기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
작업관련성 근골격계질환의 인간공학적 평가 기법들에 대한 사용성 평가
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 작업관련성 근골격계질환의 인간공학적 평가 기법들에 대한 사용성 평가
저자명
임수정,최순영,박동현,Im. Su-Jung,Choi. Soon-Young,Park. Dong-Hyun
간행물명
대한안전경영과학회지
권/호정보
2011년|13권 2호|pp.83-90 (8 pages)
발행정보
대한안전경영과학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

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.