Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Inter - and intra - observer reliability of risk assessment of repetitive work without an explicit method
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Health Systems Engineering, Ergonomics.
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Health Systems Engineering, Ergonomics.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7099-5352
2017 (English)In: Applied Ergonomics, ISSN 0003-6870, E-ISSN 1872-9126, Vol. 62, 1-8 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A common way to conduct practical risk assessments is to observe a job and report the observed long term risks for musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter- and intra-observer reliability of ergonomists' risk assessments without the support of an explicit risk assessment method. Twenty-one experienced ergonomists assessed the risk level (low, moderate, high risk) of eight upper body regions, as well as the global risk of 10 video recorded work tasks. Intra-observer reliability was assessed by having nine of the ergonomists repeat the procedure at least three weeks after the first assessment. The ergonomists made their risk assessment based on his/her experience and knowledge. The statistical parameters of reliability included proportional agreement, kappa, linearly weighted kappa, intraclass correlation and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The average inter-observer proportional agreement of the global risk was 53% and the corresponding weighted kappa was 0.32, indicating fair reliability. The intra-observer agreement was 61% and 0.41. This study indicates that risk assessments of the upper body, without the use of an explicit observational method, have non-acceptable reliability. It is therefore recommended to use systematic risk assessment methods to a higher degree.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Ltd , 2017. Vol. 62, 1-8 p.
Keyword [en]
Inter-observer reliability, Intra-observer reliability, Observational methods, Risk assessment, Reliability, Explicit method, Intraclass correlations, Kendall's coefficient of concordance, Musculoskeletal disorders, Observational method, Repetitive works, Risk assessment methods, Statistical parameters, body regions, female, human, human experiment, male, videorecording
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-207291DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2017.02.004ISI: 000401206600001ScopusID: 2-s2.0-85013380287OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-207291DiVA: diva2:1111531
Note

QC 20170619

Available from: 2017-06-19 Created: 2017-06-19 Last updated: 2017-06-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Eliasson, KristinaNyman, Teresia
By organisation
Ergonomics
In the same journal
Applied Ergonomics
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf