메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
임수정 (인하대학교 산업공학과) 최순영 (인하대학교 대학원 의학과) 박동현 (인하대학교 산업공학과)
저널정보
대한안전경영과학회 대한안전경영과학회지 대한안전경영과학회지 제13권 제2호
발행연도
2011.1
수록면
83 - 90 (8page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
It has been very important to have an exact evaluation for risk factors in order to prevent WMSDs(Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders). However, most WMSDs evaluation methods have always been some problems of possibilities associated with subjective evaluation. Therefore, this study tried to conduct a sort of usability analysis on three major evaluation methods(OWAS, RULA, REBA). Specifically, major subjects in the study consisted of three parts as follows; comparison of the results between experienced and inexperienced observers, analysis for the consistency of the results in terms of different evaluation times, and analysis for the consistency of the results in terms of different job characteristics(based on the part of the automobile). The results of the study were summarized as follows; 1) There was statistically significant difference of the results by RULA and by REBA between experienced and inexperienced observers. This might be due to the fact that experienced observers have had better ability to detect the important working posture during evaluation. However, the results by OWAS did not give any significantly different results between experienced and inexperienced observers, 2) All three checklists applied by experienced subjects did not show any single result significantly different in terms of different evaluation times. This might have to do with high intra-observer reliability from some of previous studies, 3) The five parts of an automobile were selected as five major jobs with different job characteristics in the automobile industry. Specifically, they were door part, front part(hood, etc.), inside part(dash board, seats, etc.), rear part(trunk etc.), and bottom part. All three methods did not show any significant differences for the results from each observers. Further study on this subject would eventually provide a sophisticated evaluating guidelines for WMSDs regarding determination of observer-specific evaluation, identification of repetitive number of evaluations for stable results for each checklist, determination of job-specific evaluation methods, and so on.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (4)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0