Cargando…

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 dat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nowara, Ramona, Holzgreve, Fabian, Golbach, Rejane, Wanke, Eileen M., Maurer-Grubinger, Christian, Erbe, Christina, Brueggmann, Doerthe, Nienhaus, Albert, Groneberg, David A., Ohlendorf, Daniela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10136304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37106664
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10040477
_version_ 1785032185851412480
author Nowara, Ramona
Holzgreve, Fabian
Golbach, Rejane
Wanke, Eileen M.
Maurer-Grubinger, Christian
Erbe, Christina
Brueggmann, Doerthe
Nienhaus, Albert
Groneberg, David A.
Ohlendorf, Daniela
author_facet Nowara, Ramona
Holzgreve, Fabian
Golbach, Rejane
Wanke, Eileen M.
Maurer-Grubinger, Christian
Erbe, Christina
Brueggmann, Doerthe
Nienhaus, Albert
Groneberg, David A.
Ohlendorf, Daniela
author_sort Nowara, Ramona
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10136304
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101363042023-04-28 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 Nowara, Ramona Holzgreve, Fabian Golbach, Rejane Wanke, Eileen M. Maurer-Grubinger, Christian Erbe, Christina Brueggmann, Doerthe Nienhaus, Albert Groneberg, David A. Ohlendorf, Daniela Bioengineering (Basel) Article 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. MDPI 2023-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10136304/ /pubmed/37106664 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10040477 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Nowara, Ramona
Holzgreve, Fabian
Golbach, Rejane
Wanke, Eileen M.
Maurer-Grubinger, Christian
Erbe, Christina
Brueggmann, Doerthe
Nienhaus, Albert
Groneberg, David A.
Ohlendorf, Daniela
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10136304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37106664
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10040477
work_keys_str_mv AT nowararamona testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT holzgrevefabian testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT golbachrejane testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT wankeeileenm testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT maurergrubingerchristian testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT erbechristina testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT brueggmanndoerthe testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT nienhausalbert testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT gronebergdavida testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry
AT ohlendorfdaniela testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry