The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 9 of 31800
Back to Result List

Testing the level of agreement between two methodological approaches of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) for occupational health practice — an exemplary application in the field of dentistry

  • Background: The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) is used for the risk assessment of workplace-related activities. Thus far, the paper and pen method (RULA-PP) has been predominantly used for this purpose. In the present study, this method was compared with an RULA evaluation based on kinematic data using inertial measurement units (RULA-IMU). The aim of this study was, on the one hand, to work out the differences between these two measurement methods and, on the other, to make recommendations for the future use of the respective method on the basis of the available findings. Methods: For this purpose, 130 (dentists + dental assistants, paired as teams) subjects from the dental profession were photographed in an initial situation of dental treatment and simultaneously recorded with the IMU system (Xsens). In order to compare both methods statistically, the median value of the difference of both methods, the weighted Cohen’s Kappa, and the agreement chart (mosaic plot) were applied. Results: In Arm and Wrist Analysis—area A—here were differences in risk scores; here, the median difference was 1, and the agreement in the weighted Cohen’s kappa test also remained between 0.07 and 0.16 (no agreement to poor agreement). In area B—Neck, Trunk, and Leg Analysis—the median difference was 0, with at least one poor agreement in the Cohen’s Kappa test of 0.23–0.39. The final score has a median of 0 and a Cohen’s Kappa value of 0.21–0.28. In the mosaic plot, it can be seen that RULA-IMU had a higher discriminatory power overall and more often reached a value of 7 than RULA-PP. Conclusion: The results indicate a systematic difference between the methods. Thus, in the RULA risk assessment, RULA-IMU is mostly one assessment point above RULA-PP. Therefore, future study results of RULA by RULA-IMU can be compared with literature results obtained by RULA-PP to further improve the risk assessment of musculoskeletal diseases.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Metadaten
Author:Ramona NowaraGND, Fabian Christian HolzgreveORCiDGND, Rejane GolbachORCiD, Eileen M. WankeORCiDGND, Christian Maurer-GrubingerORCiDGND, Christina ErbeGND, Doerthe BrüggmannORCiDGND, Albert NienhausORCiDGND, Jan David Alexander GronebergORCiDGND, Daniela Maren OhlendorfORCiDGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-868880
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10040477
ISSN:2306-5354
Parent Title (English):Bioengineering
Publisher:MDPI
Place of publication:Basel
Document Type:Article
Language:English
Date of Publication (online):2023/04/15
Date of first Publication:2023/04/15
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2024/09/18
Tag:RULA; Xsens; biomechanics; dentistry; ergonomic risk assessment tools; ergonomics; inertial motion capture; inertial motion units; mosaic plots; weighted Cohen’s kappa
Volume:10
Issue:4, art. 477
Article Number:477
Page Number:14
First Page:1
Last Page:14
Note:
Gefördert durch den Open-Access-Publikationsfonds der Goethe-Universität.
HeBIS-PPN:522295606
Institutes:Medizin
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Sammlungen:Universitätspublikationen
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - CC BY - Namensnennung 4.0 International