Reducing the Risk From Manual Handling of Loads in. Agriculture: Proposal and Assessment of Easily. Achievable Preventive Measures. Massimo Cecchini ...
Reducing the Risk From Manual Handling of Loads in Agriculture: Proposal and Assessment of Easily Achievable Preventive Measures Massimo Cecchini, Andrea Colantoni, Danilo Monarca, Leonardo Longo, Simone Riccioni
University of Tuscia – DAFNE Department
©2017 DAFNE – Laboratorio di Ergonomia e Sicurezza del Lavoro
Introduction • Manual handling of loads (MHL) is defined as any transporting or supporting of a load, by one or more workers, including lifting, putting down, pushing, pulling, carrying or moving of a load, which, by reason of its characteristics or of unfavourable ergonomic conditions, involves a risk particularly of back injury to workers (90/269/EEC).
Introduction • The biomechanical overload can cause diseases to: bones, joints, muscles, tendons, nerves, blood vessels (Colombini et al., 2003). • The agricultural sector is one of those most affected by this kind of risk: the environments in which workers operate, working times often imposed by the weather conditions and the increasing demand for seasonal non-specialized staff (Cecchini et al., 2013; Proto and Zimbalatti, 2010, 2015) are “competitors” to the possible onset of biomechanical overload pathologies especially of the lumbar spine section.
Trends in occupational diseases in agriculture in Italy (INAIL 2017)
The incidence of WMSDs in agriculture in Italy Type of disease
2.011
2.012
2.013
2.014
2.015 Var. % 2015/2011
Diseases of the osteomuscular system and of connective tissue
5.385
5.487
6.820
8.247
9.096
68,90%
Dorsopathy
2.887
2.808
3.377
4.204
4.777
65,50%
Soft tissue disorders (tendonitis)
1.704
1.885
2.507
3.021
3.410 100,10%
1.419
1.264
1.461
1.633
1.786
25,90%
1.352
1.218
1.402
1.536
1.690
25,00%
Nervous system disorders Carpal tunnel syndrome
Introduction • Research purpose was to make a thorough investigation, based on interviews and on-site observations, on the working methods used by workers, especially during operations involving the manual handling of loads higher than 3 kg.
Materials and methods •
Legislative Decree 81/08 refers to ISO 11228 standards as "benchmarks" to operate a proper risk assessment, and also to design effective prevention and protection measures in order to eliminate or reduce this risk.
Table 1: Maximum mass limits lifted by gender and age (Occhipinti, 2008) Working population mref (kg) Male 18 ÷ 45 years 25 Female 18 ÷ 45 years 20 Male < 18 years and > 45 years 20 Female < 18 years and > 45 years 15 •
The observations, made by means of appropriate farm inspections, were carried out during the second half of 2014 on a sample of 20 farms in central Italy.
Materials and methods The data required for MHL risk assessment were: 1. age and sex of the workers; 2. performed tasks; 3. weekly working hours including breaks; 4. number of raised objects, mass class and number of lifts performed for each object (normally and occasionally handled); 5. regarding the moved objects, it was also determined which were raised by more than one worker and which were raised using only one limb; 6. lift time spent on each mass class including any transportation by mechanical means; 7. gripper and lifting height of the object during various stages; 8. distance of the object from the body and torso rotation during handling phases.
Materials and methods With the aim of allowing the feedback on the effectiveness of proposed preventive measures, the following data were evaluated: a) presence of proper training in line with the provisions of the Italian Legislative Decree 81/08; b) response to the questions mentioned by only employer or in cooperation with the worker; c) presence of internal or external prevention and protection service manager (PPSM); d) the presence or absence of the workers' representative for safety (WRS) inside the farm.
Aim of the research • This assessment has not been operated for the sole purpose of discovering possible problems in the obtained risk indexes, but especially in order to propose a suitable redesign of procedural and organizational measures aimed at reduction of risk ratings also trying to assess their efficiency and effectiveness. • The proposed measures which determine in general a reduction of risk ratings, as the correct handling procedures (postures, lifting objects with both the limbs, handling of objects in two or more persons, etc.), can be easily feasible with proper training.
The reduction of risk • To assess how the designed preventive measures (optimized) have acted on the initial risk, the ratio of the post optimization average risk index, and risk mean index before optimization is calculated. The result is the percentage of risk reduction. • As an example: the initial average risk index is 1.98; optimized is 1.35; to estimate risk reduction compared to baseline, you apply the following formula: (1.35 / 1.98) * 100 = 68.18 %. • Thus obtained value indicates that, with the optimization measures, the risk is reduced to 68.18 % compared to the initial one. • The efficiency of the optimization measures can be calculated as a percentage by subtracting at 100 the value obtained in percent; example 100 - 68.18 = 31.82 %. • Thus obtained percentage value indicates how the proposed optimizations are potentially capable of reducing the risk indexes. • By these efficiency values, it was possible to estimate how certain factors such as training, the presence of some figures in the company (internal PPSM, WRS, etc.) are effective in the overall risk reduction of MHL.
Risk index and risk level Risk index value
Risk level
RI≤ 1,0
Acceptable
1,0
