Loading…
The burden of conveyor belt work in the canteen kitchen: A question of working height?
BACKGROUND: Working in forced postures and standing continuously can be classified as straining the musculoskeletal system. OBJECTIVE: Since such postures are frequently used in hospital canteen kitchens, we used kinematic analysis to determine the working postures of canteen kitchen staff. METHODS:...
Saved in:
Published in: | Work (Reading, Mass.) Mass.), 2022-01, Vol.73 (3), p.881-894 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | BACKGROUND:
Working in forced postures and standing continuously can be classified as straining the musculoskeletal system.
OBJECTIVE:
Since such postures are frequently used in hospital canteen kitchens, we used kinematic analysis to determine the working postures of canteen kitchen staff.
METHODS:
In this study, the daily work routine of 18 (11 w/7 m) workers of a hospital canteen kitchen (Frankfurt Main/Germany) aged 21–62 years (46±13 years) was examined by means of kinematic analysis (CULEA system; IFA; Sankt Augustin/Germany) and a detailed computerized analysis of the activities performed on-site. Angle values of the head and trunk were evaluated in accordance with ergonomic standards and presented using percentile values (P05-P95). The OWAS method was also employed to capture the proportions of standing, walking and sitting work.
RESULTS:
The kinematic posture analysis showed for all activities on the conveyor belt a tendency towards a dorsally inclined body position: trunk inclination (–7.5° to 0), thoracic spine inclination or a bending forward (–11.3° to 0°) and curvature of the back within the thoracic spine (–15.2° to 0°). In addition, >90% of the “activities on the belt” (46% of the daily working routine) were carried out standing.
CONCLUSION:
The activities on the conveyor belt were characterized by a tendency towards hyperextension of the trunk, possibly due to a too high working environment. Furthermore, an increased burden on body structures while standing can be concluded. From a primary prevention perspective, this increased standing load should be reduced by behavioral and relational prevention measures. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1051-9815 1875-9270 |
DOI: | 10.3233/WOR-205170 |