequately encompass information about exposure variability and exposure determinants and utilize it for designing and interpreting studies are a developing field of research. It has strong bearings on both ergonomics research and practice. The aim of this symposium is to discuss recent findings related to exposure assessment strategies and to stimulate further development in this important area within the field of ergonomics.
Jens Wahlstr(o)m Svend Erik Mathiassen
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Ume(a) University Hospital, Sweden Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of G(a)vle, G(a)vle, Sweden
国际会议
17th World Congress on Ergonomics(第十七届国际人类工效学大会)
北京
英文
1-2
2009-08-09（万方平台首次上网日期，不代表论文的发表时间）