人机工程学风险评估方法的等级间可靠性

Atefeh Siahi Ahangar, Sahebeh Ghanbari, Majid Hajibabaei, M. Saremi, Narges Azadi, F. Jahani, Sanaz Karim Pour, Moslem Abedini, H. Mohammadpour
{"title":"人机工程学风险评估方法的等级间可靠性","authors":"Atefeh Siahi Ahangar, Sahebeh Ghanbari, Majid Hajibabaei, M. Saremi, Narges Azadi, F. Jahani, Sanaz Karim Pour, Moslem Abedini, H. Mohammadpour","doi":"10.18502/AOH.V3I1.344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Musculoskeletal disorders are one of the most common occupational diseases, and in recent years, several methods have been developed to evaluate risk factors for these types of disorders. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 40 tasks in small industries including carpentry, turning, welding, loading and unloading, and sewing were recorded with a video camera and in the second stage, the postures were reviewed and evaluated by six raters. In total, forty of the worst and most frequent postures were analyzed by self-raters and then, the same risk levels were determined for the six methods and analyzed with correlation and Kappa agreement coefficient tests using SPSS (version 19), and then they were compared with each other using the Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The results revealed the importance of Kappa Coefficient in which it shows the risk level of different method and specified pair method: OCRA/SI =0.25, OCRA/HAL=0.2, SI/HAL= 0.32, SI/ RULA= 0.33, REBA/OCRA = 0.4, QEC/SI= 0.27, QEC/ RULA= 0.23Inter-rater Reliability of the methods was found as follow:ICCOCRA=0.3, ICCSI= 0.67, ICCHAL= 0.8, ICCRULA= 0.85, ICCREBA=0.8, ICCQEC=0.972.Conclusions: The results showed that there was no complete agreement among the methods. This agreement among methods is evaluated from poor to good (0.2-0.4). The ICC showed high reliability in the methods except in the OCRA method.","PeriodicalId":32672,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Occupational Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inter-Rater Reliability of Ergonomic Risk Assessment Methods\",\"authors\":\"Atefeh Siahi Ahangar, Sahebeh Ghanbari, Majid Hajibabaei, M. Saremi, Narges Azadi, F. Jahani, Sanaz Karim Pour, Moslem Abedini, H. Mohammadpour\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/AOH.V3I1.344\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Musculoskeletal disorders are one of the most common occupational diseases, and in recent years, several methods have been developed to evaluate risk factors for these types of disorders. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 40 tasks in small industries including carpentry, turning, welding, loading and unloading, and sewing were recorded with a video camera and in the second stage, the postures were reviewed and evaluated by six raters. In total, forty of the worst and most frequent postures were analyzed by self-raters and then, the same risk levels were determined for the six methods and analyzed with correlation and Kappa agreement coefficient tests using SPSS (version 19), and then they were compared with each other using the Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The results revealed the importance of Kappa Coefficient in which it shows the risk level of different method and specified pair method: OCRA/SI =0.25, OCRA/HAL=0.2, SI/HAL= 0.32, SI/ RULA= 0.33, REBA/OCRA = 0.4, QEC/SI= 0.27, QEC/ RULA= 0.23Inter-rater Reliability of the methods was found as follow:ICCOCRA=0.3, ICCSI= 0.67, ICCHAL= 0.8, ICCRULA= 0.85, ICCREBA=0.8, ICCQEC=0.972.Conclusions: The results showed that there was no complete agreement among the methods. This agreement among methods is evaluated from poor to good (0.2-0.4). The ICC showed high reliability in the methods except in the OCRA method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Occupational Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Occupational Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/AOH.V3I1.344\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Occupational Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/AOH.V3I1.344","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:肌肉骨骼疾病是最常见的职业病之一,近年来,已经开发了几种方法来评估这些类型疾病的风险因素。方法:在这项横断面研究中,用摄像机记录了小工业中的40项任务,包括木工、车削、焊接、装卸和缝纫。在第二阶段,由六名评分员对姿势进行了回顾和评估。共有40种最差和最频繁的姿势由自评者进行分析,然后确定六种方法的相同风险水平,并使用SPSS(19版)进行相关和Kappa一致性系数检验,然后使用组内相关系数(ICC)进行比较。结果:Kappa系数显示了不同方法和特定配对方法的风险水平:OCRA/SI=0.25,OCRA/HAL=0.2,SI/HAL=0.32,SI/RULA=0.33,REBA/OCRA=0.4,QEC/SI=0.27,QEC/RULA=0.23,ICCQEC=0.972结论:结果表明,两种方法之间并不完全一致。这种方法之间的一致性从差到好(0.2-0.4)。除OCRA方法外,ICC在这些方法中显示出较高的可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inter-Rater Reliability of Ergonomic Risk Assessment Methods
Background: Musculoskeletal disorders are one of the most common occupational diseases, and in recent years, several methods have been developed to evaluate risk factors for these types of disorders. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 40 tasks in small industries including carpentry, turning, welding, loading and unloading, and sewing were recorded with a video camera and in the second stage, the postures were reviewed and evaluated by six raters. In total, forty of the worst and most frequent postures were analyzed by self-raters and then, the same risk levels were determined for the six methods and analyzed with correlation and Kappa agreement coefficient tests using SPSS (version 19), and then they were compared with each other using the Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The results revealed the importance of Kappa Coefficient in which it shows the risk level of different method and specified pair method: OCRA/SI =0.25, OCRA/HAL=0.2, SI/HAL= 0.32, SI/ RULA= 0.33, REBA/OCRA = 0.4, QEC/SI= 0.27, QEC/ RULA= 0.23Inter-rater Reliability of the methods was found as follow:ICCOCRA=0.3, ICCSI= 0.67, ICCHAL= 0.8, ICCRULA= 0.85, ICCREBA=0.8, ICCQEC=0.972.Conclusions: The results showed that there was no complete agreement among the methods. This agreement among methods is evaluated from poor to good (0.2-0.4). The ICC showed high reliability in the methods except in the OCRA method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信