Life Sciences and Medicine Research, Volume 2010: LSMR-19
Evaluation of the Relationship between Workload and Work Capacity in Petrochemical and Tannery Workers - A Pilot Study D V Siva Priya1*, Priscilla Johnson2, R Padmavathi2, A S Subhashini2, R Ayyappan3, M Surianarayanan4 Department of Physiology, Saveetha Medical College and Hospital, Saveetha University, Saveetha Nagar, Thandalam, Chennai – 602 105, Tamilnadu, India 2 Department of Physiology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Ramachandra University, Porur, Chennai – 600 116, India 3 Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Ramachandra University, Porur, Chennai – 600 116, India 4 Central Leather Research Institute, Adyar, Chennai, India 1
*Correspondence to: D V Siva Priya,
[email protected] Accepted: October 28, 2010; Published: December 23, 2010 Abstract Industrial accidents and musculoskeletal disorders are one of the common health risks seen among workers. They constitute the most important cause of absence due to illness and occupational disabilities. Daily occurrences of such accidents can be attributed to human error. The cause is often a poor and inadequate relationship between operators and their tasks. The probability of accidents can be reduced by taking better account of human capabilities and limitations when designing and assigning work. Individuals should be accomplished to their tasks without undue fatigue so that at the end of the working day they are left with sufficient vigor to enjoy their leisure time. The results of this research should enhance the ability to design jobs by considering the actual capacity of the employee and result in maximizing performance (quantity and quality). This study was designed to assess the work capacity of manual workers in two different occupational sectors and compare it with their workload. The workers were recruited from petrochemical and tannery industries. The results of this study showed a high prevalence of MSD among the workers in petrochemical and tannery industries. Workload of all the subjects studied was heavy and work capacity of more than half of the workers were below that was required for the job. The low endurance time of majority of workers indicates that they were easily prone for fatigability. As injuries are largely preventable by improvements to make work safer and healthier, proper recruitment of workers, administrative policies, health and safety information and education to promote safety-conscious attitudes and behavior are needed. Hence, surveillance data must be developed to provide the basis for targeting preventive measures towards high-risk groups of workers. The identification of this burden has allowed the developed countries to focus on preventive actions at work. Our study can definitely pave way for comprehending and controlling the situation as a whole, and the change in the work structure and selection of appropriate workers can become a fruitful challenge in enterprises and societies in our country. Keywords: Musculoskeletal disorders; Work related musculoskeletal disorders; Workload; Work capacity; Manual workers; Petrochemical industry; Tannery industry.
1. Introduction Low back pain was one of the major concerns of Bernardino Ramazzini, the founder of occupational medicine, when he published his works in the late 1600's. Throughout this century, the manual handling of objects has accounted for 20-25% of all occupational injuries and has exceeded motor vehicle accidents (and all other single causes) as a cause of lost work time and associated monetary costs [1]. Many of the 2.9 billion workers across the globe are exposed to hazardous risks at their workplaces. Owing primarily to lack of data in developing countries, the occupational risk factors accounted for an estimated 37% of MSD, 16% of hearing loss, 13% of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 11% of asthma, 8% of injuries, 9% of lung cancer and 2% of leukemia. Workplace injuries are a common hazard for workers. Deaths due to occupational injuries are defined as any potentially avoidable death due to an external cause resulting from an exposure related to the person’s work [2]. Data on occupational accidents were not available from all countries in the world. The average estimated fatal occupational accident rate in whole world was 14.0 per 100,000 workers [3]. The rates were different for individual countries and regions and for separate branches of economic activity. The European Union rate was 5.89 per 100,000 workers. The highest rates (23.1 per 100,000 workers) were found in Asia. The rapidly industrializing countries such as Korea, Thailand and Indonesia have reported high fatal accident frequency rates [3]. United States’ annual fatality rate was 3.2 per 100,000 workers [4].
http://astonjournals.com/lsmr
1
2
Research Article
In a study conducted in Mangalore city, the overall prevalence rate of accidents was found to be 18.5%. It was found that almost around 86% of the accidents had affected the limbs (upper limb 24.7%, lower limb 61%), around half (52%) of the injuries were contributed by superficial injuries, 40% accidents were due to stepping/striking against objects and while handling. Hand tools and machinery in motion contributed to around 20% of the accidents. Accidents were more common among the younger age group and less-experienced workers [5]. The U.S. Department of Labor defined work related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) as “an injury or disorder of the muscles, nerves, tendons, joints, cartilage, and spinal discs” caused by reactions of the body during work such as overexertion and repetition on bending, climbing, crawling, reaching, and twisting [6]. Risk factors are the elements of a job that increase the chance of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Musculoskeletal disorders are multi-factorial in etiology. It is necessary to take physical (heavy, static or monotonous work, extreme or constrained postures, repetitive movements, unsuitable workplaces and equipment, forces, exposure to vibration), psychosocial (work organization, interpersonal relationships, short cycle tasks, poor work control, piece rate payment system, poor management, unsatisfactory training, lack of breaks) and personal (gender, age, seniority, exercise habits, life style, psychological characteristics and capacities) aspects into account as risk factors [7-9]. In 1976, Chaffin and Ayoub reported results of work conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) that defined several broad components of the lifting task related to the risk of back injury [10]. These components were classified into four categories: (a) worker characteristics, (b) characteristics of the material or object to be lifted, (c) task characteristics, and (d) work practices. Important worker characteristics include age, sex, anthropometry, coordination, degree of formal training in manual material handling, work experience, general health, and general level of physical activity. Estimation of the actual burden is essential before any intervention could be done. The estimated burden of occupational risk factors can be diminished by taking into better account workers capacity along with improving working conditions. Safest working conditions could be thus observed where all avoidable injury hazards are controlled by effective preventive measures. The primary purpose of this study is to ensure that the subject is fit to perform the task required effectively and without risk to the subject's or others' health and safety. The subject's fitness is interpreted in functional terms and in the context of the job requirements. The research in this study was aimed at 1) evaluating the work capacity of normal workers by assessing their maximal oxygen consumption (V02 Max); 2) comparing the work capacity with the workload of the worker. Expanding these initial findings will provide data to generate practical guidelines that can be used for design and evaluation of work system.
2. Methods The study was conducted in the Department of Physiology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Ramachandra University, Chennai, India. This study was designed to assess the work capacity of manual workers in two different occupational sectors. The workers were recruited from petrochemical and tannery industries. Employees in petrochemical industry were involved in activities like paletization, pushing, pulling, loading, unloading, checking samples, sweeping and mopping, whereas employees in tannery industry were engaged in works like cutting, counting, embossing, attaching handles, coloring, thread burning, sewing and house keeping. The work capacity of the worker was compared with his workload. 80 manual workers of both sexes, 62 male and 18 female were included in the study. 57 workers were recruited from petrochemical industry and 23 workers were recruited from tannery industry. Due permission was obtained from the industries concerned and the participants were involved in the study after obtaining an informed written consent. 2.1. Inclusion criteria
E-ISSN: 19487886
Manual workers (n = 80) inclusive of both sexes Age ranging from 18 – 55 yrs Minimum of one year working experience
Life Sciences and Medicine Research, Volume 2010: LSMR-19
2.2. Exclusion criteria
Workers with acute ailments Any cardiorespiratory disease Pregnancy Workers in executive category
2.3. Assessment of workload Questionnaire was administered and data regarding job title, job severity, previous job, job description, duration and frequency of doing that type of work, mental stress factors, rest periods, personal habits, and description of injury or illness were collected. 2.4. Assessment of work capacity The primary purpose of the medical assessment of fitness to work was to ensure that the subject was fit to perform the task required effectively and without risk to the subject's or others' health and safety. The subject's fitness should be interpreted in functional terms and in the context of the job requirements. 2.5. Body mass index Height and weight of the participants were measured and the Body Mass Index - BMI/Quetlet’s index was calculated (BMI = Weight 2 in kg/Height in m ). Table 1: The international classification of adult underweight, overweight and obesity according to BMI. (Source: Adapted from WHO, 1995; WHO, 2000 and WHO, 2004). BBMI (kg/m2)/m²) Underweight (UW)
