rss
Occup Environ Med 2002;59:452-458 doi:10.1136/oem.59.7.452
  • Original article

Active epidemiological surveillance of musculoskeletal disorders in a shoe factory

  1. Y Roquelaure1,
  2. J Mariel2,
  3. S Fanello1,
  4. J-C Boissière1,
  5. H Chiron1,
  6. C Dano1,
  7. D Bureau2,
  8. D Penneau-Fontbonne1
  1. 1Centre de consultation de pathologie professionnelle (Center for Occupational Health and Ergonomics), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (University Hospital), F-49033 Angers Cedex, France
  2. 2Service Médical Inter-entreprise de l'Anjou (Occupational Health Service of Anjou), 25, rue Carl Linnè, F-49009 Angers, France
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr Y Roquelaure, Centre de consultation de pathologie professionnelle (Center for Occupational Health and Ergonomics), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (University Hospital), F-49033 Angers Cedex, France;
 yvroquelaure{at}chu-angers.fr
  • Accepted 13 February 2002

Abstract

Aims: (1) To evaluate an active method of surveillance of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). (2) To compare different criteria for deciding whether or not a work situation could be considered at high risk of MSDs in a large, modern shoe factory.

Methods: A total of 253 blue collar workers were interviewed and examined by the same physician in 1996; 191 of them were re-examined in 1997. Risk factors of MSDs were assessed for each worker by standardised job site work analysis. Prevalence and incidence rates of carpal tunnel syndrome, rotator cuff syndrome, and tension neck syndrome were calculated for each of the nine main types of work situation. Different criteria used to assess situations with high risk of MSDs were compared.

Results: On the basis of prevalence data, three types of work situation were detected to be at high risk of MSDs: cutting, sewing, and assembly preparation. The three types of work situations identified on the basis of incidence data (sewing preparation, mechanised assembling, and finishing) were different from those identified by prevalence data. At least one recognised risk factor for MSDs was identified for all groups of work situations. The ergonomic risk could be considered as serious for the four types of work situation having the highest ergonomic scores (sewing, assembly preparation, pasting, and cutting).

Conclusion: The results of the health surveillance method depend largely on the definition of the criteria used to define the risk of MSDs. The criteria based on incidence data are more valid than those based on prevalence data. Health and risk factor surveillance must be combined to predict the risk of MSDs in the company. However, exposure assessment plays a greater role in determining the priorities for ergonomic intervention.

Footnotes

    Register for free content


    Free sample
    This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of OEM.
    View free sample issue >>

    Free archive
    The full back archive is now available for OEM. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
    Register to access the free archive >>

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.