MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDER(MSD) RISK REDUCTION

OF THE LIFTING TASK AT AGRO-INDUSTRIAL

COOPERATIVE INC. FEEDMILLS

_________________________________

Batan, John Patrick N.

Bilog, Cristine Joy M.

De Leon, Abegail D.

Diama, Johanna Therese D.

Dipasupil, Marvic Joyce E.

AUTHORS

_________________________________

De La Salle Lipa

SCHOOL
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT i
CHAPTER
1 THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Background of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 5
Research Objectives 5
Research Framework 6
Significance of the Study 7
Scope and Limitations 8

2 METHODOLOGY
Research Design 9
Locale of the Study 9
Research Tools and Instruments 9
Data Analysis and Interpretation 11
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 17
4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary 43
Conclusion 44
Recommendation 47
 i

ABSTRACT
Musculoskeletal disorder is experienced by the workers of Agro-Industrial Cooperative Inc.

caused by excessive lifting of loads due to poor manual material handling tasks which results to the

absenteeism of the workers. A cross-sectional study was conducted among workers aged between 19 to

40 with a total number of nine (9) workers out of eighteen (18) workers in the production area. Five (5)

workers were assigned to the lifting of raw materials to elevator machine and four (4) workers were

allocated to the lifting of finished goods to storage. The workers were selected through purposive

sampling within the duration of twenty-four (24) weeks. The main objective of this study is to minimize

the risk of injury, over fatigue, and overworked. To achieve the main objective, the researchers created

the following specific objectives: (1) To further evaluate scores gathered from the assessment tools such

as Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) Lifting equation; (2) To determine feasible solution to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal

disorder; (3) To conduct the feasible solutions through pilot testing in the company; (4) To evaluate the

results of the solution through comparison of the past data to the present based on its effectiveness on

reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorder. In order to comply with these objectives, the researchers

conducted the assessments and come up with a result that their methods of lifting showed that they are

exerting excessive compressive force. According to their REBA score, when lifting the raw materials to

elevator machine they were at 80% (n=4) high risk and 20% (n=1) of very high risk. Finished goods to

storage workers REBA score showed that they were 100% (n=4) very high risk. To address the issue, the

researchers were able to apply the engineering and administrative control wherein it resulted to the risk

reduction of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD’s) among the workers. Under engineering control, methods

of lifting reduced the risk to 58%. Prototyping reduced the risk up to 72%. Lastly, job rotation acquires

59% of risk reduction. Among these feasible solutions, having an equipment to help the workers on their

lifting task turns out to be the most effective at reducing risk. Overall, it is highly recommended to

continue using the equipment for the continuous reduction of MSD to help the workers and the company.
 CHAPTER 1
THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Background of the Study

A manufacturing industry involves industrial production meaning, preparation to processing of

items, improving old and creating new commodities are the priorities. Under this is the Feed

Manufacturing wherein it refers to the process of producing animal feeds whereby raw materials of widely

ranging physical, chemical and nutritional composition can be converted into a homogeneous mixture

suitable for producing a desired nutritional response in the animal to which the mixture is fed.

The feed manufacturing process may be considered to be made up of several unit operations which,

in almost all circumstances, including raw material selection, weighing, grinding, mixing of dry

ingredients and addition of liquids, blended feed bagging, storage and dispatch. Such processes require a

lot of manpower specifically from lifting, carrying, and transporting of raw materials until the final output

is made.

Most machines cannot operate without man, especially in the production line with this kind of work

environment which poses several risks for employees. Having no proper gear or safety body equipment,

poor body mechanics and improper work technique can also be a factor. Body pain, overexertion and over

fatigue are the common problem, it can’t be controlled but it is tolerable, yet it can greatly affect the

productivity of the worker, especially because the workers are fond of lifting excessive loads in the

workplace which can lead to a long-term damage.

According to Haspod (2018), 507,000 workers were suffering from musculoskeletal disorder in

2016 and 2017, and over 8.9 million working days were lost. Lifting and carrying can be analyzed using

ergonomic assessment tools. This is to determine if there is a potential hazard for the aforementioned

tasks. Common injury that can be experienced in lifting and carrying includes musculoskeletal disorder

(MSD). In recent years, there has been an increasing effort to investigate the causes of musculoskeletal

disorders (MSDs) and to take action to prevent them. This has led to increased recognition by workers and
 2

employers that there is a strong relationship between factors in the work environment and the

development of MSDs, resulting in significant sickness, absence, and reduced productivity. (Lanfranchi &

Duveau, 2008). Low back MSD is one of the major public health issues.

Feed Milling is one of the sources of income in the country. It is one of the providers of

employment opportunities for most Filipinos and also for residents of Mataas na Kahoy. Jobs in a feed

milling requires muscle strength due to the nature of work. Maintaining the productivity of the workers

can be achieved through proper training and supporting the needs in performing their tasks.

One of the feeds milling industry in Mataas na Kahoy is Agro-Industrial Cooperative Inc.

(AICOM )Feed Mills. (AICOM) Feedmills managed by Michael D. Palo, which is situated in Barangay

III, Mataas na Kahoy, Batangas. It produces feeds for swine and poultry such as hog’s starter, grower,

breeder, lactating and finisher, as well as broiler starter, broiler finisher, laying mash, piglet booster mash

etc. The company purpose is to help all individuals taking care of hogs, piglet and broiler. The company

currently has eighteen (18) operators that is working five (5) days per week with eight (8) working hours

each day. Their age ranges from 19 to 59 yrs old (See appendix A.2) and from 6 mos. to 25 years in

service. Each of the workers were deligated into different job assignments in the production of feeds.(See

appendix A.1) Each work corresponds with different level of physical stress.

Workers at the production area have their respective job description where the production

process starts at lifting the raw materials from the storage to the elevator machine wherein 28% of the

workers is needed to do the task.Then 5% of them was task to wait until the sack was full of grinded raw

materials then he will be placing it into the next process. Then, 11% of them is task to lift the grinded raw

materials together with other nutrients that were also in different sacks to the mixing machine. Those

sacks will be poured into the mixing machine manually by the 11% of the workers. The mixed product

would weighed and sealed as finished goods where both 6% of the workers are assigned. Lastly, it would

be lifted manually to the storage room by 22% of the workers. (See Appendix A.3)
 3

The researchers were able to get the daily time record of the workers for the past six months to

know which of the workers have the greatest number of absences and which of the task the operator is

assigned. The absences were classified as either Sick Leave (SL) or Non Sick Leave (NSL). From the

data given, it is evident that sick leaves were greater than non-sick leave of the worker. (See Appendix

A.4). In addition to this operator 18 had the highest number of absences, based on the researcher’s

interview with the supervisor, he was assigned into whatever task needed a helper but most of the time he

was assigned to load the finished goods to the storage. Consequently, along the researcher’s investigation,

the said operator was resigned on the month of April because he found a better job with less workload or

physical stress. Operator 2,12 and 14 were the next of having the highest number of absences, which they

were assigned in loading of finished goods to storage for operator 2, and 14, while operator 12 is assigned

to lifting of raw materials. (See Appendix A.6). The researchers analyzed those absences per month and

found out that their absences were alarming having 4.44% as the highest sick leave absence which is in

the month of January (See Appendix A.5). The absenteeism ratio for the past six months had an average

of 3.06% wherein it is considered an alarming rate. According to (Kirwan, 2017) in a company with less

than 100 employees, 1.8% of absences in a month is considered alarming.

According to Bydawell (2000), as cited by Josias and Beverly (2019), stated that "many

companies are actually running at absenteeism rates as high as 12 percent without even realizing it”.In

addition to this, absenteeism is indeed a behavior that organizations can never eliminate,but they

can control and manage it by the right analyzation. The researchers had identified different reasons of the

workers to file the incurring absences. The reasons were utilized to perform an evaluation through a check

sheet (See Appendix A.7) to know which particular reason, contribute the most in the absences. The

results showed that among the eighteen (18) operators, eight(8) of them stated that body pain was the

basis of their absences. It also showed that these operators also have high absent rates.

In this situation needs analysis was conducted in the lifting task of raw materials and lifting of

finished goods to storage. Based from the initial interview conducted with the manager, supervisor, and
 4

workers, workers in the production department are experiencing over fatigue, body pain, and overworked

which is one the reason for being absent. This led to doubling the task for the rest of the workers, which

eventually will cause overworking of workers. Initial study was conducted on workers both with long and

short years of service in the company. Using Nordic Musculoskeletal Disorder Questionnaire as an

ergonomic assessment tool, they experienced body pain in the neck, shoulders, nape, torso, legs and lower

back portion of their body. Symptoms of low back musculoskeletal disorder have been widely reported by

the participants. The results of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Disorder Questionnaire show that lower back

problems most routinely disclosed, 95% of the sample had experienced in such problems in the past 12

months and 89% in the past week (See Appendix B.1). Upper back, hips or thighs and shoulders are the

next most frequently reported types of musculoskeletal disorder, with annual prevalence rate of 79%, 68%

and 58% respectively (See Appendix B.2).

Based on the result of NMDQ, the researchers used Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) by

ErgoFellow to know the level of risk associated with the workers task. After the assessment, the task for

lifting the raw materials to the elevator machine got a REBA score of 13 as well as the task for loading

the finished goods to storage. This indicates that the tasks are at very high risk and implementation of

change should be done. (See appendix B.3 and B.4)

To analyse and identify the risks of physical stress associated with manual lifting, NIOSH

Lifting Equation was conducted on the task of lifting of the finished goods to the storage room. The

calculated Recommended Weight Limit (RWL) is 2.801, which indicates that the lifted load in not

acceptable. If the Lifting Index (LI) value is more than 1.0, the workstation and task should be redesigned

according to NIOSH Lifting Equation (See Appendix B.5). The calculated Lifting Index (LI) value is

17.801 (greater than 1.0) so there is a need to redesign, lift and lower the workstation tasks.
 5

Problem Statement
Agro-Industrial Cooperative Inc. (AICOM) feed mills has an average of 3.06% of sick leave

absences for the past 6 months. By further investigation and assessments from the absences incurred using

NMDQ, 95% of the workers claimed of having low back pain (LBP). The score provided by REBA was

13 for both lifting the raw materials and finished goods meaning the workers are at very high risk and

there is a need for implementation change and for NIOSH Lifting Equation, the resulted composite lifting

index was 19.22, which is greater than 1 so the lifting task is at high risk and redesigning of work task is

needed.

Research Objectives

The general objective of this research strives to minimize the risk of injury, over fatigue,

overworked which results to the absenteeism of the workers.

The following specific objectives would facilitate the achievement of the general objective.

1. To further evaluate scores gathered from assessment tools:

1.1 Rapid entire body assessment (REBA);

1.2 National institute for occupational safety and health (NIOSH) Lifting Equation;

2. To determine feasible solution to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorder based on:

2.1 Engineering Controls;

2.1.1 Methods of Lifting;

2.1.2 Prototyping;

2.2 Administrative Control;

2.2.1 Job Rotation;

3. To conduct the feasible solutions through pilot testing in the company;

4. To evaluate the results of the solution through comparison of the past data to the present based on

its effectiveness on reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorder.

 6

Research Framework

Figure 1: Model of MSD hazards and risk factors developed by

US National Research Council
(Macdonald 2012)

Figure 1 shows three groups of hazards in the workplace: external (biomechanical) loads,

organizational factors and social context; these are commonly referred to as psychosocial hazards within

the latter two groups.

Risks in all three categories interact (shown by linking arrows) and all these hazards can affect

internal processes of individual workers (internal biomechanical loads, physiological responses) and

personal outcomes (discomfort, pain, impairment, disability). As shown on the right of the diagram, all

personal processes and results are influenced by individual factors. (Macdonald, 2012)

It shows three factors under the workplace, which are external loads, organizational factors and

social context. The researchers will be focusing only on the external loads, even if it is correlated with

organizational factors and social context because the researchers will only be considering the lifting of the

raw materials to the elevator machine and lifting of the final product for storage. Hence, organizational
 7

factors and social context has the same effect on the person. The researchers will be focusing on the

external loads because it can also affect the organizational factors in such a way that they will have

knowledge in proper lifting for the operators as well as their postures. The external load is linked with

biomechanical loading and outcomes. Through biomechanical loading, the internal loads will affect the

physiological responses of the workers. Outcome from external load will result to pain discomfort that

can lead to impairment disability of the worker.

Significance of the Study

The study will make an impact and give advantage to the researcher’s chosen workers of

AICOM Inc. Workers having awkward body postures, repetitive work, and heavy workload may result to

body pain, over fatigue and overexertion leading to higher risk of musculoskeletal disorder is what the

company should pay attention with. It is important to know the findings of this study would be benefits to

the researchers and to the company itself.

For the Company. This study will have a benefit to Agro-Industrial Cooperative Inc. (AICOM) Feedmills

company , specially the workers. The company will have knowledge on how they can assess the worker’s

risk on their task. For the workers, the benefit is to know the proper way of lifting loads and body

postures to reduce the risk of Low Back MSD. Furthermore, the results of the study may be beneficiary to

other companies that is under the same circumstances.

For the Researchers. This paper will help the researchers to be knowledgeable and have a deeper

understanding on physical ergonomics in particular to the usage of the ergonomic assessment tools.

Moreover, this study can serve as a guide and reference for the researchers undertaking similar studies.
 8

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study covers the lifting tasks done by workers of AICOM Feedmills throughout their eight

hours shift, it is where they are lifting the raw materials to the elevator machine and also transporting the

finished goods for storage. The researcher also included the age and years in service to know if there is a

relationship to the occurrence of risk of MSD. The researchers will also be considering the weight lifted,

distance of the object being lifted to its destination and other variables that affects the workers, that

contribute to the occurrence of MSD. In assessing these variables, the researchers will only be using three

(3) ergonomic assessment tools such as (1) NMDQ for evaluating if the workers are diagnosed of having

musculoskeletal disorder, (2) REBA whereas it can also integrate the results generated from other tools

such as OWAS and RULA, and (3) NIOSH lifting equation because its focal point is the lifting

movement of the worker. As shown in the theoretical framework the researchers will only be focusing on

the external loads by assessing biomechanical loading and outcomes of the work.

The researchers will use NIOSH Lifting equation, but it is restricted from the lifting of raw

materials to the elevator machine because the workers’ movement includes pulling of the raw material to

the machine using only a hand which is not included in this study, hence, this assessment tool will still be

used in classifying the lifting of finished goods for storage. Furthermore, organizational factors and social

context in the workplace are also excluded being both are another broad issue affecting workers

performance.
 CHAPTER 2
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

Experimental Design is the type of research designs that the researchers will use in the study. This

type of research is a blueprint procedure that allows researchers to maintain control over all factors that

may affect the outcome of an experiment. This enables researchers to answer the question, "What is

causing something to happen?" and identify the relationship between variables causal and effect.

Researchers tend to find the root cause of the problem why the production department's AICOM

Feedmills workers are suffering from low back pain, overfatigue, and over-exertion. By experimenting

with the use of ergonomic tools such as REBA and NIOSH Lifting Equation, these problems will be

assessed.

Locale of the Study

The feed mill industry was chosen by the researchers to be the locale of research due to the fact

that Batangas have plenty of it. The Agro-Industrial Cooperative Incorporated (AICOM) Feedmills which

is located in Mataas na Kahoy, Batangas have eighteen (18) workers in the production department

wherein their ages are ranging from nineteen (19) to fifty-nine (59) years old. These workers have an

average of 8.85 years in service with a range from 6 months to 25 years.

Research Tools and Instrument

To provide and gather as much specific information and relative evaluation, experimental method

is used. The following instruments are mainly used in the conduct of the research: First is the Personal

interview, second, direct observation, and lastly, actual measurements. Personal interview was
 10

conducted starting from the company manager, production head, and the operators of the company to

gather real and experience-based information. The company manager was asked regarding the common

problem with the workers in the production, while the production head is asked regarding the whole

process in the production line including the weight of the raw materials and output that is lifted through

the entire process, also their quota for the day. The operators were also interviewed specifically about

their age, years in service, work assignment and what do they do to ease pain that can also support the

common problem.

Another research instrument used is direct observation of the operators in the production. This

includes the observation of initial to final process, from picking and transporting of raw materials to the

elevator equipment, to weighing, transporting of the grinded raw materials for mixing, to the packaging of

the product and loading of the output ready for delivery.

Actual measurements of the raw materials, the transportation distance of one process to another is

also measured, tally of the absences of the workers and mainly the maximum weight being carried by the

workers are also considered.

The researchers will be using the software ErgoFellow in evaluating the postures of the workers .

The software has 17 ergonomic tools to assess and enhance workplace conditions, in order to reduce

occupational risks and increase productivity. One of the ergonomic tools is the REBA analysis which will

be used to assess the level of severity of the workers. The researchers will also be utilizing the Image

Analysis tool from the software in order to determine the inclination angles of the body parts from their

neutral position.

Another program that the researchers will be using is the 3 Dimensional Static Strength

Prediction Program (3D SSPP). For activities such as lifting, pressing, pushing and pulling, 3DSSPP

technology predicts static strength requirements. The program provides an approximate model of work

that includes data on posture parameters of force and anthropometry between male and female.
 11

Performance includes the percentage of men and women with the strength to perform the job mentioned,

the compression strength of the spinal cord and the correlation of data with NIOSH guidelines.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

To furthermore understand the data, the researchers apply different tools to identify the body

discomfort of every workers that results in body pain such as NIOSH Lifting Equation, and REBA. In

addition to that, researchers used a questionnaire to evaluate the musculoskeletal problems of the workers.

Nordic Musculoskeletal Disorder Questionnaire (NMDQ)

According to Alaca et.al (2019) the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire is completed by self-

administration or face-to-face interview and provides reliable information on the onset, prevalence and

outcomes of MSP in nine body regions (the neck, shoulder, upper back, elbow, wrist/hand, low back, hip/

thigh, knee, ankle/foot). The NMQ-E interrogates ache, pain or discomfort experienced in the nine body

parts to date, for the last 12 months, for the last four weeks and on the day of the administration, with

binary choice questions (yes or no).

According to Descatha et al (2010), it consists of structured, forced, multiple-choice questions

and can be used as an interview or as a self- administered questionnaire. The original version consists of

several components: a general questionnaire and three specific components focusing on the lower back,

shoulders and neck. The questionnaire was designed to answer the following question: "In a given

population, do musculoskeletal disorders occur, and if so, in which parts of the body are they located?" A

questionnaire in which the human body (viewed from the back) is divided into nine anatomical regions

was constructed with this consideration in mind. The question "Have you ever had trouble (suffering,

pain, discomfort) in the lower back (shoulders, neck, etc.) during the last 12 months/7 days?" In turn, each

anatomical area is requested. Then focus specific questions on each anatomical region. In the original

version, these anatomical areas were the lower back, the shoulders, and the neck.
 12

Biomechanical Analysis

According to Lee and Jung (2015), this analysis is the process of examining an activity or

movement pattern to distinguish its component parts. The application of biomechanical principles is

important for preventing MSDs in order to improve working conditions and performance. In ergonomics,

safety, and health, the hand is mainly evaluated to reduce the risk of MSDs.

Biomechanical analyses have to date contributed to enhance our knowledge of the underlying

causes of movement. This is supported by the fact that the sole use of observation methods correlates

weakly with quantitative biomechanical measures. Biomechanics has indeed enabled a precise

quantification of motor strategies in order to optimize, maintain or develop high level human

performances while preventing MSD in sports and ergonomics (McGinnis, 2005) as cited by Madeleine

(2011).

This is exemplified by the general agreement concerning the important role of the muscles of the

shoulder girdle in the development of rotator cuff injury/impingement syndrome (Escamilla et al, 2009).

Thus, biomechanical assessments of human performance contribute to delineate damageable load

patterns to the musculoskeletal system in relation to physical activity (Madeleine, 2010).

NIOSH Lifting Equation

According to Middlesworth (2018) The NIOSH Lifting Equation is a method used by

occupational health and safety practitioners to assess the risks associated with the lifting and elimination

of workplace activities associated with manual material handling.

As mentioned by Shahu (2016), this method is for two-handed activities, one-handed activities

and also repetitive lifting jobs. However, the metabolic characteristics of the assigned task should be

clearly understood as to whether they would produce similar results.

 13

Single-Task Assessment

The Recommended Weight Limit is a multiplicative model that incorporates weighing factors

(multipliers) corresponding to six task variables such as: Load Constant, Horizontal Multiplier, Vertical

Multiplier, Distance Multiplier, Asymmetric Multiplier, Frequency Multiplier and Coupling Multiplier

(See Appendix C.14 - 19). It is calculated as:

RWL= LC X HM X VM X DM X AM X FM X CM

Based on the results from the RWL, we can get the lifting index. It is term that provides a relative

estimate of the level of physical stress associated with a particular manual lifting task. Lifting index is

calculated as:

LI = Load Weight / Recommended Weight Limit

Multi-Task Procedure

1. Compute the Frequency-Independent Recommended Weight Limit (FlRWL) and Single-Task

Recommended Weight Limit (STRWL) for each task.

2. Compute the Frequency-Independent Lifting Index (FILI) and Single-Task Lifting Index (STLI)

for each task.

3. Compute the Composite Lifting Index (CLI) for the overall job.

Psychophysical Analysis

Rapid Entire Body Assessment

According to Middlesworth (2018), this ergonomic assessment tool uses a systematic process to

evaluate whole body postural MSD and risks associated with job tasks. A single page worksheet is used

to evaluate required or selected body posture, forceful exertions, type of movement or action, repetition,

and coupling.
 14

As mentioned by Madani (2016), REBA provides a measure to determine the number of WMSD

hazard postures. This divides the body into portions to be identified separately, depending on the motion

planes, and provide a scoring for muscle activity throughout the entire body where the effect of manual

handling occurs.

TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution)

Developed by Hwang and Yoon in 1981, TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by

Similarity to Ideal Solution) is a technique for multi-attribute decision making. It is based on the concept

of comparing different alternatives with a negative ideal solution (NIS) and a positive ideal solution (PIS).

These ideal solutions represent the alternatives having respectively all worst and all best attribute

values attainable. Therefore, the best solution should have the longest distance from the NIS and the

shortest distance from the PIS.

1. Assign weights (wj) to attributes; the basis for these weights can be anything, but, usually, is ad hoc

reflective of relative importance.

2. Determine the normalized decision matrix according to equation:

Where xij and rij are respectively the original and normalized scores of the decision matrix;

3. Construct the weighted normalized decision matrix according to equation: Where wj is the weight for

the criterion j.

4. Determine PIS and NIS:

 15

5. Calculate the separation measures using equations:

6. Calculate the relative closeness to the ideal solution according to equation:

7. Rank configurations according to the preference order;

8. Select the top ranked configuration, i.e. the one that has the best score

among all variable alternative.

Job Rotation Evaluator

Job rotation is the structured worker interchange between different jobs that requires workers to

rotate at certain intervals between different workstations or jobs. Job Rotation Evaluator is used to

determine Exertion Index (EI) for each muscle group.

1. Determine variable rating by interviewing and observing workers to gain a full understanding of

all the tasks required, then using the data collection worksheet to document ratings and

measurements for the three variables needed to determine the Exertion Index (EI).

Exertion Effort – This rating is based on a perceived level of exertion comparable to the Borg

Scale but fewer choices (5 instead of 10-15). Assess the exertion level for each muscle group

based on asking workers about their experience and observations.

Exertion Posture – This rating is based on studying work tasks along the knowledge of human

movement and common posture.

 16

Exertions / minute – Determine the exertion rate for each muscle group by counting the average

number of exertions in a short sampling time, then divide the total number of exertions by the

number of minutes observed.

2. Determine Exertion Index (EI) for Muscle Groups by selecting the the appropriate rating criterion

on the worksheet for each muscle group. Repeat this process using a different worksheet for every

job being considered for rotation into the worksheet. After determining the scores, the EI is then

compared to a gradient that estimates the level of task risk:

Less than 6.0 is low risk (green), 6.0 – 13.0 is moderate risk (yellow) and greater than 13.0 is high

risk (red)

3. Determine Job Rotation Sequence. The rotation sequence or schedule should be based on the Job

Rotation Evaluator tool results to ensure that the different jobs in the rotation do not present the

same ergonomic stressors to the same parts of the body (muscle-tendon groups). The objective is

to provide a consistent and systematic method for job rotations that are based on the requirements

of the jobs. The ideal rotation schedule is based on the following criterion:

Acceptable rotations Avoid if possible Unacceptable rotations

Green ↔ Green Yellow ↔ Yellow Red ↔ Yellow

Green ↔ Yellow Red ↔ Red

Green ↔ Red
 CHAPTER 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter discusses the results of the study conducted and it entails the researchers to further

explain the results of the studies through comparison of data. It provides discussion on the objectives of

the study.

1. Scores gathered from assessment tools

Scores gathered shows the assessment result of posture analysis using REBA and NIOSH lifting

equation.

1.1 Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA)

REBA scores show the risk level that the workers experienced in lifting sacks of feeds. Data used

in the analysis includes the workers position of the neck, trunk, upper arm, forearm, wrist, and leg.

REBA scoring is based on determining the angle of twist or position with respect to a particular reference,

while the body is in a neutral position.

Shown in (See Appendix F.1) is the position of the worker while doing his lifting task. The

worker’s neck position revealed an angle of 35.25 degrees with respect to his spinal column. The trunk is

bend forward in an angle of 74.20 degrees. The upper arm and the lower arm have and angle of

inclination angle of 44.26 degrees and 99.76 degrees respectively. Lastly, the worker’s leg deviated 33.43

degrees from the neutral position.

By analyzing the posture of the worker using REBA, it reveals that each part of the body that

departs from the neutral position corresponds to a given risk level. The computed REBA score is 13,

which is considered a very high-risk level.

 18

Table 3.1. Categorization on REBA Scores of Workers

REBA Score Risk Level Required Action

1 Negligible None necessary

2 or 3 Low Risk Change may be needed

4 to 7 Medium Risk Further investigation, change soon

8 to 10 High Risk Investigate and implement change

11 or more Very High Risk Implement change

Figure 2 provides the current posture analysis using REBA

Figure 2. Percentage of Workers at Raw Materials under REBA Level

From the 5 workers that lift the raw materials of the feeds, 80 percent (4 workers) experiences a

score of “8 to 10” which is considered as high-risk level. While the 20 percent of the workers, or only one

of them is categorized in the very high-risk level, with a score of 11 and above.
 19

With the current posture practiced by the workers, it shows that his head is flexed greater than 20

degrees, known as forward head posture. According to Morrison (2018), for long-term effects, forward

head posture can put an increasing amount of stress on the neck and for other areas of the body. Other

long-term effects can be muscle imbalances, the risk for spinal degeneration and reduced

mobility. Workers are categorized in the high-risk levels, in which there is a possibility that they will be

suffering MSD in the long run as a consequence of poor manual handling. The workers also show that in

their activity, their trunk is bent more than 60 degrees. According to Danuta and Klaus (2017), when the

trunk is bent forward more than 60 degrees or when the trunk is bent backwards the risk of developing

musculoskeletal disorders increases rapidly. For the trunk, bending sideways (frontal plane) or twisting

the upper part with respect to the lower part (transverse plane) determines the comfort zones with a

criterion of 10 degrees. Awkward trunk posture (twisting or bending) is also a strong risk factor in

absenteeism due to back pain

The same assessment has been applied to the process of lifting the finished goods and carrying

them to the storage area.

Presented in (See Appendix F.2) is the lifting position of the worker while performing his task.

Most of the workers at finished good area are executing this kind of position when they’re lifting the

feeds to storage. The workers are bending their neck up to 35.25 degrees. According to OshWiki (2017),

if the neck is flexed at 20 degrees for more than 40% of work time, the risk increases rapidly. Their trunks

are bending to 75.49 degrees and twisted or side bending. According to OshWiki (2017), when the trunk

is bent forward above 60 degrees or when trunk is bent backwards the risk of developing MSD’s is

growing rapidly. For the trunk bending sideways or twisting the upper part of trunk with respect to lower

part, comfortable zones are determined with criteria of 10 degrees. Moreover, their upper and lower arms

are inclined to 35.20 degrees and 143.86 degrees respectively. Most of the workers are raising their

shoulder. According to OshWiki (2017), the risk of developing shoulder pain rises significantly when

work is done with hands above the level of the shoulder or when work requires a lower knee rate. In both

sagittal and frontal planes, comfortable working posture needs an arm angle of less than 20 degrees. The
 20

worker wrists are twisting 20.02 degrees from the neutral position. Lastly, their legs are bending with an

angle of 65.21 degrees.

Figure 3 provides the current posture analysis using REBA.

Figure 3. Percentage of Workers at Finished Goods under REBA Level

Having 4 (four) workers at the finished goods area, Figure 3 shows that all of them acquire a

score of 11 or more based on the percentage of the workers and REBA score. This is considered that they

are at a very high-risk level.

1.2 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Lifting Equation

The multi-task analysis of the revised NIOSH lifting equation is used in lifting operations where

weights and heights vary. In related to the issue of the workers the manual lifting process in the feedmill

where the vertical multiplier of the operator varies. The researchers used this analysis in order to verify if

the lifting posture of the workers is suitable or not to lift the 50 kg sacks of feed.
 21

Variables included in the assessment of lifting task includes the horizontal distance, vertical

distance, distance travelled, asymmetry angle, frequency of lifts per minute, and coupling (See Appendix

F.3). For each variable there are values identified the horizontal distance of the hands at the origin is 12

inches and the distance of the hands at the destination is 18 inches. The measurement of the vertical

distance above the floor at the origin is 63 inches and the distance of the destination varies having values

of 8.5 in, 13.5 in, 18.5 in, 23.5 in, 28.5 in, 33.5 in and 38.5 in.

Table 3.2. NIOSH Lifting Equation Result

Task Variables Values Multiplier

Horizontal (H) 0.83

Origin 12 in

Destination 18 in

Vertical (V) 0.75

Origin 63 in

Destination

V1 8.5 in

V2 13.5 in

V3 18.5 in
V4 23.5 in

V5 28.5 in

V6 33.5 in

V7 38.5 in

Distance Travelled (D)

D1 54.5 in 0.85

D2 49.5 in 0.86

D3 44.5 in 0.86
 22

D4 39.5 in 0.87

D5 34.5 in 0.87

D6 29.5 in 0.88

D7 24.5 in 0.89

Asymmetry Angle (A) 1

Origin 0 degree

Destination 0 degree

Frequency of lifts (F) 0.5 lifts/min 0.81

Coupling (C) 0.9 0.9

Composite Lifting Index (CLI) 19.22

Using the values in Table 3.2 and the corresponding multiplier for the lifting of sack of feeds to be

placed at the storage area, it reveals a composite lifting index (CLI) of 19.22. According to Ketan and

Alsaffar (2017), their study revealed a calculation of CLI value of 1.92, that pointed unacceptable work

since the value of CLI is 1.0 for acceptable work, which means this job is physically stressful and

lead to the exposure to fatigue for a worker. As a result, the need for a redesign was validated and

actions were taken to change the job condition in order to decrease the CLI to 1 or less.

2. Feasible solution to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorder

Feasible solutions for reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorder are defined as Engineering

controls and Administrative control. There are sub categories under each, for the Engineering controls it

includes methods of lifting and prototyping, and as for the Administrative control, job rotation and

personal protective equipment falls under it.

 23

2.1 Engineering Controls

Engineering controls were able to apply by the researcher by implementing the optimal methods

of lifting, designing an ergonomic equipment, and creating an ideal job sequence for the workers. Some

engineering controls involves reducing the weight of a load to limit force exertion, redesign tools to

enable neutral postures, reposition a work table to eliminate a long/excessive reach and enable working in

neutral postures, use diverging conveyors off a main line so that tasks are less repetitive, and install

diverters on conveyors to direct materials toward the worker to eliminate excessive leaning or reaching.

2.1.1 Methods of Lifting

Methods of lifting is an aid for corrective movement for the workers. It includes the consideration

of the height, range and frequency of lift. It is a solution for reducing the risk of having musculoskeletal

disorder while performing manual materials-handling tasks.

Figure 4. Lifting position on raw materials

Illustrated in Figure 4 is the simulated lifting position on raw materials starting from the first

position to the final position. Here, the object is placed horizontally on the floor then the worker will be

putting the sack of raw materials unto the push cart.

 24

Figure 5. Lifting position on finished goods

Demonstrated in Figure 5 is the lifting position of the worker on finished goods. Shown above are

the three positions, from the start, middle, and final position of the lift. In the first situation, after the

sealing process the sack of finished goods is placed vertically on the floor, then the worker will be lifting

the sack unto its head to travel it to either the output pallet or the truck.

Figure 6. Proper lifting position

Presented in Figure 6 is the proper lifting position in accordance with the methods of lifting. This

is the optimum position when lifting an object, when an object is being lifted from the floor the

applicable starting point is a squatting position where the hands must be in between the legs, then slowly

standing up to keep the good posture.

According to Sander (1993), it was rather common practice (even perhaps an article of faith) to

recommend lifting from the floor from a squatting position, with knees and hips bent and back reasonably

straight (sometimes referred to as the straight-bent-knee method, squat lift, or leg lift). The squat method

contrasts with the stoop method (or back lift), where the legs tend to be straight, with the back bending
 25

forward and most lifting. Another lift style is called free-style, which resembles a semi-squat posture in

which the load during lifting can be placed on the thigh. In lifting the frequency of lifting must be

considered, as per Genaidy and Asfour (1989), quoted by Sanders in 1993, had men lifting different loads

at different lifting frequencies from the floor to the table height. They continued the task until at the

prescribed frequency they could no longer lift the load. This has been taken as a time of endurance. As the

lifting frequency increases, there is a significant decrease in endurance time. It should also be noted that

as frequency increases, during the endurance time, fewer total lifts are made. Improving the lifting

technique can enhance workers lifting form or posture but can limit them because of the frequency of

load, for they are working for straight 8 hours where their job is pure lifting. In their working environment

they are required to exert compressive force because the load to be lifted is considerably around 50

kilograms. In methods of lifting we must take in consideration the height, range, also the frequency of lift

because it may affect the adaption of corrective movements of the worker.

The feasible solution of lifting was determined by computing the compressive force that the

worker experience while lifting the sack of feeds. Presented in Table 3.3 is a summary of results in

determining the compressive force of lifting position on raw materials, lifting position on finished goods

and proper lifting position.

 26

Table 3.3. Summary of results in determining the compressive force

Compressive force (lb)

Workers’ position
Starting position Middle position Final position

Lifting position on raw materials 425 1317 880

Lifting position on finished goods 198 918 532

Proper lifting position 357 943 888

Using 3DSSPP, the computed compressive force experienced by the worker in the current method

of lifting on raw materials are 425 lb for starting position, 1,317 lb for middle position, and 880 lb for

final position. For the lifting on finished goods the computed comprehensive force for the starting

position is 198 lb, for the middle position is 918 lb, and for the final position is 532 lb. Also, the

comprehensive force of the optimum lifting position in accordance with the methods of lifting is also

provided, giving a compressive of 357 lb for starting position, 943 lb for the middle position and lastly for

its final position with a value of 888 lb.

2.1.2 Prototyping

Based on the assessments gathered on REBA scores and NIOSH Lifting Equation, a prototype

was designed to help workers in lifting. According to OSHA (2019), many industries have successfully

implemented ergonomic solutions in their facilities as a way to address their workers' MSD injury risks.

Making these changes has reduced physical demands, eliminated unnecessary movements, lowered injury

rates and their associated workers' compensation costs, and reduced employee turnover. Engineering

controls are the most desirable, where possible. It involves the use of a device lift and reposition heavy

objects to limit force exertion, reduce the weight of a load to limit force exertion, redesign tools to enable

neutral postures and etc.

 27

Four designs are considered and weighed using “Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity

to Ideal Solution” (TOPSIS). These designs are picked based on its use on lifting the sack of feeds (See

Appendix G.1). Criteria used in the analysis includes cost, durability, design, capacity, and materials

used.

Table 3.4. Criteria for TOPSIS and Assigned Weights

Weights 0.30 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.10

Criteria Cost (Php) Durability Design Capacity (kg) Material

Hand Truck 1 25740 4 4 150 4

Hand Truck 2 51480 4 3 250 4

Hand Truck 3 39360 3 4 100 3

Hand Truck 4 28620 2 4 200 4

Assigned weights were based on the importance considered by the company. Cost was considered

as the highest among the criteria, followed by durability and capacity, then lastly, the design, and

materials used. Cost is determined depending on the cost estimated by the fabricator, and capacity is

based on the weights the design can carry. Durability, design, and material are rated by assigning scores

wherein five (5) is the highest and one (1) is the lowest.

Assessing the criteria using TOPSIS will follow the protocol of normalizing the values to arrive

at normalized decision matrix, providing weights to the normalized decision matrix, determining the

maximum and minimum value for each criterion presented in positive-negative ideal solution, and finally,

separation measures, closeness to ideal solution, and ranking.

 28

Table 3.5.Normalized Decision Matrix

Cost Durability Design Capacity Material

Hand Truck 1 0.34 0.60 0.53 0.41 0.53

Hand Truck 2 0.68 0.60 0.40 0.68 0.53

Hand Truck 3 0.52 0.45 0.53 0.27 0.40

Hand Truck 4 0.38 0.30 0.53 0.54 0.53

Normalized decision matrix is obtained by dividing the normalized score to the square root of the

summation of the squared of it.

Table 3.6.Weighted Normalized Decision Matrix

Cost Durability Design Capacity Material

Hand Truck 1 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.10 0.05

Hand Truck 2 0.20 0.15 0.04 0.17 0.05

Hand Truck 3 0.16 0.11 0.05 0.07 0.04

Hand Truck 4 0.11 0.07 0.05 0.14 0.05

Values shown in table 3.6 is obtained by multiplying the result from the normalized decision

matrix to its corresponding weights.

 29

Table 3.7.Positive and Negative Ideal Solution

Cost Durability Design Capacity Material

(PIS) V+ 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.17 0.05

(NIS) V- 0.20 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.04

PIS - Positive Ideal Solution; NIS – Negative Ideal Solution

For the cost, Positive Ideal Solution (PIS) is obtained by getting the minimum value for each

criteria and Negative Ideal Solution (NIS) is based on the maximum value while the latter criteria, PIS is

obtained by getting the maximum and NIS is minimum .

Table 3.8.Separation Measures, Closeness to the Ideal Solution, and Ranking

Separation Index+ Separation Index- Closeness Index Rank

Hand Truck 1 0.07 0.13 2.08 1

Hand Truck 2 0.10 0.13 1.36 3

Hand Truck 3 0.12 0.06 0.57 4

Hand Truck 4 0.08 0.12 1.51 2

Closeness Index determines the ranking for the design alternative wherein the largest value is

considered the optimal design. Hand Truck 1 is considered the best design, as revealed from the

comparison of the designs.

 30

The design for the hand truck will be based on the average or the 50th percentile anthropometry

of the workers in the company and the sizes of the feeds they are lifting. According to Liang and Shih

(2014), for postural situations we have to use the average of the 50th percentile value to accommodate

most of the users. Appendix G.1 shows the appearance of the designed hand truck with parts and

dimensions.

Appendix G.2 and G.3 shows the parts, dimension, and the capacity of hand truck based on the

design established by the researchers. The height of the platform during non-lifted state is 20 inches from

the ground. When it is fully lifted, the height of the platform from the ground is 46 inches. The capacity

of the design is 150 kilograms, the platform’s length and width are 40 by 28 inches and handle’s height

are 43 inches from the floor that is based on the average height of the workers in lifting the raw materials

and finished goods. According to Del Prado-Lu(2012), the average standing height of Filipino workers is

167 centimeters or 65.75 inches, which is also the same value of the workers from AICOM Feedmills.

2.2 Administrative Control

Administrative or work practice controls may be appropriate in some cases where engineering

controls cannot be implemented or when different procedures are needed after implementation of the new

engineering controls require that heavy loads are only lifted by two people to limit force exertion. Job

rotation is a practice in which workers in the company rotate between jobs.

2.2.1 Job Rotation

The job rotation is evaluated using the job rotation evaluator in which each muscle group are

rated based on the severity of stress on different parts of the body.

Table 3.9 shows that ratings applied to each muscle groups are based on factor/variable with

corresponding description and criterion. Assigned ratings are based on the observation of the researchers

for each muscle group.

 31

Table 3.9. Job Rotation Evaluator Rating Criteria

Factor/Variable Rating Description Rating Criterion

Very Light 1-Relaxed Effort

Exertion Effort Light 3-Noticeable Effort

(Force) Moderate 6-Obvious Effort

Hard 9-Substantial Effort

Maximal Effort 13-Maximal Effort

Good 1-Near Neutral

Fair 1.5-Slight Deviation

Exertion Poor 2-Marked Deviation

Posture Very Poor 2.5-Extreme Deviation

Very Low 0.5-Less than 4/minute

Low 1.0-(4-8/minute)

Exertions/Minute Moderate 1.5(9-14/minute)

(Repetitions) High 2.0-(15-19/minute)

Very High 3.0-More than 20/minute

Exertion Index Low <6.0=Green

(EI) Moderate 6.0-13.0=Yellow

High >13.0=Red

Source: ErgoPlus
 32

Table 3.10. Job Rotation Evaluation

JOB1 Lifting of JOB 2 JOB 3 JOB 4 JOB 5 JOB 6 Lifting

Raw Materials Preparation Mixing Weighing Sealing of Finished
Goods

Muscle Group Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating

Neck/Upper 4.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 19.5

Back

R Upper 1.5 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 6.75

Arm/Shoulder

L Upper 1.5 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 6.75

Arm/Shoulder

R 4.5 1.5 3 1.5 0.5 4.5

Forearm/Elbow

L Forearm/Elbow 4.5 1.5 3 1.5 0.5 4.5

R Wrist/Finger 1.5 9 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.5

L Wrist/Finger 1.5 9 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.5

Trunk/Lower 13.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 13.5

Back

Legs(foot pedal) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Table 3.10 shows the ratings for various jobs in different muscle groups wherein green stands for

low exertion index, yellow is moderate, and red is high. After determining the ratings from the job

rotation evaluator tool, the researchers have come up with a job rotation sequence to ensure that the

various rotational workers do not have the same ergonomic stressors in the same body parts. According to

Middlesworth(2018), job rotation can be used reactively and proactively. Reactive job rotation reduces
 33

employee exposure to jobs that have been identified as “high-risk” based on an objective ergonomic

assessment. Rotation can be used until engineering controls are implemented. Proactive job rotation can

be implemented to prevent muscle fatigue due to exposure to job tasks that focus the workload on single

muscle groups, and for additional benefits.

3. Feasible solutions through pilot testing in the company

After determining the feasible solutions in this study, the researchers conducted one week of pilot

testing in the company to know the effects of the solution in reducing the risk of Musculoskeletal

Disorder.

3.1 Methods of Lifting

Hand truck is an aid to help the workers on lifting excessive loads, also by using this equipment it

is less likely for them to suffer from injuries. This section shows the simulation of the workers’ lifting

position but with having a proper posture and the use of a hand truck.

Figure 7. Lifting of Raw materials with Hand truck

Illustrated in Figure 7 is the lifting of raw materials with hand truck, on the first position, squat

lift is applied lifting as a preparation for the lift. Slowly lifting the load horizontally from the floor then it

will be placed unto the hand truck.

 34

Figure 8. Lifting of Finished goods with Hand truck

In Figure 8, is the lifting of finished goods with hand truck. After the sawing process, the load

will be lifted vertically from the floor starting with a high squat position then the load will be lifted slowly

to be placed horizontally on the hand truck.

3.2 Prototyping

Appendix G.4 presents the hand truck designed by the researchers for lifting the materials.

Appendix G.4 shows the final output of hand truck. Some modifications were added wherein

more scissor type of metals were included so it can lift larger weights and at the same time, the lifter was

replaced by a steering wheel to lift the material easier. Dimensions of the hand truck is still the same

except from the height when the platform is fully elevated where the researchers consider the

anthropometry of the workers and the capacity of the truck increases from 150 kilograms to 200.

Appendix G.5 reveals the workers’ posture interacting with the hand truck.

Shown in (See Appendix G.5) is the position of the worker while doing his lifting task with the

introduced hand truck. The worker’s neck position revealed an angle of 14.32 degrees with respect to his

spinal column. The trunk is in the neutral position wherein the angle of deviation is 0 degrees. The upper

arm and the lower arm have and angle of inclination angle of 12.97 degrees and 93.63 degrees

respectively. Lastly, the worker’s leg deviated 9.07 degrees from the neutral position.

The same assessment is conducted on lifting finished goods to storage with the hand truck.
 35

Appendix G.6 shows the worker performing his lifting task with the modified hand truck. His

neck is flexed by 19.36 degrees with respect to his spinal column. Trunk is bent forward with an angle of

29.39 degrees from its neutral position. The upper and lower arm has a deviation of 19.83 degrees and

63.1 degrees, respectively. The wrist is flexed by 12.34 degrees. Lastly, the legs are bending with an

angle of 56.89 degrees.

By analyzing the postures of workers using REBA it reveals that each part of the body is closely

deviated from its neutral position.

Appendix G.7 shows that the worker is carrying the finished goods to the storage area using the

Hand Truck. It shows that the worker is lifting the sack of feeds to the storage area. The horizontal

distance for the origin in Appendix G.7A is 12 inches and the vertical distance for the origin is 16 inches.

In Appendix G.7B, the horizontal distance for the destination is 18 inches and the vertical distance for the

origin is 20 inches and lastly, the upper limb twisted with an angle of 90 degrees.

3.3 Job Rotation

Different job rotation cycles were identified to assess the optimal rotation for the workers to

lessen the forces in different muscle groups.

Figure 9. Recommended Rotation Sequence

 36

The aim is to provide a clear and structured process for work rotations based on job requirements.

Based on the results of the rating in job rotation evaluator in Table 3.10, the optimal method of rotation is

based on the following criteria: acceptable rotations : green to green, green to yellow, and green to red,

avoid if possible, rotations: yellow to yellow, lastly, unacceptable rotations: red to yellow and red to red.

To determine the best rotation rate, a number of variables should be considered wherein the researchers

find the best flow of job that follows the criteria. The researchers avoided the yellow to yellow, red to

yellow, and red to red rotation of jobs to avoid stress in certain muscle groups. The optimal job rotation

for the company is lifting of raw material, mixing, weighing, lifting of finished goods, sealing, and

preparation. According to Middlesworth(2018), rotations lasting 1-2 hours are commonly effective

because this fits in well with break sequences. Generally, multiple rotations within the work shift is more

effective than daily or weekly rotations. However, some specialized jobs with a higher learning / training

curve may need to be rotated less frequently such as daily or weekly. Manufacturing and assembly

objectives must be considered as well, so you will need to work with management to determine what

frequency would work best for the group of jobs being considered for rotation.

To evaluate the optimal job sequence, NIOSH Lifting Equation is applied wherein the multiplier

of frequency of lifting is changed due to lower working hours shown in Table 3.11.

Table 3.11. Applying Job Rotation to NIOSH Lifting Equation

Task Variables Values Multiplier

Horizontal (H) 0.83

Origin 12 in

Destination 18 in

Vertical (V) 0.75

Origin 63 in
 37

Destination

V1 8.5 in

V2 13.5 in

V3 18.5 in

V4 23.5 in

V5 28.5 in

V6 33.5 in

V7 38.5 in

Distance Travelled (D)

D1 54.5 in 0.85

D2 49.5 in 0.86

D3 44.5 in 0.86

D4 39.5 in 0.87

D5 34.5 in 0.87

D6 29.5 in 0.88

D7 24.5 in 0.89

Asymmetry Angle (A) 1

Origin 0 degree

Destination 0 degree

Frequency of lifts (F) 0.5 lifts/min 0.92

Coupling (C) 0.9 0.9

7.96
Composite Lifting Index (CLI)

By lowering their working hours to 1-2 hours for lifting, by implementing the suggested job

rotation, one of the variables which is the frequency of lifting from NIOSH Equation will have a larger

multiplier resulting to lower lifting index of 7.96.

 38

4. Results of the solution through comparison of the past data to the present.

The pilot testing will determine whether the feasible solution was effective in reducing the risk of

Musculoskeletal Disorder by comparing the past results to the present. This will determine if the solutions

gathered helped the workers to ease their body pain.

4.1 Methods of Lifting

Compressive forces were assessed for lifting positions of raw materials and finished goods with

and without the hand truck. It demonstrates how the value of compressive forces are improved by having

a less value compared to the current lifting position.

Figure 10. Comparison of Lifting on Raw materials

Illustrated in Figure 10 is the comparison of the results based on the compressive force of lifting

position of raw materials and the lifting position of raw materials with hand truck. The corresponding

values of starting, middle, and final position of the current lifting on raw materials are 425 lb, 1,317 lb,

and 880 lb, while the values for the lifting positions with the hand truck are 315 lb, 1,061 lb, and 367 lb

respectively.
 39

Figure 11. Comparison of Lifting on Finished goods

Shown in Figure 11 is the comparison of the results based on the compressive force of lifting

position of finished goods and the lifting position of finished goods with hand truck. The corresponding

values of starting, middle, and final position of the current lifting on finished goods are 198 lb, 918 lb,

and 532 lb, while the values for the lifting positions with the hand truck are 313 lb, 763 lb, and 291 lb

respectively.

Furthermore, the results gathered shows that there is an improvement on the compressive forces

after using the hand truck on lifting of raw materials and finished goods. The lower the compressive

force, the lower the risk for the workers.

 40

4.2 Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA)

REBA scores of the workers were evaluated through the comparison of the past and present data.

The assessment is based on the posture of the workers while performing their lifting task without using a

hand truck and with the ergonomic intervention.

Figure 12. Comparison of REBA scores between Lifting of Raw materials

With and Without Hand truck

Figure 12 presents the ratio of the workers and their corresponding REBA scores while lifting the

raw materials with and without the use of a hand truck. Without using a hand truck, 80% of the workers

has a score of “8 to 10” and 20% of them has a score of 11 and above. On the other hand, when the

workers used the hand truck, 100 percent (5 workers) experiences a score of “2 to 3” which is considered

as low risk level.

 41

Figure 13. Comparison of REBA Score between Lifting the Finished Goods

with and without Hand Truck

Figure 13 presents the comparison of lifting the finished goods with and without the use of hand

truck. This shows that without hand truck they acquire a 100% score of 11 or more, while having a hand

truck to help them with their lifting task, they obtain a 100% score of 4 to 7 from REBA assessment. The

workers lifting task result is from a very high risk down to medium risk REBA level.
 42

4.3 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

Table 3.12. Comparison of NIOSH Lifting Equation in Lifting the Finished Goods with and

without Hand Truck

Lifting of Finished Goods

Multi-Task Job Analysis

Composite Lifting Index (CLI) 19.22

Lifting of Finished Goods with Hand Truck

Single-Task Job Analysis

Lifting Index (LI)

Origin 3.66

Destination 5.34

Table 3.12 reveals the comparison of lifting the finished goods with and without using the hand

truck. For the multi-task job analysis, the workers are not using the hand truck with the value of the

composite lifting index is 19.22. For the single-task job analysis the worker is using the hand truck the

lifting index for the origin is 3.66 and for the value of the destination is 5.3.
 CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

This section shows a brief discussion of the main points of the study.

Agro-Industrial Cooperative Manufacturing (AICOM) is one of the feed milling companies under

the manufacturing industry. It is located at Mataas na Kahoy, Batangas. This became the subject of the

research due to the fact that it is one of the sources of income of their citizens. The investigation of this

study conducted last February 2019, its main objective is to minimize the risk of a musculoskeletal

disorder that is experienced by the workers. To achieve the said objective, the researchers used ergonomic

tools, engineering controls, and administrative controls. Moreover, the focus of this study was the

workers in the production area of AICOM. The respondents were chosen based on the severity of their

task performance.

Both qualitative and quantitative types of research were reflected in this study. To have a better

understanding of the company and its problem, the researchers used quantitative research and interview

the manager of AICOM. For the validation of the said interview, data were gathered and analyzed through

direct observation in the production area and getting the actual measurements to be used and this set as

the qualitative research of the study. The data gathered were treated using the Rapid Entire Body

Assessment (REBA) tool as well as the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

lifting equation. Based on the tools used, it was found out that the workers were engaged at high-risk level

of musculoskeletal disorder (MSD). Moreover, to support the findings from REBA and NIOSH Lifting

Equation, the researchers applied engineering controls such as methods of lifting and prototyping as well

as administrative controls which is the job rotation.

The results gathered were analyzed and discussed in line with the researchers’ objectives. From

the hierarchy of hazard control conducted by the researchers, engineering and administrative controls
 44

were effective in reducing the risk of the workers for having musculoskeletal disorders (MSD).

Implementing a helping device which is under the engineering control turns out to be the most effective

by having the biggest risk reduction among other controls. Finally, it is recommended to utilize the

equipment to avoid the occurrence of MSD to the workers.

Conclusion

This section shows the overall conclusion of the researchers for the study.

Researchers stand in need of acquiring the appropriate postures which would help the workers of

AICOM Feedmills in reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorder. The researchers used assessment

tools such as Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) and National Institute of Occupational Safety and

Health (NIOSH) Equation to determine the level of severity of their lifting tasks and postures as well as

their suitable corrective actions. In order to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorder (MSD), we had

conducted different controls for the MSD Hazards, and these are Engineering Controls namely, Methods

of Lifting and Prototyping and Administrative Control such as Job Rotation. The researchers have

gathered the results from the application of the controls which led them into the following conclusions:

1. REBA Scores show a very high-risk level when lifting the raw materials to the pushcart as well as the

lifting of finished goods to storage. The prevalence of ergonomic risk factors is extremely high based

on the findings of this study. Major factors of ergonomic risk found in this job operation such as

flexion of the neck, trunk bending, extreme upper arm raising, wrists twisting and leg bending.

Therefore, it can be concluded that, if the workers continue to work on these positions, they may suffer

to MSD’s related to neck, trunk, and wrist later on. This requires taking corrective action and

implementing change as soon as possible.

Composite Lifting Index (CLI) allows the evaluation of “multi-task” jobs involving multiple

lifting tasks with different parameters. The results in Table 3.3 shows that the analysis explains that
 45

any of the tasks result in a CLI that is above 1.0, is unacceptable. The task is high risk and redesign is

needed.

2. For the methods of lifting, the researchers provided a prediction of positions of the workers in lifting

raw materials and finished goods, also the simulated optimum position for lifting an object using

3DSSPP. The summary of the results shows that the compressive force of the current positions of the

workers when lifting a sack of feeds is high, and for the value of compressive forces on the proper

position of lifting is also above 770 lb which is considered as danger or hazard. Hence, providing an

optimum position on lifting for the workers still results in unacceptable posture because of the given

load of 110.20 lb. Simply improving lifting technique is not enough for this kind of work environment,

lifting equipment must be developed.

The technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution results shown in Table 8

illustrates that out of the four designs gathered by the researchers, hand truck 1 is the optimal design

having the largest value of closeness index.

3. Lifting with the use of hand truck decreased the result of the compressive force of the workers in the

lifting of raw materials and finished goods. This proves that using a hand truck as a support for lifting can

reduce the risk for the workers on having injuries caused by lifting an excessive amount of load.

In addition to this, working with the device helped the workers to perform a better working

postures with minimal deviation from the neutral position of the workers. This implies a significant

difference between their current working posture against working with an equipment.

4. The use of the hand truck reduces the REBA scores of the workers in their lifting tasks which means

that ergonomic equipment is an effective intervention to reduce MSD among the workers. Overall, both

of the lifting on raw materials and lifting on finished goods results that the risk of the workers is reduced.

In the NIOSH Lifting Equation, from the multi- task job analysis of the workers it became single-

task job analysis it is because of the help of the ergonomic instrument that help the workers to lessen the
 46

lifting task of the finished goods to the storage area. The use of the hand truck reduces the REBA scores

of the workers in their lifting tasks which means that ergonomic equipment is an effective intervention to

reduce MSD among the workers. Overall, both of the lifting on raw materials and lifting on finished

goods results that the risk of the workers is reduced.

Based on the created job sequence, reducing their duration of work in their lifting task into 1-2

hours, the lifting index decreases and still considered as hazardous.

 47

Recommendation

This section shows various suggestions and recommendations of the proponents for the future

researchers in line with the improvement of the study itself.

Through this review, numerous differences have been uncovered. As such, the researchers

recommend the following to encourage further development in this particular area:

For the Company:

1. To use the hand truck designed by the researcher for the long term to avoid the occurrence of having a

risk of musculoskeletal disorder.

2. Operator’s Job Scheduling; associated with the job rotation created by the researchers, it would help to

minimize the risk of Musculoskeletal Disorder to equal the weightage of workload for each operator.

Also, the company should provide a monitoring sheet for the worker’s job schedule.

3. Work practice controls for work activity approaches to discuss the strategies used to conduct work

tasks when risk factors are correlated with the methods workers used to perform physical work

activities.

4. Work Recovery Methods and Tools; to maintain muscle strength, recovery from each workday is

necessary. Cold treatment, good sleeping habits and multiple relaxation exercises for all workplaces

should be prescribed and encouraged.

5. Establish a systematic ergonomic assessment program for a plant-wide awareness campaign for

accident prevention and implement an intervention stretching system.

6. Provide established height and weight requirements for applicants that is fitted for the nature of their

work.

For the Future Researchers:

1. To further assess the workers considering the approaches in assessing manual material handling based

on psychophysical and physiological aspect.

 48

2. Evaluate other task of the workers aside from lifting the raw material and finished goods by assessing

whether there is a possible risk of musculoskeletal disorder.

3. Implement the feasible solution constructed by the researchers by continuously using the lifting

device, applying the suggested methods of lifting, and involving the ideal job sequence.

4. Plant Layouting; redesigning provides an effective utilization that reflects on the company’s overall

productiveness. Furthermore, improving a plant design is proven one of the best components for

implementing change in a company.

5. Cost-Benefit Analysis; it requires a list of all the cost that is associated in the making or implementing

a project. This is a suggested factor to determine how long an investment diminish after change is put

into action.
 REFERENCES

Mula, A. K. (2019). Physicians' role in patient ergonomics: A pilot study (Order No. 13424542).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(2195501884). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2195501884?accountid=28547
Date Retrieved: April 2, 2019

Bezek, J. (2018). Safety culture characteristics in manufacturing supporting early reporting of job-related
physical discomfort (Order No. 10976251). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I;
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2135231478). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2135231478?accountid=28547 Date Retrieved: April 2, 2019

Sorensen, C. J. (2015). Validation and use of an induced-pain paradigm to investigate risk factors for low
back pain development during prolonged standing (Order No. 3689741). Available from ProQuest
Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(1678077361). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1678077361?accountid=28547
Date Retrieved: April 2, 2019

Ayub Y, Shah ZA (2018) Assessment of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Manufacturing

Industry. J Ergonomics 8: 233. doi:10.4172/2165-7556.1000233 Date Retrieved: April 11, 2019

Stack, T., Wilhelmsen, C. A., & Ostrom, L. T. (2016). Occupational ergonomics (1st ed.). Hoboken: John
Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118814239 Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2133341703?accountid=28547 Date Retrieved: April 4, 2019

Ali, A., Qutubuddin, S. M., Hebbal, S. S., & Kumar, A. C. S. (2012). An ergonomic study of work-related
musculoskeletal disorders among the workers working in typical Indian sawmills. International
Journal of Engineering Research and Development, 3(9), 38-45. Date Retrieved: April 22, 2019

Sanders, S. & McCormick J. (Eds.). (1993). Human Factors in Engineering and Design. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

K.H.E. Kroemer, Henrike Kroemer, Katrin Kroemer-Elber (2001). Ergonomics: How to Design for Ease
and Efficiency. Pearson Education Asia Pte Ltd.

Middlesworth, Mark (2018, December 5). A Step-by-Step Guide to Using the Niosh Lifting Equation for
Single Tasks. Retrieved from https://ergo-plus.com/niosh-lifting-equation-single-task/ Date
Retrieved: April 13, 2019
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (1981, March) Work practices guide for
manual lifting [ DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 81-122]. Washington, DC: Superintendent of
Documents. Date Retrieved: April 23, 2019

Caillet, R. (1981). Low back pain syndrome. Philadelphia: FA Davis. Date Retrieved: April 23, 2019

Klein, B., Roger, M., Jensen, R., and Sanderson, L. (1984). Assessment of workers’ compensation claims
for back sprain/strains. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 26, 443-448. Date Retrieved: April 24,
2019

Ayoub, M., and Mital, A. (1989). Manual materials handling. London: Taylor & Francis. Date Retrieved:
April 29, 2019

Ayoub, M. M. (1982) The Manual Lifting Problem: The Illusive Solution. Journal Occupational
Accidents 4,1-23. Date Retrieved: April 28, 2019

Freivals, A. (1989). Understanding and Preventing Back Trauma: Comparison of U.S. and European
Approaches, Pages 55-63 in K.H.E. Kroemer, J. D. McGlothlin, and T. G. Bobick (Eds.). Manual
Material Handling: Understanding and Preventing Back Trauma Akron, OH: American Industrial
Hygiene Association.

Ayoub, M. M. and Dempsey, P. G. (1999). The Psychophysical Approach to Manual Materials Handling
Task Design. Ergonomics 42, 17-31. Date Retrieved: April 28, 2019

Mital, A. (1984). Comprehensive maximum acceptable weight of lift database for regular 8-hour work
shifts. Ergonomics, 27(11), 1127-1138.

Sauter, V. L., (2012). Prototyping. Retrieved from

http://www.umsl.edu/~sauterv/analysis/prototyping/proto.html May 8, 2019

Macdonald, W. (2012). Conceptual framework for development of a toolkit for prevention of work-
related musculoskeletal disorders. 41, 3933–3936. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0689-3933
Date Retrieved: May 8, 2019

Widienta, M. M. D., Rizaldi, T., Setyohadi, D. P. S., & Riskiawan, H. Y. (2018). Comparison of Multi-
Criteria Decision Support Methods (AHP, TOPSIS, SAW & PROMENTHEE) for Employee
Placement. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 953(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/953/1/012116 Date Retrieved: May 11, 2019
Descatha, A., Roquelaure, Y., Chastang, J. F., Evanoff, B., Melchior, M., Mariot, C.,Leclerc, A. (2007,
February). Validity of Nordic-style questionnaires in the surveillance of upper-limb work-related
musculoskeletal disorders. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2980505/ Date Retrieved: May 11, 2019

Madeleine, P., Samani, A., Zee, M. D., & Kersting, U. (n.d.).Biomechanical Assessments in Sports and
Ergonomics Retrieved from
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dAoh9vdnmvAJ:https://www.anybodytec
h.com/download.html?did=publications.files&fname=madeleine_2011a_biomechanical
assessments in sports and ergonomics.pdf &cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ph Date Retrieved: May 11,
2019

Lee, K. and Jung, M. (2019). Ergonomic Evaluation of Biomechanical Hand Function. Retrieved From:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2093791114000729 Date Retrieved: May 11,
2019

Middlesworth, M. (n.d.). Niosh Lifting Equation Single Task. Retrieved from https://ergo-
plus.com/niosh-lifting-equation-single-task/ Date Retrieved: May 11, 2019

Van Der Beek, A. J., Dennerlein, J. T., Huysmans, M. A., Mathiassen, S. E., Burdorf, A., Van Mechelen,
W., … Coenen, P. (2017). A research framework for the development and implementation of
interventions preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Scandinavian Journal of Work,
Environment and Health, 43(6), 526–539. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3671 Date Retrieved: April
12, 2019

Charoenchai L, Chaikoolvatana A, Chaiyakul P. The relationship between health behaviour and pain scale
in patients with low back pain in Thailand. Southeast Asian J Trip Med Public Health.
2006;37(5):1040. Date Retrieved: April 12, 2019

Kamat, S. (2017). Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.com.ph/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=The+ergonomics+body+posture+
on+repetitive+and+heavy+lifting+activities+of+workers+in+aerospace+manufacturing+warehouse
&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DqDqmBPIPNhAJ Date Retrieved: April 12, 2019

Deros, B. M., Daruis, D. D., Rosly, A. L., Aziz, I. A., & Hishamuddin, N. S. (2017). Ergonomic risk
assessment of manual material handling at an automotive manufacturing company.
Pressacademia,5(1), 317-324. doi:10.17261/pressacademia.2017.606 Date Retrieved: May 28,
2019
Ansari, N & M. J. Sheikh, Dr. (2014). Evaluation of work Posture by RULA and REBA: A Case Study.
IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering. 11. 18-23. 10.9790/1684-11431823. Date
Retrieved: May 28, 2019

Banibrata Das, Tirthankar Ghosh & Somnath Gangopadhyay (2012) Assessment of Ergonomic and
Occupational Health-Related Problems Among Female Prawn Seed Collectors of Sunderbans,
West Bengal, India, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 18:4, 531-540,
DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2012.11076949. Date Retrieved: May 28, 2019

Butler, Terry and Gillette, Jason C. (2019), "Exoskeletons: Used as PPE for Injury Prevention" .
Kinesiology Publications. 47. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/kin_pubs/47. Date Retrieved: May 28, 2019

Asensio-Cuesta, Sabina & Diego-Mas, Jose & V. Cremades-Oliver, L & González-Cruz, Maria. (2012).
A method to design job rotation schedules to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders in
repetitive work. International Journal of Production Research. 50. 7467-7478.
10.1080/00207543.2011.653452. Date Retrieved: May 28, 2019

Padula, Rosimeire & Luiza, Maria & Comper, Maria Luiza & Sparer, Emily & Dennerlein, Jack. (2017).
Job rotation designed to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and control risk in manufacturing
industries: A systematic review. Applied Ergonomics. 58. 386-397. 10.1016/j.apergo.2016.07.018.
Date Retrieved: May 28, 2019

Bataller-Cervero, A. V., Rabal-Pelay, J., Roche-Seruendo, L. E., Lacárcel-Tejero, B., Alcázar-Crevillén,

A., Villalba-Ruete, J. A., & Cimarras-Otal, C. (2019). Effectiveness of lumbar supports in low back
functionality and disability in assembly-line workers. Industrial Health, 57(5), 588–595. doi:
10.2486/indhealth.2018-0179.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/indhealth/advpub/0/advpub_2018-0179/_pdf Date
Retrieved:October 8, 2019.

Middlesworth, M. (2018, July 25). A Step-by-Step Guide to Job Rotation. Retrieved from https://ergo-
plus.com/job-
rotation/?fbclid=IwAR1sRDTBqZVPiytGUuMUiLRXaL66rFjdPwryIm6_305aPRV06_R9QBij9-
k. Date Retrieved: October 8, 2019.

Government of Canada, Canadian Centre for Occupational Health. (2019, October 7). OSH Answers Fact
Sheets. Retrieved October 8, 2019, from
https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/back_blt.html.

Morrison, G. (2018, October 19). How Poor Posture Causes Neck Pain, https://www.spine-
health.com/conditions/neck-pain/how-poor-posture-causes-neck-pain. Date Retrieved: October 8,
2019.

D. R.-L., & K. K. (2017, February 13). Risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders - working postures.
https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/Risk_factors_for_musculoskeletal_disorders_—_working_postures.Date
Retrieved: October 8, 2019.

Waters, T. R., Anderson, V. P., Garg, A. (1994, January) Application Manual for the Revised NIOSH
Lifting Equation Retrieved from
http://www.fondazionerubestriva.info/public/CI_IN/prot.%2031_2016%20all.%20Ref%206%20Ap
 plications%20Manual%20For%20The%20Revised%20NIOSH%20Lifting%20Equation.pdf Date
Retrieved: October 17,2019

Musculoskeletal Disorders as a Public Health Concern. (2011, November 1). from

https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-
database/2014/07/08/14/21/musculoskeletal-disorders-as-a-public-health-concern#Anchor 1. Date
Retrieved: October 23, 2019

WorkSafe. (2019, January). from https://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/back-belts-are-not-effective-reducing-

back-injuries. Date Retrieved: October 23, 2019

Shahu R. (2016, March 27). The NIOSH Lifting Equation for Manual Lifting and Its Applications.
Retrieved from https://www.longdom.org/open-access/the-niosh-lifting-equation-for-manual-
lifting-and-its-applications-2165-7556-1000159.pdf. Date Retrieved: October 23, 2019

Madeleine, P., Samani, A., Zee, M. de, & Kersting, U. (2011, November 25). Biomechanical Assessments
in Sports and Ergonomics. Retrieved October 23, 2019, from
https://www.intechopen.com/books/theoretical-biomechanics/biomechanical-assessments-in-
sports-and-ergonomics.

Madani D. (2016, December 02). Rapid Entire Body Assessment: A Literature Review. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/52a2/ced2f754da589683aedd53fdbadca3136716.pdf. Date
retrieved: October 23, 2019

Alaca N., Safran E.S., and Timucin E. (2019). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the extended
version of the Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire into Turkish. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nuray_Alaca/publication/334330372_Translation_and_cross-
cultural_adaptation_of_the_extended_version_of_the_Nordic_musculoskeletal_questionnaire_into
_Turkish/links/5d24e2bc299bf1547ca75e3a/Translation-and-cross-cultural-adaptation-of-the-
extended-version-of-the-Nordic-musculoskeletal-questionnaire-into-Turkish.pdf. Retrieved date:
October 23, 2019

Lu J.L.D. (2012) Anthropometric Indices in the Philippines for Manufacturing Workers. In: Preedy V.
(eds) Handbook of Anthropometry. Springer, New York, NY. Retrieved Date: October 23, 2019

Yuh-Chuan S. & Sheau-Farn L. (2014) Bridging Research and Good Practices towards Patients Welfare:
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Healthcare Ergonomics and Patient Safety
(HEPS),Taipei, Taiwan: CRC Press; 1 edition. Retrieved Date: October 23, 2019.
 APPENDIX

A. Results of Initial Interview

Appendix A.1: Personal Information of the Operators

Age Distribution
6
6 5
5 4
Frequency

4 3
3
2
1
0
19-30 31-40 41-50 >51
Age in years

Appendix A.2: Workers Age Distribution

 Job Distribution
Loading to
Storage Lifitng of Raw Lifitng of Raw Materials
22% Materials
28%
Picking of Grinded
Ingredients

Sealing Loader of other

6% Ingredients
Mixing
Weighing of Picking of
Finished Goods Grinded
Picking of MIxed
6% Ingredients
Ingredients
5%
Picking of MIxed Loader of other Weighing of Finished
Ingredients Mixing Ingredients Goods
11% 11% 11%

Appendix A.3: Job Distribution in the Production

Sick Leave and Non-Sick Leave

SL NSL

31%

69%

Appendix A.4: SL and NSL Comparison

 Absent Ratio per Month
5.00 4.44

4.00 3.61
Absent Ratio

3.19 3.33
3.00
2.22
2.00 1.56

1.00

0.00
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
Month

Appendix A.5: Absent Ratio of Sick Leave for Six Months

Appendix A.6: Distribution of Absences

Appendix A.7: Check Sheet for Absences
B. Ergonomic Assessment Tools Results

Appendix B.1: Observed Prevalence Rates for Musculoskeletal Problems using NMDQ
Appendix B.2 : Annual Rates for Musculoskeletal
Disorders in Different Parts of the Body
through NMDQ
Appendix B.3: REBA Score for Lifting
of Raw Materials

Appendix B.4: REBA Score for Lifting

of Finished Product
C. Hierarchy of the Feasible Options to Assess the Risk of Musculoskeletal Disorder

Appendix C.1 Controls for MSD Hazard

D. Job Rotation Evaluator

Appendix D.1: Rating Muscle Group for Different Job

E. NIOSH Lifting Equation: Single & Multi-Task Job Analysis Worksheet

Appendix E.1: Composite Lifting Index of Lifting of Finished Goods

Appendix E.2: Lifting Index of Lifting of Finished Goods with Hand Truck
Appendix E.3: Composite Lifting Index of Lifting of Finished Goods
applying the Job Sequence
F. Worker’s Current Postures

Appendix F.1: Worker’s Position at Feed’s Raw materials

Appendix F.2: Worker’s Position at Finished Goods to Storage

Appendix F.3: Worker’s Position Variables at Finished Goods to
Storage Area
G. Prototyping

Appendix G.1: Different Designs of Hand Truck

Appendix G.2: Dimensions of Hand Truck Design for Lifting

Appendix G.3: Parts of Hand Truck Design for Lifting

Appendix G.4: Final Output of Hand Truck Design

Appendix G.5: Lifting of Raw materials with the modified Hand Truck

Appendix G.6: Lifting of Finished Goods with the Modified Hand Truck
Appendix G.7: Lifting of Finished Goods to the Storage Area using the Hand Truck