4.3 Article

Assessing the Impact of Work Activities on the Physiological Load in a Sample of Loggers in Sicily (Italy)

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19137695

Keywords

biomechanical overload; heart rate; loggers

Funding

  1. High Plains Intermountain Center for Agricultural Health and Safety CDC/NIOSH [U54OH008085]
  2. Mountain and Plains Education and Research Center CDC/NIOSH [254-2012-M-52941]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Occupational logging activities pose significant risks to workers, including lifting heavy loads, sustaining awkward positions, performing repetitive movements, and having insufficient work breaks. This study investigated the impact of logging activities on physiological strain in a group of loggers, and found that tree felling was the most demanding task, with underestimated perception of physiological workload by experienced loggers.
Occupational logging activities expose workers to a wide range of risk factors, such as lifting heavy loads, prolonged, awkward positioning of the lower back, repetitive movements, and insufficient work pauses. Body posture has an important impact on the level of physiological load. The present study involved a group of 40 loggers in the province of Enna (Sicily, Italy) with the aim of defining the impact of logging activities on the workers' physiological strain during the three primary work tasks of felling, delimbing, and bucking. The Zephyr Bioharness measurement system was used to record trunk posture and heart rate data during work tasks. The NASA TLX questionnaire was used to explore workers' effort perception of the work tasks. Based on our results, the most demanding work task was tree felling, which requires a higher level of cardiac cost and longer periods spent in awkward trunk postures. The perceived physiological workload was consistently underestimated, especially by the more experienced loggers. Lastly, as the weight of the chainsaw increased, the cardiac load increased.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available