Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Investigation into the work related hazard from impact force on

helmeted motor cyclist in Nigeria
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi a,b, O.O. Obasanya b, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola b,
Olayinka Oluwole Agboola a,⇑
a
Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria
b
Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Risk exposure of motorcyclist could be overwhelming when riding especially without protective wears
Received 19 October 2020 on. Helmet which serves as protection to the most delicate part of the rider comes with different designs
Received in revised form 19 October 2020 and quality in the study area, This study considered two common types of helmet used by the study pop-
Accepted 29 December 2020
ulation with the aim of assessing impact force on the cyclist as well as characterize the same. The inves-
Available online 16 February 2021
tigation show that JC Yoli has performance metrics of percent risk, severity index and head acceleration
(<1, 73, 245) which guarantee safety of the user. The percent risk, severity of accident and head acceler-
Keywords:
ation significantly influence the impact force which can result head injury, spinal cord injury and death of
Impact force
Helmet
rider involve in an accident. This research also suggests the use of helmet that has protective face mask
Performance metrics that could prevent the spread of COVID 19 amongst the riders of business motorcyclist.
Head injury Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Motor cyclist Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Materials, Processing & Characterization. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction tion prevalent among larger population of business rider informed

Transportation is not only an essential means of moving human
and commodities from one place to the other it is also a major
industry through which people sustain livelihood. The use of Motor
cycle depends on important factors among which are size of goods,
road networks and distance of travel, legislation, safety needs, and
economic reasons. In many developed countries motor cycle can-
not be engaged in commercial services that involve moving mate-
rials and men. In like manner there is strict ban on riding without
protective wares. Some of the required wares recommended for
the cyclist are helmet, hand gloves, face mask, and goggle. Evi-
dently the use of the mentioned wares do not come without pains,
stress and discomforts which are responsible for bad attitude both
commuters and riders to usage of the safety wares. The recent
occurrence of novel COVID 19 worldwide which suggest as part
of solution to the pandemic the use of face mask s faced with sim-
ilar challenge of poor attitude and weak enforcement of the safety
rules [12]. The issue of low level of vocational and technical educa-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: onawumi.ayodele@lmu.edu.ng (A.S. Onawumi), agboola.
olayinka@lmu.edu.ng (O.O. Agboola).
the practice of ignorance and poor level of risk perception of
motorcyclist [1].
Helmets of varying design features imported from different
countries of the world are available in the Nigerian markets many
of these head gears comes with issues related to ergonomic fitness
to the anthropometric demands of the user population in Nigeria
and as a result of lack proper consideration of critical risk factors
most expected users have formed counter opinion on the need
for the use of helmet and other recommended protective wares
(Onawumi and Oyawale, 2016). The economic limitations of large
population of the low income earners in Nigeria can only afford
them to buy used motor cycle (both Nigerian of foreign used) also
called okada for family or commercial use.
Work related musculoskeletal disorder can be induced waring
misfit protective gear due to the sensitivity of the nerves in the
head and neck. Using external stressor is inimical to productive
activities of man. The designed two wheel for motor cycle and lack
of cubicle exposes the riders to hazards which place high demand
for rider’s vigilance level with all sense organs under stress/strain
for high performance and safety. This suggests the need for protec-
tive wares when engaged in operating this complex two wheeled
automobile [1].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.1169
2214-7853/Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Materials, Processing & Characterization.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi, O.O. Obasanya, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola et al.
The informed attitude of motor cyclist on the use of variety of
protective gears is investigated in this work with the view of prof-
fering a sustainable suggestions the possibly will encourage the
occupational cyclist to abide by safety instructions and practices
while engaging in their means of livelihood. The work identify level
of discomfort experience by business riders of motor cycle partic-
ularly with respect to the use of protective head gears.
2. Working operation of motor-cycle helmet
Modern cycle helmets typically have a micro-shell, usually
between 0.3 and 0.8 mm thick; that is often bounded to the liner
material during the manufacturing process. The micro – shell liner
provides little rigidity or load distribution, but may help to main-
tain helmet integrity in an impact; which may be particularly
important if a second impact occurs in the same accident. A hard
shell is likely to distribute loading better in a localized loading con-
dition, and would be expected to be better than a micro–shell in
protecting against penetration of sharp objects [2]. In both hard–
shell and micro–shell helmets, the liner will absorb a proportion
of the impact energy and will distribute the impact loading over
a higher cross sectional area of the human head (especially, in
cases of impacts with relatively flat surface). Both of these features
will reduce the danger of cranium fracture by reducing the local-
ized strain on the head cranium and the risk of skull fracture and
brain injury by minimizing the rectilinear acceleration of the head.
The proportion of impact energy absorbed will depend on the
design of the helmet, the impact test that the helmet has been
designed to meet and the type of surface impacted [2]. In the pro-
cess of absorbing a proportion of the energy of an impact, the
structure of the helmet is usually damaged. This is a necessary
property of helmets provided the liner material was elastic, the
energy of impact that was initially absorbed by the helmet would
be resulted later to the head during impact, thereby largely reduc-
ing the effectiveness of the padding. Liner materials are therefore
primary plastic in their deformation characteristics. By changing
the material used as the liner, it is theoretically possible to tune
the head protection properties for a particular impact condition
of interest [2]. However, the extent to which this is done by helmet
manufacturers also depends upon material availability and cost.
Helmet fit and retention are also considered to be important,
because an improperly fitting helmet may not provide the
designed impact absorption, and a helmet that is dislodge in an
impact may not provide any protection at all [3]. In addition to
these considerations, ventilation and aesthetics are considered
important to the comfort and user acceptability of helmets. Fur-
thermore, cycle helmets for use on the roadway are usually
designed to ensure that the vision and hearing of the rider are
not compromised. The most pragmatic helmet designs balance
the need for good impact performance in the event of a fall or col-
lision, with the need to be acceptable, practicable and comfortable
when used [3].
3. Motorcyclist helmet
Helmet is a major head gear used by cyclists. Its primary func-
tion is to protect users for head injury due to accident or fall [4]. A
helmet provides safety to the extent that it is designed to provide.
This are determined by the capability of the material used in the
design and production of the head gear. Although, for the maxi-
mum protection of the head, the retention system of the helmet
must be securely fastened under the chin and be properly fit. Fail-
ure to have a proper fit and to securely fasten the helmet is danger-
ous as the helmet could come off in an accident leaving the head
totally unprotected [7]. More importantly as design requirement
2860
Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864
helmet is to provide head protection during collision or accident
and to provide thermal comfort of its users. Humidity and high
ambient temperature make the situation worse for the rider as
trapped heat causes significant discomfort [5].
4. The structure of motor-cycle riders’ helmet
The components of standard helmets being used by motor-
cyclist include the visor, or shield, outershell, comfort padding,
ventilation system, retention system or chin strap, and liner or
foam [6]. However, the main helmet components nowadays are
from the foam liner (EPS, polyurethane, polyolefin, polyethylene,
polymer blend, polyvinylidene chloride or integral skin) and the
shell (thermoplastic or composite). In general, the function of the
foam is to absorb most of the impact energy, while the function
of the shell is to resist penetration of any sharp object from touch-
ing the head and resulting in direct skull damage, and to distribute
the impact load on wider foam area, thus increasing the foam
energy absorption capacity [7].
5. Materials and methods
This work aim at investigating the experience of motor cycle
riders and the level of discomfort with the use of protective head
gear (helmet). Structured questionnaire was designed to capture
information on personal data, experience on business riding of
motor cycle, and attitudinal issues among the riders. Sample size
of fifty (50) business riders were selected randomly in the study
area for the identification of risk associated with use of helmet.
Two common types of helmet in the study area were like wise
selected for theoretical and experimental determination of impact
force on the sampled types of helmet.
6. Structured questionnaire administered on riders
The respondents were motor-cyclists who have experienced
accidents while wearing or not wearing either of the selected hel-
mets and those who have not experienced any accident on motor-
cycles. Questions ranging from: personal data (age, sex, educa-
tional background, etc.), years of experience as rider, number of
years of consistent usage of helmet, suggested modifications to
improve on required level of comfort, accident rate on motor cycle,
degree of fatality experience, causative agents, and speed limit
usually observed.
7. Determination of impact force of the motor cycle on collision
The mass, riding velocity, breaking distance and stopping dis-
tance of motor-cycle involved in road accident were extracted from
the records of Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) Nigeria [8,9]. The
riding velocity of the motor-cycle just before collision (U), is
expressed in meters per second. The values of U for both dry and
wet roads were collected.
Impact force F is transmitted to the entire body of the motor-
cycle and this is experienced by the motor-cyclist during impact.
The work-done (W) by the motor-cycle rider can be expressed as
mU 2
F¼ ðNewton; NÞ 1
2d
The kinetic energy of a moving motor-cycle (E) expressed as
kgm2/s2
1
E¼ mU 2 ðRajput; 2011Þ 2
2
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi, O.O. Obasanya, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864

During impact, the kinetic energy is converted to work as helmeted head dropped at three heights (1 m, 1.5 m and 2 m) to
shown in 3.5 selected anvil.

1
Fd¼ mU 2 3 10. Results and discussions
2
The impact force on the head was determined by using 3 10.1. Questionnaire Administration.
2
mU
F¼ ðNewton; NÞ 4 The survey was carried out on fifty business motorcyclists dis-
2d
tributed randomly over the study area within a study period of
Where, m = mass of the motor-cycle rider, expressed in kilo- one year. The selection of respondents took cognizance of cyclist
gram Kg. age, eligibility by license and registration of the motorcycle used.
U = Velocity of the motor-cycle just before collision, expressed Table 1 summarize specific features of respondents in the business
in m/s. and use of helmet. The majority (84%) had<10 year experience in
E = Kinetic energy of a moving motor-cycle in Kgm2/s2 or Joule business riding this suggest unsustainability of the job as viable
(J). and safe means of livelihood.
d = Stopping Distance in meters m The level of compliance with the use of helmet was observed to
F = Impact Force in Newton N be discouraging with over 62% business cyclist failed to comply.
Consistent use of helmet for five years was identified with only
8. Theoretical determination of impact force on helmeted 40% respondents and about 60% cannot remember using helmet
dummy head for up to five years. Majority (74%) report that they are comfortable
using helmet as a form of protection of head. However 88% submit-
The impact force acting on the motor-cyclist covered with hel- ted that the cause of discomfort with the use of helmet is heat and
met during accident was calculated based on the geometry of the blockage of air. A number of suggestions on how to improve the
motor-cycle helmet structure and the data collected from FRSC,
using applied mechanics principles. Table 1
Survey Results of Administered Questionnaire.
9. Impact test on Helmet. Responses Type No. of % of total
Respondents Respondents
The impact test rig for standard helmets test shown in Fig. 1 Year of Job <10 years 42 84
was set up at Federal Institute of Research, Oshodi, Lagos and the Experience 10–19 years 8 16
results obtained from the test were compared with the maximum Compliance with Yes 21 28
acceleration impacted to the head form, whether or not it exceeds Helmet Usage No 24 62
certain threshold value. No Response 5 10
The two commonly used helmets (JC Yoli and Skyo Serpent) Experience with the <5 years 20 40
were considered for this test. The procedure involve the position- Use of Helmet 5–10 years 1 2
10–19 years – –
ing of the test sample on a metal head form and then dropped in
No Response 29 58
a guided fall on two different steel test anvils (flat, and hemispher-
Helmet and Comfort Yes 37 74
ical types). The head forms are instrumented with an accelerome-
No 2 4
ter to measure the impact force and acceleration with the No Response 10 22
Discomfort Heat over the head 44 88
and blockage of air
Blur Vision on Motion 5 10
No Response 1 2
Helmet modification Inner foam 19 38
and Design Weight 21 42
Tiny holes to reduce 8 16
heat
No Response 2 4
Accident Yes 38 76
No 8 16
No Response 4 8
Head Injury Yes 35 70
No 9 18
No Response 6 12
Cause of Accident Over – speeding and 34 68
over – taking
Diversionary 10 20
activities while on
motion
Others 6 12
Shield Yes 40 80
No 8 16
No Response 2 4
Speed Limits (km/hr) 50 6 12
60 7 14
70 12 24
Greater than 70 25 50
Fig. 1. Image of the Equipment Used in Standard Impact Tests.

2861
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi, O.O. Obasanya, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864

Table 2
Variations of Speed, Mass, Distance and Impact Force on Dry Road.

Speed (m/s) Mass(kg) Reaction distance (m) Braking Distance (m) Stopping Distance(m) Impact Force (N)
11.11 75.00 11.00 9.00 20.00 420.80
13.89 77.00 14.00 14.00 28.00 530.56
16.67 84.00 17.00 20.00 37.00 686.55
22.22 65.00 22.00 35.00 57.00 729.37
27.78 55.00 28.00 55.00 83.00 757.95
33.33 85.00 33.00 79.00 113.00 1430.69

Table 3
Variations of Speed, Mass, Distance and Impact Force on Wet Road.

Speed (m/s) Mass (kg) Reaction distance (m) Braking Distance (m) Stopping Distance (m) ImpactForce (N)
11.11 82.00 11.00 18.00 29.00 460.07
13.89 92.00 14.00 28.00 41.00 633.92
16.67 78.00 17.00 40.00 56.00 637.51
22.22 58.00 22.00 71.00 93.00 650.82
27.78 73.00 28.00 82.00 110.00 1006.00
33.33 60.00 33.00 159.00 192.00 1009.90

Table 4
Motor-cycle Helmet Drop Test Results for JC Yoli.

Drop Height (m) Shell Rigid Surface Front Side

SI %Risk G SI %Risk G
1 Yes Flat 311 <1 89 707 1 172
1.5 Flat 503 2 110 870 5 173
2 Flat 854 6 144 1424 28 215
Rear Top
1 Yes Hemispherical 267 <1 81 245 <1 73
1.5 Hemispherical 501 1 112 548 2 112
2 Hemispherical 685 3 126 1211 17 201

comfortability of the helmet include design modification of the
inner foam, weight, and ventilation system by 38%, 42% 16% of
respondents. Over two-third (76%) experience varying level of acci-
dents on the job with 70% identify head injury as consequence of
the accident. Eighty percent of the riders do not have transparent
face mask on their helmet which exposed them to air born infec-
tions such as the novel corona virus (COVID 19) especially between
the riders (motorcyclist and the passenger) Over-speeding and
wrong over-taking were observed as the causes of the accident
with more than two- third (74%) driving at 70 km/hr and above.
10.2. Theoretical impact force Results.
The riding velocity of the motor-cycle (U), expressed in meters
per second are shown in first column of Table 2. The riding velocity
(U) of the motor-cycle, stopping distance (d) by motor-cyclist and
mass (m) of motor-cyclist were used to obtain the magnitude of
the impact force as shown in Table 2 and Table 3. While in motion,
the velocity of the motor-cycle can be increased between the spec-
ified speed limits by the motor-cyclist as indicated in the
speedometer of the motorcycle. It has been established from the
survey conducted that most motor-cyclists used above 70 km per
hour when riding on motor-cycle and this largely contributed to
the accident experienced by the motor-cyclist. When the velocity
of the motor-cycle is increased, the distance (d) moved by
motor-cyclist before coming to rest is increased during impact
and the magnitude of the impact force is changed. The variations
in the impact force as a result of increasing speed of the motor-
cycle, changes in mass and distance moved, using the FRSC data
collected are as shown in Table 2 and 3. The results showed that,
2862
the impact force experienced by the motor-cyclist is high when
the speed moved by him is high and at a relatively high stopping
distance. The values stopping distance is high for wet road than
for dry road, which means high impact forces are experienced by
motor-cyclists on dry road.
10.3. Statistical test of difference on impact Force.
Student t-test was used to compare the values of the impact
force on dry and wet roads. From Table 2 and 3, the following were
obtained
Null Hypothesis, H0 ; There is no difference between the values
of impact force on dry and wet roads.
Alternative Hypothesis, H1; there is significant difference
between the impact forces on dry and wet roads.
Significance levela = 0.05
Student t – test (t) = 3.132 Critical value of t at 0.05 significant
level for (6 – 1 = 5) degrees of freedom is 2.015 Since
jtobtained jjtcritical j > jtcritical j i.e j3:132j > j2:015j, then the null hypothesis
that there is no difference in the values of impact force on dry and
wet roads is rejected. Hence there is significant difference in the
values of impact force on dry and wet roads. It was found that val-
ues of p greater than 0.05 were considered statistically significant
as impact force on dry road was higher than on wet road.
10.4. Impact test of helmeted dummy head
Table 4 presents the result of J C Yoli dropped from heights of
1 m, 1.5 m, 2 m respectively on both the flat and hemispherical
shaped surfaces. The test was carried out with loaded dummy hel-
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi, O.O. Obasanya, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864

Table 5
Motor-cycle Helmet Drop Test Results for Skyo Serpent.

Drop Height (m) Shell Rigid Surface Front Side

SI %Risk G SI %Risk G
1 No Flat 566 1 140 677 1 166
1.5 Flat 928 7 170 1080 12 192
2 Flat 1516 38 212 2011 70 265
Rear Top
1 No Hemispherical 334 <1 92 321 <1 99
1.5 Hemispherical 686 3 136 661 3 133
2 Hemispherical 1137 15 178 1252 18 196

Table 6
Helmet Performance Profile.

Drop Height (m) % Risk Head Acceleration (G) Severity Index Profile
1 RJC  1 73  HAJC  172 JCtophem < JCrearhem < JCfrontflat < Skyotophem < Skyorearhem < Skyofrontlat < Skyosideflat < JCsideflat
RSkyo  1 92  HASkyo  166
1.5 1  RJC  5 110  HAJC  173 JCrearhem < JCfrontflat < Skyorearhem < JCtophem < Skyotophem < JCsideflat < Skyofrontflat < Skyosideflat
3  RSkyo  12 133  HASkyo  192
2 3  RJC  70 73  HAJC  172 JCrearhem < JCrearhem < JCtophem < Skyotophem < Skyorearhem < JCsideflat < Skyofrontflat < Skyosideflat
3  RSkyo  18 126  HASkyo  265

met having 0.05 m radius surface with impact on from, side, rear
and top surfaces. The severity index (SI), associated risk and head
acceleration (G) (245, <1, 73) of JC Yoli with top surface impacting
from the 1 m height on the hemispherical rigid surface produced
the least profile among all the test results of sampled JC Yoli while
side surface dropped from 2 m height on flat rigid surface presents
the highest profile (1424, 17, 215). The test results of Skyo Serpent
(Table 5) with the top surface dropped from 1 m height on hemi-
spherical rigid surface shows a relatively lower profile (321, <1,
99) while the side surface of the helmet dropped from 2 m height
on flat rigid surface presents a profile of (2011, 70, 265). It was
reported that lowering acceleration lowers severity index, which
in turn lowers the risk of accident. Motor-cycle that better manage
impact energies result in lower head acceleration and thus a lower
severity index [6,10]. Considering Tables 4 and 5, It is observed that
results of the performance when shell (inner foam padding) is
available in the helmet is considerably better than when it is not.
Table 6 shows the performance profile of the test samples. The per-
cent risk at 1 m drop height for both types of helmet is less than 1
percent risk on any of the test conditions and the head acceleration
not exceeding 172 m/s2. The performance metrics of JC Yoli at the
top hemispherical point presents the best result amongst for 1 m.
1.5 m and 2 m test drop heights (<1, 73, 245), (2, 112, 548), (17,
201, 1211) respectively. This suggests that JC Yoli is better perfor-
mance as motor cycle helmet.
The general observation shows that the higher the drop height
the risk and severity of resulting accident which inform that the
worst case of accident occur with Skyo Serpent as it drop from
2 m height and impact the ground with the side on the flat ground
surface.
11. Conclusion
Safety of the motor cyclist and the passenger have be investi-
gated in relation with their protection from occupational hazards
of accident, and infectious diseases. The two common types helmet
(JC Yoli and Skyo Serpent) used did not have protective shield (that
could serve as face mask for protection against COVID 19) which is
in violation of the guideline of Nigeria Center for Diseases Control
(NCDC) [11]. Skyo Serpent poses high risk of use at higher drop
height with severity index and head acceleration at higher thresh-
old limit. However, the available helmet can be improved upon to
accommodate the peculiar anthropometric characteristics riders’
population in Nigeria. It suggested that necessary legislation be
put in place to control the importation of unsafe helmets in to
the country.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
Special appreciation goes to the industrial engineering research
team of the Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, the manage-
ment of Landmark University for creating the platform for the
reseach publication and the pastgraduate research students who
did the enumeration. The management of the organisation whose
data were used in this work were acknowledged.
References
[1] J.O. Adenle, Femi Kayode (2013), Commercial motorcycling (Okada) business
distraction for vocational practice in Nigeria: the consequentiality of
intentionality. J. Educ. Res. 1(11),1–12.Onawumi et al 2017.
[2] J. Carroll, N. Kinnear, S. Helman, D. Hynd, R. Cuerden, Compulsory wearing of
cycle helmets. Published Project Report PPR697 (2014). Asiminel et al., 2009.
[3] Bambach, M.R., Mitchell, R..J., Grzebieta, R.H., and Oliver, J. (2013). The
effectiveness of helmets in bicycle collisions with motor vehicles: A case–
control Study Accident Analysis and Prevention 53 (2013): 78–88.Amoros
et al., 2012.
[4] Becker, E.B. (1998). Helmet Development and Standards. Snell Memorial
Foundation, an Excerpt from: Frontiers in Head and Neck Trauma. IOS Press.
Muhamad, 2011.
[5] F. Akbar-Khanzadeh, M.S. Bisesi, R.D. Rivas, Comfort of Personal Protective
Equipment. Appl. Ergonom. 26(3) (1995): 195–198.
[6] F. Akbar-Khanzadeh, Factors contributing to discomfort or dissatisfaction as a
result of wearing of personal protective equipment. J. Hum. Ergol. 27(1,2):
(1998); 70–75. Chia-Yuan et al., 2003.
[7] H.S.M.R. Muhamad, Experimental Study on Motorcycle Helmet Microclimate
Heat Distribution, Universiti Teknikal, Malaysia Melaka, 2011.
[8] Federal Road Safety Corps (2007), An Article on FRSC Establishment Act.

2863
Ayodele Samuel Onawumi, O.O. Obasanya, Oluwafolakemi Adebanke Odunola et al.
[9] Federal Road Safety Corps (2014), Report on Road Safety Annual Report,
Nigeria Road Safety Strategy 2014–2020.
[10] K.M. Guskiewicz, J.P. Mihalik, V. Shankar, S.W. Marshall, D.H. Crowell, S.M.
Oliaro, M.F. Ciocca, D.N. Hooker, Measurement of head impacts in collegiate
football players: relationship between head impact, biomechanics and acute
clinical outcome after concussion, Neurosurgery 61 (6) (2007) 1244–1253.
2864
Materials Today: Proceedings 44 (2021) 2859–2864
[11] Guidelines NCDC, (2020), Mandate of Nigeria Centre of Disease Control
(NCDC), https://covid19.ncdc.gov.ng.
[12] Ayse Gurses, Megan Tschudy, Sharon McGrath-Morris, Amyna Husain, S.S.
Barry, A.G. Kylee, Julia Kim, Overcoming COVID 19: What can human factors
and ergonomics offer?, J Patient Saf. Risk Manag. 25 (2) (2020) 49–54.