PubMed · 4677363
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M Oshima. 1972. [Ergonomics].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4677363/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Three participatory ergonomics teams have been established among healthcare workers in a metropolitan medical center. Three teams, consisting of orderlies, intensive care unit nurses, and laboratory workers, were selected to provide a diversity of work activities and educational backgrounds. The effectiveness of these teams was assessed by observations of team interactions, by team members' perceptions of their effectiveness, and by the teams' success in identifying problems and implementing solutions. After 1 year, one of the three groups has been highly effective by these measures. To varying degrees, the groups encountered competing time demands and obstacles in implementing solutions within current administrative structures. For some groups of health care workers, participatory ergonomics teams seem to be an effective strategy to improve health and safety. This approach may not be feasible in all areas of health care, especially in high-demand clinical areas where patient needs may take precedence over the safety of health care workers.
BACKGROUND: There is increasing recognition of surgeons' physical fatigue in the new ergonomic environment of laparoscopic surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine what the differences are in the movement of the surgeon's axial skeleton between laparoscopic and open operations. METHODS: Surgeons' body positions were recorded on videotape during four laparoscopic (LAP) and six open (OP) operations. The percent of time the head and back were in a normal, bent, or twisted position as well as the number of changes in head and back position were tabulated using a computer program. A separate laboratory study was performed on four surgeons "walking" a 0.5-inch polyethylene tubing forward and backward using laparoscopic and open techniques. The movements of the surgeons' head, trunk, and pelvis were measured using a three-camera kinematic system (Kin). The center of pressure was recorded using a floor-mounted forceplate (Fp). RESULTS: In the operating room surgeons' head and back positions were more often straight in laparoscopic procedures and more often bent in open operations. The number of changes in back position per minute were significantly decreased when the laparoscopic-only part of surgery was analyzed. In the laboratory the subjects' head position was significantly (p = 0.02) more upright and the anteroposterior (AP) and rotational range of motion of the head was significantly reduced during laparoscopy. Subjects' CP was more anterior and there was a significant reduction in the AP range of motion of the CP during laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that surgeons exhibit decreased mobility of the head and back and less anteroposterior weight shifting during laparoscopic manipulations despite a more upright posture. This more restricted posture during laparoscopic surgery may induce fatigue by limiting the natural changes in body posture that occur during open surgery.
This paper reviews the literature comparing the fields of ergonomics and quality, mainly in an industrial context, including mutual influences, similarities and differences. Relationships between ergonomics and the factors: work conditions, product design, ISO 9000, continuous improvements and TQM are reviewed in relation to the consequence, application, and process domains. The definitions of ergonomics and quality overlap substantially. Quality deficiencies, human errors and ergonomics problems often have the same cause, which in many cases can be traced to the design of work, workplace and environment e.g. noise, light, postures, loads, pace and work content. In addition, the possibility of performing to a high standard at work is an important prerequisite for satisfaction and well-being. Contradictions between the two fields have been identified in the view of concepts such as standardization, reduction of variability and copying of best practice, requiring further research. The field of quality would gain by incorporating ergonomics knowledge, especially in the areas of work design and human capability, since these factors are decisive for human performance and also therefore the performance of the systems involved. The field of ergonomics, on the other hand, would benefit from developing a stronger emphasis on methodologies and structures for improvement processes, including a clearer link with leadership and company strategies. Just as important is a further development of practicable participative ergonomics methods and tools for use at workplaces by the workers themselves, in order to integrate the top-down and the bottom-up processes and achieve better impact. Using participative processes for problem-solving and continuous improvement, focusing ergonomics and quality jointly has a great potential for improving working conditions and quality results simultaneously, and satisfying most of the interested parties.