請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23244
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 黃耀輝 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yen-Ting Chen | en |
dc.contributor.author | 陳彥廷 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T04:49:28Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2009-09-16 | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2009-07-28 | |
dc.identifier.citation | American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienist. Hand activity level. In TLVs and BEIs-Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents. 2001; 110-112.
Bao S, Spielholz P, Howard N, Silverstein B. Quantifying repetitive hand activity for epidemiological research on musculoskeletal disorders--part I: individual exposure assessment. Ergonomics. 2006a;49:361-380. Bao S, Howard N, Spielholz P, Silverstein B. Quantifying repetitive hand activity for epidemiological research on musculoskeletal disorders--part II: comparison of different methods of measuring force level and repetitiveness. Ergonomics. 2006b;49:381-392. Battevi N, Menoni O, Vimercati C. The occurrence of musculoskeletal alterations in worker populations not exposed to repetitive tasks of the upper limbs. Ergonomics. 1998:41:9:1340-1346. Bonfiglioli R, Mattioli S, Spagnolo MR, Violante FS. Course of symptoms and median nerve conduction values in workers performing repetitive jobs at risk for carpal tunnel syndrome. Occupational Medicine (Oxford). 2006:56:2:115-121. Bureau of Labor Insurance. Causes of Occupational Diseases, by Industrial Divisions. Bureau of Labor Insurance, Taiwan; 2005-2007:266-273. David GC. Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Occup Med (Lond). 2005;55:190-199. Devereux JJ, Vlachonikolis IG, Bucklel PW. Epidemiological study to investigate potential interaction between physical and psychosocial factors at work that may increase the risk of symptoms of musculoskeletal disorder of the neck and upper limb.' Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 2002:59:4:269-277. de Zwart BC, Frings-Dresen MH, Kilbom A. Gender differences in upper extremity musculoskeletal complaints in the working population. International Archives of Occupational & Environmental Health. 2001:74:1:21-30. Feveile H, Jensen C, Burr H. Risk factors for neck-shoulder and wrist-hand symptoms in a 5-year follow-up study of 3,990 employees in Denmark.' International Archives of Occupational & Environmental Health. 2002:75:4:243-251. Graves RJ, Way K, Riley D, Lawton C, Morris L. Development of risk filter and risk assessment worksheets for HSE guidance--Upper Limb Disorders in the Workplace 2002. Appl Ergon. 2004;35:475-484. Jones T, Kumar T. Assessment of physical exposures and comparison of exposure definitions in a repetitive sawmill occupation: trim-saw operator. Work. 2007;28:183-196. Karhu O, Kansi P, Kuorinka I. Correcting working postures in industry: a practical method for analysis. ApplErgon. 1977;8:199–201. Koppelaar E, Wells R. Comparison of measurement methods for quantifying hand force. Ergonomics. 2005;48:983-1007. Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon. 1987;18:233-237. Leclerc A, Landre MF, Chastang JF, Niedhammer I, Roquelaure Y.. Upper-limb disorders in repetitive work. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 2001:27:4:268-278. Li G, Buckle P. Current techniques for assessing physical exposure to work-related musculoskeletal risks, with emphasis on posture-based methods. Ergonomics. 1999;42:674-695. Lindfors P, von Thiele U, Lundberg U. Work characteristics and upper extremity disorders in female dental health workers.' Journal of Occupational Health. 2006:48:3:192-197. McAtamney L, Corlett E. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Appl Ergon. 1993;24:91–99. McDiarmid M, Oliver M, Ruser J, Gucer P. Male and female rate differences in carpal tunnel syndrome injuries: personal attributes or job tasks? Environmental Research. 2000:83:1:23-32. Mondelli M, Grippo A, Mariani M, et al. Carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy at the elbow in floor cleaners.' Neurophysiologie Clinique. 2006:36:4:245-253. Moore JS, Garg A. The Strain Index: a proposed method to analyze jobs for risk of distal upper extremity disorders. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1995;56:443-458. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and workplace factors. A critical reviews of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back. Cincinnati, OH, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1997. Occhipinti E. OCRA: a concise index for the assessment of exposure to repetitive movements of the upper limb. Ergonomics 1998;41:1290–1311. Roquelaure Y, Ha C, Leclerc A, et al. Epidemiologic surveillance of upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders in the working population. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55:765-778. Spielholz P, Silverstein B, Morgan M, Checkoway H, Kaufman J. Comparison of self-report, video observation and direct measurement methods for upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder physical risk factors. Ergonomics. 2001;44:588-613. Tanaka S, Petersen M, Cameron L. Prevalence and risk factors of tendinitis and related disorders of the distal upper extremity among U.S. workers: comparison to carpal tunnel syndrome.' American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2001:39:3:328-335. Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents. Cincinnati, OH: ACGIH Worldwide, 2001. Shih TS, Chang CP. Survey of Employees' Perceptions of Safety and Health in the Work Environment in 2004 Taiwan. Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Council of Labor Affairs, Taiwan; 2004. van der Beek AJ, Frings-Dresen MH. Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Occup Environ Med. 1998;55:291-299. Yeh CY, Hwang YH, Liang HW. Validation of the monitoring system for the use of computer input devices. Ergonomics. 2009. Yeung SS, Genaidy A, Deddens J, Sauter S. The relationship between protective and risk characteristics of acting and experienced workload, and musculoskeletal disorder cases among nurses.' Journal of Safety Research. 2005:361:85-95. Andersen JH, Thomsen JF, Overgaard E, et al. Computer use and carpal tunnel syndrome - A 1-year follow-up study. JAMA. 2003:289:2963-2969. Blatter BM, Bongers PM. Duration of computer use and mouse use in relation to musculoskeletal disorders of neck or upper limb. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2002:30:295-306. Buckle P. Ergonomics and musculoskeletal disorders: overview. Occupational Medicine-Oxford. 2005:55:164-167. Chang CH, Wang JD, Luh JJ, Hwang YH. Development of a monitoring system for keyboard users' performance. Ergonomics. 2004:47:1571-1581. Demunter C. The digital divide in Europe. 【http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=1073,46587259&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&p_product_code=KS-NP-05-038】2005. Douwes M, de Kraker H, Blatter, BM. Validity of two methods to assess computer use: Self-report by questionnaire and computer use software. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2007:37:425-431. Faucett J, Rempel D. Musculoskeletal symptoms related to video display terminal use. An analysis of objective and subjective exposure estimates. Offical Journal of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses. 1996:44:33-39. Gerr F, Marcus M. Ensor C, et al. A prospective study of computer users: I. Study design and incidence of musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2002:41:221-235. Heinrich J, Blatter BM, Bongers PM. A comparison of methods for the assessment of postural load and duration of computer use. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2004:61:1027-1031. Ijmker S, Blatter BM, van der Beek AJ, van Mechelen W, Bongers PM. Prospective research on musculoskeletal disorders in office workers (PROMO): Study protocol. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2006:7. Jensen C, Finsen L, Sogaard K, Christensen H. Musculoskeletal symptoms and duration of computer and mouse use. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2002:30:265-275. Karlqvist L, Tornqvist EW, Hagberg M, Hagman M, Toomingas A. Self-reported working conditions of VDU operators and associations with musculoskeletal symptoms: a cross-sectional study focussing on gender differences. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2002:30:277-294. Kimura M, Sato H, Ochi M, Hosoya S, Sadoyama T. Electromyogram and perceived fatigue changes in the trapezius muscle during typewriting and recovery. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2007:100:89-96. Kryger AI, Andersen JH, Lassen CF, et al. Does computer use pose an occupational hazard for forearm pain; from the NUDATA study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2003:60. Lassen CF, Mikkelsen S, Kryger AI, et al. Elbow and wrist/hand symptoms among 6,943 computer operators: A 1-year follow-up study (The NUDATA study). American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2004:46:521-533. Sillanpaa J, Huikko S, Nyberg M, et al. Effect of work with visual display units on musculo-skeletal disorders in the office environment. Occupational Medicine-Oxford. 2003:53:443-451. Village J, Rempel D, Teschke K. Musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity associated with computer work: A systematic review. Occupational Ergonomics. 2005:5:205-218. Wahlstrom J. Ergonomics, musculoskeletal disorders and computer work. Occupational Medicine-Oxford. 2005:55:168-176. Wang CH. Development and test of the recording system for computer mouse activities 【Thesis】. Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.: National Taiwan University; 2006:90. Weiler A. Information technology: use and training in Europe. 【http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef04134.htm】European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. 2005. Woods V. Musculoskeletal disorders and visual strain in intensive data processing workers. Occupational Medicine-Oxford. 2005:55:121-127. Yeh CY, Hwang YH, Liang HW. Validation of the monitoring system for the use of computer input devices. Ergonomics. 2009. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23244 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Part I:
To evaluate the risk factors for upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders, the direct measurement has the advantage of better validity while the observation method and self-report have the strength of convenience in operation. The aim of this study are to evaluate the correlation of exposure variables monitored by direct measurement and observation method, respectively, and to find out the most feasible and valid parameters by observation method to assess hand activity at workplace. A total of 35 different tasks by 19 subjects of 10 companies were included in this study, which were primarily involved in upper extremity activity. All subjects filled in a modified Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire to report their health outcome prior to the beginning of this study. Then, the study subjects were asked to work as usual for the designated task for 15 minutes or more than 5 cycles per task. Meanwhile, direct measurements, including surface electromyography and biaxial electrogoniometers for wrist, were applied to record the bioelectronic signals for hand activity. All the subjects’ hand activities were videotaped and, later, rated by a reviewer according to the Strain Index (SI) checklist and hand activity level (HAL) checklist issued by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. Both direct measurement and observation method provided exposure variables for exertion force and frequency. Results showed that the prevalence of discomforts in wrist was higher than other upper extremity parts among the study subjects. The parameters of exertion frequency by direct measurement and video observation were significantly correlated (r=0.62, p<0.01). The efforts per minute estimated by SI checklist was correlated with the mean power frequency of exertion (r=0.66, p<0.001) and the root mean square of wrist deviation speed by the biaxial electrogoniometers (r=0.51, p<0.01). However, such consistence was not found for exposure variable of exertion force. The finding of the present study suggested that the frequency of upper extremity motion estimated by observation method could be used as a feasible indicator for exposure loading assessment at workplace if direct measurement is not feasible for all study subjects. Part II: To assess the physical loading of computer work, the electronic activity monitoring system provides an alternative tool for computer use time estimation in practice. The aims of this study were to study the reliability of an electronic activity monitoring system, VDTlog, in computer use time estimation, and its applicability as an exposure assessment tool in the field. Twenty two participants were recruited in this study with most of their daily work composed of computer-based office work. Three methods including video record observation, self-report and VDTlog were used to gather the information related to computer use. During three consecutive working hours, two cameras were turned on to record, and VDTlog was used to estimate the keyboard, mouse, and computer use time. Subjects had to complete a self-report questionnaire about aforementioned computer use times for each hour during the observation period. The estimates of keyboard, mouse and total computer use time for study hours by self-report and VDTlog were compared to video record observation by Pearson’s correlation analysis. The average time of total computer use was 63% of the video record observation period. Estimation by VDTlog was highly correlated with video record observation for total computer use time (r=0.98). The relative errors decreased along with the percentage of total computer use time in the monitored working hours among the subjects. It implied that the electronic activity monitoring system, VDTlog, seemed to be well comparable to video record observation, and it is a valid and reliable tool for the collection of time related information on the highly intensive work activities of computer workers. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T04:49:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-98-R96841002-1.pdf: 2562767 bytes, checksum: 47e193e0493ad433685ab901e3d69bc7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Part I. Comparison between Direct Measurement and Observation Methods for Upper
Extremity Activity Assessment at Workplace. Abstract 1 1. Introduction 5 2. Literature review 7 2.1. Exposure assessment methods for physical factors associated with UEMSD 7 2.1.1. Self report 7 2.1.2. Observation 8 2.1.3. Direct measurement 9 2.2. Application of exposure assessment methods for UEMSD at workplace 11 2.3. Study aims 14 3. Materials and methods 15 3.1. Subject recruitment 15 3.2. Procedures and apparatus 16 3.2.1. Self-report questionnaire 17 3.2.2. Observation and checklist 18 3.2.3. Direct measurement 19 3.3. Data Analysis 20 4. Results 21 4.1. General descriptions of subjects’ work by video record observation and direct measurement methods 21 4.2. Correlation among variables of video observation, SI and HALTLV checklists 24 4.3. Spearman correlation between variables at task level by observation and direct measurement methods 26 5. Discussions 28 5.1. Comparison of frequency-related variables 28 5.2. Comparison of force-related variables 30 5.3. Implication and suggestion 33 6. Conclusions 34 7.Reference 35 Part II. Evaluation of the Electronic Activity Monitoring System for Computer Use in Field Study. Abstract 40 1. Introduction 43 2. Literature review 45 2.1. Risk factors for computer work activities associated with work-related upper extremity disorders 45 2.2. Exposure assessment methods for computer work activities 47 2.3. Study aims 50 3. Materials and methods 51 3.1. Subjects recruitment 51 3.2. Procedures and apparatus 52 3.2.1. Video record observation 54 3.2.2. VDTlog 56 3.2.3. Self-report questionnaire 57 3.3. Inter-rater test 59 3.4. Data Analysis 61 4. Result 62 4.1. General descriptions of subjects’ work by observation, self report and direct measurement methods 62 4.2. Idle time setting for total computer use 65 4.3. Relationship between percentage of computer use time and relative error by different methods 67 5. Discussion 69 5.1. Comparison of computer use time estimates among three methods: video record observation, self-report and VDTlog 69 5.2. Criteria for idle time setting for the total computer use time estimation by VDTlog 71 5.3. Implication and recommendation in further study 74 6. Conclusion 75 7. Reference 76 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 一、直接量測與觀察法於工作現場手部作業評估之比較
二、電腦監測系統於職場運作之評估 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Part I. Comparison between Direct Measurement and Observation Methods for Upper Extremity Activity Assessment at Workplace
Part II. Evaluation of the Electronic Activity Monitoring System for Computer Use in Field Study | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 97-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 王子娟,陳志勇,陸哲駒 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 肌肉骨骼不適,上肢作業,暴露評估,觀察法,電腦作業,電腦電子活動監測系統,VDTlog, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | musculoskeletal disorder,exposure assessment,observation method,computer work,exposure assessment,electronic activity monitor,VDTlog, | en |
dc.relation.page | 81 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2009-07-28 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 公共衛生學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 職業醫學與工業衛生研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 職業醫學與工業衛生研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-98-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.5 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。