4.2 Article

Occupational discomfort and injuries among automotive technicians in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study

期刊

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/WOR-210522

关键词

Musculoskeletal disorders; body postures; heavy lifting; ergonomics assessment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are a major cause of disability and economic loss for businesses. This study examined WMSD cases and identified risk factors among automotive technicians in small repair shops in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The findings highlight the need for improving work environments and postures to reduce the risk of WMSDs.
BACKGROUND: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are one of the major causes of disability and early retirement. Consequently, WMSDs cost businesses billions of dollars annually due to compensation claims and productivity loss. Automotive technicians are vulnerable to WMSDs due to the nature of their work, which exposes them to numerous WMSDs risk factors. OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the WMSD cases among technicians and evaluate their postures while working in small automotive repair shops in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (SA). METHODS: The study employed a cross-sectional design. A self-administrated questionnaire and body parts discomfort survey were filled by thirty automotive technicians. A postural analysis technique was performed to assess the body postures that technicians adopt while performing the tasks, in order to estimate the associated risk of WMSD discomfort. RESULTS: Most automotive technicians suffer severe pain in the lower back, shoulders, neck, hands or wrists, and knees. The technicians related the pain to awkward body postures, heavy lifting, and sustained forceful movements. CONCLUSION: Automotive technicians are advised to level the height of the work surface as feasible, to work as close as possible to said work surface, and to avoid working with awkward body postures as much as possible.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据