IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i18p6479-d409511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of AULA Risk Assessment Tool by Comparison with Other Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools

Author

Listed:
  • Kyeong-Hee Choi

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

  • Dae-Min Kim

    (Division of ICT Convergence Engineering, Dongseo University, Busan 47011, Korea)

  • Min-Uk Cho

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

  • Chae-Won Park

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

  • Seoung-Yeon Kim

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

  • Min-Jung Kim

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

  • Yong-Ku Kong

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea)

Abstract

Agricultural upper limb assessment (AULA), which was developed for evaluating upper limb body postures, was compared with the existing assessment tools such as rapid upper limb assessment (RULA), rapid entire body assessment (REBA), and ovako working posture analysis system (OWAS) based on the results of experts’ assessments of 196 farm tasks in this study. The expert group consisted of ergonomists, industrial medicine experts, and agricultural experts. As a result of the hit rate analysis, the hit rate (average: 48.6%) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (RULA: 33.3%, REBA: 30.1%, and OWAS: 34.4%). The quadratic weighted kappa analysis also showed that the kappa value (0.718) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (0.599, 0.578, and 0.538 for RULA, REBA, and OWAS, respectively). Based on the results, AULA showed a better agreement with expert evaluation results than other evaluation tools. In general, other assessment tools tended to underestimate the risk of upper limb posture in this study. AULA would be an appropriate evaluation tool to assess the risk of various upper limb postures.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyeong-Hee Choi & Dae-Min Kim & Min-Uk Cho & Chae-Won Park & Seoung-Yeon Kim & Min-Jung Kim & Yong-Ku Kong, 2020. "Application of AULA Risk Assessment Tool by Comparison with Other Ergonomic Risk Assessment Tools," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-9, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6479-:d:409511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6479/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6479/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Hita-Gutiérrez & Marta Gómez-Galán & Manuel Díaz-Pérez & Ángel-Jesús Callejón-Ferre, 2020. "An Overview of REBA Method Applications in the World," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-22, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Davide Gattamelata & Mario Fargnoli, 2022. "Development of a New Procedure for Evaluating Working Postures: An Application in a Manufacturing Company," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Muhamad Nurul Hisyam Yunus & Mohd Hafiidz Jaafar & Ahmad Sufril Azlan Mohamed & Nur Zaidi Azraai & Md. Sohrab Hossain, 2021. "Implementation of Kinetic and Kinematic Variables in Ergonomic Risk Assessment Using Motion Capture Simulation: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Dohyung Kee, 2022. "Systematic Comparison of OWAS, RULA, and REBA Based on a Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Dohyung Kee, 2022. "Comparison of LEBA and RULA Based on Postural Load Criteria and Epidemiological Data on Musculoskeletal Disorders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-12, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marta Gómez-Galán & Ángel-Jesús Callejón-Ferre & José Pérez-Alonso & Manuel Díaz-Pérez & Jesús-Antonio Carrillo-Castrillo, 2020. "Musculoskeletal Risks: RULA Bibliometric Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-52, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6479-:d:409511. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.