6 Langkah dalam melaksanakan Program Ergonomi ditempat Kerja adalah
- Management Commitment
Management sebagai pengambil keputusan harus memiliki komitmen dalam mendukung terlaksananya program Ergonomi dengan menyediakan segala kebutuhan dalam menerapkan program tersebut. Anda juga harus dapat menyakinkan ke managemen tentang betapa pentingnya program ini dilakukan.
Contoh: Kebijakan Perusahaan; Membuat Prosedur; Membuat proposal tentang program ergonomi.
- Hazard Information & Reporting
Anda harus membuat system yang mempermudah pekerja dalam pelaporkan adanya tanda atau gejala MSD, ini berguna untuk melakukan respon yang tepat dan cepat.
Contoh: Pengembangan sistem database antara Medical Operator (RS/Clinic Perusahaan dengan SHE personal (Industrial Hygiene). Beberapa software yang bisa dipergunakan adalah Microsoft Access; Medgate; Ellipse; dsb
- Assessment
Setelah informasi mengenai MSD didapat/dilaporkan maka selanjutnya dilakukan analisa mengenai permasalahan tersebut untuk mengetahui faktor resiko ergonomi yang dapat menimbulkan terjadinya MSD. Ini bisa dilakukan dengan membuat hierarki control
Contoh: dengan melakukan JHA (Job Hazard Analysis)
Form JHA
Langkah Kerja | Kemungkinan Bahaya / Deskripsi Event | Tingkat Resiko | Antisipasi / Tindakan Perbaikan |
- Education
Selain kita membuat materi training secara general (sesuai dengan bahaya umum di suatu lokasi kerja/perusahaan) diperlukan juga “Area Specific Hazard Training” maksudnya dengan memberikan materi yang lebih detail kepada pekerja. (misalnya yang di area kerjanya memiliki resiko terjadinya MSD dilakukan training ergonomic)
Contoh: Annual refresher training untuk semua pekerja, Spesific hazard Training untuk pekerja diarea tertentu, dsb
- MSD Management
Anda harus merespon segera terhadap kondisi pekerja yang beresiko MSD untuk mencegah kondisi mereka semakin buruk. Berikan mereka akses yang mudah ke “health care professional” untuk melakukan konsultasi dan mendapatkan rekomendasi yang tepat.
Contoh: Adanya dokter perusahan (Occupational Health Doctor), harus dipastikan bahwa dokter yang bersangkutan sudah berpengalaman dalam permasalahan kesehatan di lingkungan kerja, permasalahan ini pernah dialami penulis ketika dokter OH-nya sangat kesulitan memberikan rekomendasi karena kurangnya informasi tentang kesehatan kerja.
- Program Evaluation.
Perlunya dilakukan evaluasi secara periodik terhadap program ergonomik paling sedikit 3 tahun sekali. Ini berguna untuk menyakinkan bahwa program yang telah dibuat sesuai dengan kebutuhan perkembangan perusahaan.
Contoh: Review Prosedur secara berkala
*MSD =Musculoskeletal Disorder
What is the most likely kind of injury resulting from manual materials handling?
It is probably fair to say that every worker who lifts or does other manual handling tasks is at some risk for musculoskeletal injury. Low back injury is the most likely kind of injury. The complete elimination of this risk is not realistic because MMH usually involves awkward postures and repeated forceful movements. However, people can reduce the number and the severity of manual handling-related injuries substantially by using safe work practices.
How can we prevent back injury resulting from MMH?
To prevent occupational back injuries, it is essential to identify the factors of MMH that make the worker more susceptible to injury or that directly contribute to injury.
When efforts to prevent injuries from MMH focus on only one risk factor, they do not significantly reduce the injury rate. A more successful approach such as the one offered by ergonomics combines knowledge of engineering, environment, and human capabilities and limitations. The following aspects should be considered:
- organization of work flow
- job design/redesign (including environment)
- pre-placement procedures, where necessary
- training
How does organization of the work flow reduce the risk for back injury due to MMH?
Often, poor planning of the work flow results in needless or repeated handling of the same object. When articles are temporarily stored in one place, moved to another, stored again, and moved again, a more efficient work flow can eliminate many potentially harmful MMH tasks.
How does job design/redesign reduce the risk for back injury due to MMH?
The design or redesign of jobs involving MMH should be approached in the following stages:
- eliminate heavy MMH
- decrease MMH demands
- reduce stressful body movements
- pace of work and rest breaks
- improve environmental conditions
How do you eliminate heavy MMH?
Consider using powered or mechanical handling systems if eliminating MMH tasks completely is not possible. Mechanical aids lower the risk for back injury substantially by reducing the worker's physical effort required to handle heavy objects.
Manual handling such as lifting and carrying can be easier and safer if mechanized by using lift tables, conveyors, yokes or trucks. Gravity dumps and chutes can help in disposing of materials. Mechanical aids also reduce the need to select workers for the task, but it is essential that the worker is properly trained in the safe use of the available equipment.
How can we decrease MMH demands?
Where possible, use mechanical aids. The next step is to decrease the manual material handling demands. There are several ways to achieve this:
- Decrease the weight of handled objects to acceptable limits.
- Reduce the weight by assigning two people to lift the load or by splitting the load into two or more containers. Using light plastic containers also decreases the weight of the load.
- Change the type of MMH movement. Lowering objects causes less strain than lifting. Pulling objects is easier than carrying. Pushing is less demanding than pulling.
- Change work area layouts. Reducing the horizontal and vertical distances of lifting substantially lowers MMH demands. Reducing the travel distances for carrying, pushing or pulling also decreases work demands.
- Assign more time for repetitive handling tasks. This reduces the frequency of handling and allows for more work/rest periods.
- Alternate heavy tasks with lighter ones to reduce the build-up of fatigue.
How can we reduce stressful body movements in MMH?
It is important that the design of MMH allows the worker to do tasks without excessive bending and twisting. These body motions are particularly dangerous and can cause back injury even when not combined with handling loads.
- Provide all materials at a work level that is adjusted to the worker's body size.
- Eliminate deep shelves to avoid bending.
- Ensure sufficient space for the entire body to turn.
- Locate objects within easy reach.
- Ensure that there is a clear and easy access to the load.
- Use slings and hooks to move loads without handles.
- Balance contents of containers.
- Use rigid containers.
- Change the shape of the load so the load can be handled close to the body.
How do we set up a proper work pace, and a beneficial ratio of work to rest breaks, to reduce the risk for back pain due to MMH?
Pace of work, particularly when externally imposed, may significantly contribute to the worker discomfort, and consequently to the onset of musculoskeletal injuries, including low back injuries. As a rule, pressure to work at a certain pace coming from management creates the mental need to work in a hurry. This in turn creates tension not only in the mind but also in the body. Tensed muscles are much more prone to injury, leading to WMSD.
Very recent research on the causes of back injury shows that workers at high risk for back pain (for example, those who lift for a living or where lifting is significant part of their job) need more frequent and longer breaks. Even a moderate pace of lifting (not necessarily at the maximum lifting limit) if maintained for a prolonged time without breaks, rapidly decreases workers' lifting ability by speeding up their fatigue. It also means that in the second half of the working day, the risk for contracting low back injury (and, for that matter, any other musculoskeletal injury) is higher. And because of this it would be wise to assign heavier tasks at the beginning of the working day rather than at the end (but after the worker is "warmed up").
It would be ideal if workers could work at their own pace and have some freedom to take a rest break when they start feeling the effects of fatigue. However, this might be impractical. It seems reasonable to incorporate two additional 15-minute breaks, mid-morning and mid-afternoon, in addition to the 30-minute lunch break, If that schedule is still not feasible, shorter but more frequent breaks can do as well.
It is also important that novices whose jobs involve lifting and MMH be given time to adjust by allowing them more breaks.
How can we improve the environment to reduce the risk for injury due to MMH?
The design of the work environment is an important element of back injuries prevention.
- Keep the temperature of the working area between 18°C and 21°C when practical.
- In extreme cases that require heavy MMH in temperatures above 30°C, rest periods or light work load tasks may account for 75 percent of the work time.
- Wear properly designed clothing to decrease the heat absorption by the body and to increase evaporation. This is particularly important for people required to work in high temperature environment.
- Encourage using proper protective clothing for people working in a cold environment. This is essential to protect the worker from hypothermia and to preserve dexterity needed for safe work.
- Illuminate the work area for MMH tasks at the level of 200 lux.
- Use task lights or other additional light sources to improve the ability to see clearly where MMH requires fine visual discrimination.
- Use angular lighting and colour contrast to improve depth perception. This helps the worker where MMH involves climbing stairs or moving in passageways.
When the MMH tasks are done outdoors, the temperature conditions including the humidex (in hot weather) or wind-chill factor (in cold weather) have to be monitored very closely.
- Reduce MMH tasks by half when the temperature exceeds 28°C.
- Stop MMH when the temperature exceeds 40°C.
- Restrict MMH to the minimum possible when wind-chill drops below -25°C.
- Stop MMH when wind-chill drops to -35°C.
How effective is pre-placement screening in back injury prevention?
The objective of pre-placement screening is to select individuals less likely to be injured in work involving MMH. X-rays, medical examination, physiological testing may be hazardous under certain circumstances or may not be specific enough to achieve the intended objective. They do not reduce the occurrence of occupational back injury among selected individuals. Worse, the selection procedures can be abused when applied as a substitute for work design.
The only situation where pre-placement screening may be justified as a preventive measure is where a job involves heavy MMH in an unpredictable and uncontrollable environment. Examples of these are firefighting, mine and water rescue, and police work. Even here, the selected tests should closely reflect with the anticipated requirements of the job. By far the best pre-selection method, if one must be used, is performance of the actual task.
Does training reduce back injuries?
There is little evidence to indicate that training alone reduces the number of MMH injuries. When combined with work design, training is an important element in the prevention of injuries. Proper training also shows the worker how to actively contribute to the prevention of injuries. A good training program should:
- make the worker aware of the hazards of MMH
- demonstrate ways of avoiding unnecessary stress
- teach the worker to handle materials safely
Instruction on how to lift "properly" is the most controversial issue concerning training in MMH. There is no single correct way to lift because lifting can always be done in several ways. Because of this, on-site, task specific training is essential. In fact, it is sometimes safer to allow the worker to use common sense acquired by experience rather than to force new biomechanically correct procedures. But there are some general lifting rules.
- Prepare to lift by warming up the muscles.
- Stand close to the load, facing the way you intend to move.
- Use a wide stance to gain balance.
- Ensure a good grip on the load.
- Keep arms straight.
- Tighten abdominal muscles.
- Tuck chin into the chest.
- Initiate the lift with body weight.
- Lift the load close to the body.
- Lift smoothly without jerking.
- Avoid twisting and side bending while lifting.
- Do not lift if you are not convinced that you can handle the load safely.
It is also important that workers:
- take advantage of rest periods to relax tired muscles; this prevents fatigue from building up
- report discomforts experienced during work; this may help to identify hazards and correct working conditions.
Finally, there is an aspect of training that cannot be overlooked if training is to be part of an effective prevention program.
Workers should be educated that muscles, tendons and ligaments are not prepared to meet the physical stress of handling tasks when they are not "warmed up." They are more likely to pull, tear or cramp when stretched or contracted suddenly under such conditions. This, painful enough by itself, can lead to more serious and permanent injury if physically stressful work is continued. Warming up and mental readiness for physically demanding tasks are important for any kind of MMH, but particularly for occasional tasks where the worker is not accustomed to handling loads. Workers are more likely to have "ready-to-go" attitude for the task ahead when they understand that other preventive measures are also tried
Source: CCOHS
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are costly to businesses - they affect around 1 million people a year and are the most common occupational illness in the
Ergonomics uses scientific and evidence-based knowledge about people - their physical and psychological capabilities and limitations - to design workplaces and work activities so that individuals work better, are less likely to injure themselves or make errors.
Ideally, ergonomics principles need to be included in the design of a new workplace or a production process. But the likelihood is that companies seek the services of an ergonomist/human factors specialist after problems are experienced by the workforce. Even when a proposed ergonomics intervention to solve the problem makes sense, managers often have limited financial resources. They need to be able to persuade their financial controllers that investment in ergonomics interventions will be good for the company’s profitability.
However, a Health & Safety Executive Report published last autumn, Cost Benefit Studies that support tackling Musculoskeletal Disorders gives details of 21 case studies that quantify the costs of ergonomics interventions and the benefits gained through savings or increased productivity and quality of output.
The research was carried out on behalf of the HSE by ergonomics consultancy Hu-Tech Ergonomics. One of the report’s authors Hu-Tech director Andy Nicholson emphasized that the organisations who opened their doors to his research team found the exercise to be very worthwhile.
The case studies varied in complexity and magnitude and represented a range of industries. Most of the case studies involved interventions tackling manual handling and upper limb disorder issues but there were some dealing with lower limb disorders in the medical equipment manufacture and agricultural/horticulture sectors.
Many of the design or organisational solutions could be transferred to other industries and situations e.g. the ergonomics principles that led to changes to a packing line at a food processing factory could apply to a manual assembly line for other goods. Interventions took a variety of forms, from addressing the design of the task, the equipment, workstation and environment, to the organisational context in which the work was done.
Benefits were established by calculating the investment required to bring the intervention about and comparing that cost with the quantifiable benefits of the improved work system. Therefore, it was important to be able to compare the difference in conditions before the intervention and afterwards.
The research team considered changes to sickness absence levels attributed to MSDs, productivity rates, staff turnover and other variables which might apply such as reduced waste of materials and higher quality output.
Where necessary, assumptions were made about certain costs or benefits. Where estimates were made, they are identified as such in the cost benefit analysis. A Chartered Accountant supported the research team by interpreting financial data where necessary and ensuring that calculations were in accordance with good accounting practice.
“To our knowledge this is the first time that the research involving a significant number of case studies has been carried out to demonstrate the quantifiable benefit to organisations when they tackle MSDs in this way,” says Andy Nicholson.
Case studies on MSD solutions
One of the case studies related to the manufacture of medical devices. Workers were attaching ultra-fine sutures, used in ophthalmic surgery, to needles and 40% of them were experiencing shoulder and neck discomfort.
It was identified that the high ergonomics risk could be avoided if the ultra-fine attaching job was performed for only four hours per shift but this would reduce productivity levels, with ensuing costs. Modifications were made to the workstation to improve posture and a camera and small monitor were installed to allow the operator to check the location of the needle without adopting awkward neck postures.
Staff who had not been experienced in the task could now perform it with less training than before. An ergonomic assessment was undertaken of the revised workstation, which showed that operators could work safety for an additional two hours a day without being at significant risk of musculoskeletal pain or injury.
The cost of the modification to the workstations and for purchasing the cameras was £9350, the net intervention benefit was £18,900 and the payback period was 12 months.
Another case study showed how providing manual handling equipment paid for itself rapidly, based on avoiding an emerging pattern of injuries. Prior to the intervention, heavy containers were lifted manually into an ‘overpack’ for transporting offshore. Within the containers was a radioactive source used to look at the density of rock formations below the sea bed. The containers weighed 75kg, 45kg and 10kg, and were lifted into the larger overpack by a single operator. Space constraints meant that posture was poor and there was only room for one person to do the job.
A back injury had already occurred because of this job, and this resulted in six month’s absence for the injured operator. This was the second such injury in a matter of months. The injured personnel were specialists, and were in short supply. The company lost revenue and risked losing its reputation as a good employer.
It was not possible to make the source containers lighter or to change the dimensions of the overpack which would have improved the postures that could be adopted. Instead, a jib crane was fitted permanently to the top of the overpack (see photo) that would take the weight of the containers.
Assessing the risks and fitting jib cranes to all of the containers cost £14,875. The cost of the two incidents was around £45,000 – and more incidents of that type were foreseeable. Assuming that the jib cranes would be used for five years meant that the investment costs would be recouped within just three months.
Calum Smith, Hu-Tech Ergonomics
Group
|
| IIHOHA |
| Visit this group |
