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...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | Bioengineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/4/477 |
| _version_ | 1797606327918264320 |
|---|---|
| author | Ramona Nowara Fabian Holzgreve Rejane Golbach Eileen M. Wanke Christian Maurer-Grubinger Christina Erbe Doerthe Brueggmann Albert Nienhaus David A. Groneberg Daniela Ohlendorf |
| author_facet | Ramona Nowara Fabian Holzgreve Rejane Golbach Eileen M. Wanke Christian Maurer-Grubinger Christina Erbe Doerthe Brueggmann Albert Nienhaus David A. Groneberg Daniela Ohlendorf |
| author_sort | Ramona Nowara |
| collection | DOAJ |
| 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 <i>Arm and Wrist Analysis—area A</i>—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 <i>area B—Neck, Trunk, and Leg Analysis</i>—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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T05:13:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-08c75f5df2614c26bef4b3ea66503b3e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2306-5354 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T05:13:38Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Bioengineering |
| spelling | doaj.art-08c75f5df2614c26bef4b3ea66503b3e2023-11-17T18:22:39ZengMDPI AGBioengineering2306-53542023-04-0110447710.3390/bioengineering10040477Testing 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 DentistryRamona Nowara0Fabian Holzgreve1Rejane Golbach2Eileen M. Wanke3Christian Maurer-Grubinger4Christina Erbe5Doerthe Brueggmann6Albert Nienhaus7David A. Groneberg8Daniela Ohlendorf9Institute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute of Biostatistics and Mathematical Modelling, University Hospital Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, 55131 Mainz, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyCompetence Centre for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60596 Frankfurt am Main, GermanyBackground: 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 <i>Arm and Wrist Analysis—area A</i>—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 <i>area B—Neck, Trunk, and Leg Analysis</i>—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.https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/4/477RULAergonomicsergonomic risk assessment toolsbiomechanicsdentistryinertial motion capture |
| spellingShingle | Ramona Nowara Fabian Holzgreve Rejane Golbach Eileen M. Wanke Christian Maurer-Grubinger Christina Erbe Doerthe Brueggmann Albert Nienhaus David A. Groneberg Daniela Ohlendorf 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 Bioengineering RULA ergonomics ergonomic risk assessment tools biomechanics dentistry inertial motion capture |
| 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 | RULA ergonomics ergonomic risk assessment tools biomechanics dentistry inertial motion capture |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/4/477 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ramonanowara testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT fabianholzgreve testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT rejanegolbach testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT eileenmwanke testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT christianmaurergrubinger testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT christinaerbe testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT doerthebrueggmann testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT albertnienhaus testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT davidagroneberg testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry AT danielaohlendorf testingthelevelofagreementbetweentwomethodologicalapproachesoftherapidupperlimbassessmentrulaforoccupationalhealthpracticeanexemplaryapplicationinthefieldofdentistry |