Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Cotton Spinning

ISSN : 2319 3182, Volume-2, Issue-4, 2013

17

Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Cotton Spinning

Occupation : An Ergonomic Intervention

Dhananjay Ikhar

1, Vishwas Deshpande

2 & Sachin Untawale

3

1&3 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Datta Meghe Institute of Engineering, Technology & Research, Wardha

2Ramdeobaba Collge of Engineering & Management, Nagpur

E-mail : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract Cotton spinning is an important operation in

small scale and cottage textile industries in India. A large

number of women workers in these industries perform

cotton spinning task adopting squatting posture in

traditional workshops. A Dutch Musculoskeletal

Questionnaire (DMQ) was used to evaluate 40 operators

regarding work related musculoskeletal disorders

WMSDs. 50% operators were suffering with

musculoskeletal complaints due to working conditions .

They were observed and evaluated with the Rapid Upper

Limb Assessment (RULA) technique and their exposure to

the WMSDs was assessed. From the observations and

analysis of the result it was concluded that the health of

spinning operators were highly affected due to improper

body postures and workload. Twisting, bending and over

reaching are the resultant of poorly designed workstations.

These actions force them into non neutral position that

increases the overall discomfort and pain at the lower

back, neck and shoulders. Certain aspects regarding the

ergonomic evaluation for those workers are discussed in

this study.

Index Terms Ergonomics Evaluation, Musculoskeletal

Disorders, DMQ, RULA.

I. INTRODUCTION

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are one of the greatest occupational health concerns

today.[1] Stooped and squatting postures are common in

developing countries such as India [3] especially in

small scale industries. Most of the manually energized

operations in these industries are carried out using such

postures. One such industry is cotton spinning industry

where operators are mostly women and 91% of them

suffer from WMSDs [2]. Cotton spinning wheel, more

commonly known as charkha, is hand-powered device for spinning cotton yarn from pressure clamp. Spinning

operation is performed in a squatting position in which

operators rotate spinning wheel sitting down on the hard

and flat surface with folded knees without any backrest.

Fig.1 shows the details of posture adapted.

The task of rotating the wheel for cotton spinning is

repetitive and continuous for 8 hours of working in a

day. In this condition, the back is bent excessively and

postures of different parts of body dramatically deviate

from the neutral. The design is essentially a compromise

between the operators biological needs, as determined by the ergonomics guidelines and physical requirements

of the equipment [3].

Fig.1: working posture adapted in order to perform

spinning operation

The objective of the present study was to assess the

workstation and work postures and to study the

prevalence of musculoskeletal problems in cotton

spinning operators population.

International Journal on Theoretical and Applied Research in Mechanical Engineering (IJTARME)


18

II. MATERIAL & METHODS

A. Selection of subject

This cross-sectional study was carried out in

spinning sections of two workshops in Wardha city of

Central India. All the workers present at the time of

study (total 40 workers) were included in the study after

obtaining oral consent.

B. Work Posture Assessment

We also carried out hierarchical task analysis [4].

The spinning operation consisted of 7 tasks. Out of

which most of the tasks are light and normal and hence

not considered for the posture analysis. Major tasks like

rotating the spinning wheel, rejoining of thread are

selected for further assessment.

The working postures were assessed by RULA

(Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) technique [5]. This

rapid upper limb assessment technique is used here to

assess the postural discomfort of the cotton spinning

female operators at their average working posture. This

was carried out with the aid of digital photography.

Later on stick diagrams were drawn to freeze frame

video records and eventually subjected to analysis.

C. Peceived work load and musculoskeletal complaints

The standard Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire

(DMQ) was used to study the workers perceptions of

static and dynamic loads, repetitive loads, and

ergonomic environmental and self perceived

musculoskeletal complaints [6].

III. RESULTS

A. Study subjects

Total of 40 female subjects were studied. The mean

age was 38.5 years, mean height was 151 cms and mean

weight being 50.8 kg. The mean work experience was 8

years. On an average, they worked for 8 hours every

day. The lunch period is approximately about half an

hour after the continuous work of 3 hours. (Table 1).

Variable Mean SD Range

Age (year) 38.5 8.96 18-60

Height (cm) 151 11.45 145-165

Weight (kg) 50.8 8.9 45-60

Work Experience (yr) 8 4.69 1-18

Weekly working Hours 48 1.35 45-50

Table 1. Sociodemographic charactiristics of study

participants.

B. Work Posture Analysis

RULA score was 7 for arm and wrist movements

(score A) and score 8 for neck, trunk and leg movements

(score B) for the task of rotating the spinning wheel. The

final grand score for the task was 7 which indicated

action level 4 attention i.e. immediate investigation and

changes are required in existing workstation. For

rejoining the broken thread, the grand score was found

to be 5 which indicated to action level 3 i.e. prompt

investigation and changes are required in existing

workstation. (Table 2).

Tasks Grand

score Action Level

Rotating an input wheel 7 4

Rejoining of broken

thread 5 3

Table. 2 Analysis of Working posture by the RULA

Method

C. Peceived work load and musculoskeletal complaints

Majority of the workers (62.5%) perceived the

dynamic load as heavy, half of the workers perceived

the repeatative load as moderate while 62.5% workers

perceived static load as heavy. Majority of them i.e.

57.5% perceived the ergonomic environment as poor.

(Table 3).

Type of Load Frequency Percentage

(n=40)

Dynamic Load

Moderate 15 37.5

Heavy 25 62.5

Repetitive Load

Light 17 42.5

Moderate 20 50

Heavy 3 7.5

Static Load

Light 2 5

Moderate 13 32.5

Heavy 25 62.5

Ergonomic

Environment

Good 17 42.5

Poor 23 57.5

Table. 3 Workload & Ergonomic Environment



19

During the last 7 days, majority of the workers had

one or the more musculoskeletal complaints. 32.5%

workers had neck pain, 57.5% had upper back pain and

lower back pain, 65% had shoulder pain while 47.5%

had wrist/hand pain. (Table 4)

Variable Ever Had Pain Had during last 7 days

Had During

Last 12

Months

Freq % Freq % Freq %

Neck 21 52.5 13 32.5 32 80

Upper

back 26 65 23 57.5 32 80

Lower back

26 65 23 57.5 40 100

Shoulder 32 80 26 65 Left 10 25

Right 14 35

Elbows 17 42.5 8 20 Left 23 57.5

Right 25 62.5

Wrist/

Hands 29 72.5 19 47.5

Left 17 42.5

Right 11 27.5

Hips/

Thighs 8 20 3 7.5

Left 20 50

Right 20 50

Knees 29 72.5 20 50 Left 19 47.5

Right 21 52.5

Ankles/

Feet 6 15 0 0

Left 27 67

Right 25 62.5

Table. 4. Physical Complaints attributed to work by

study projects

IV. DISCUSSION

The results of this study revealed that the cotton

spinning operators are engaged in prolonged forward

bendingg posture in there working condition. Our study

showed that 50.62% as an average value for the

subjects suffering from at least one work- related

musculoskeletal pain. Similar study was done by

Montreuils, Laflames and Pellier on textile tufting

workers handling thread cone and have reported that

64.9% had one work related musculoskeletal pain

[7].The majority of the subjects in our study had

shoulder, back and wrist pain which could be due to

repetitive nature of the job and the poor design of

spinning wheel. Similar findings had been reported by

Punnelt, Robin Keyserling in female garment

workers[8]. This is a significant support to our study.

The musculoskeltal complaints are prominant in our

study because the female subjects study participants

were in a long sitting posture withour any backrest and

maintained this position for atleast 8 hours a day.

Grandjean has reported that sitting posture has a

disadvantage because it affects digestion and breathing

due to prolonged slacking of the abdominal

musculature and the purported ill effect of the flexion

of the lumber spine [9]. Since the women in our study

were involved in two jobs, spinning and farm working

as means of income to support their family and also

being married had family responsibilities and

household work also which could be a major factor for

their residual musculoskeltal pain. As there is residual

pain and fatigue, the productivity slows down. This

compels workers to speed up the work resulting in

increase in symptoms setting up a vicious cycle.

Remedy is the rest, which is bypassed in the process of

reaching the target. For the spinning, hand work is

cyclic and both the agonists and the antagonists get

some rest through the inhibition of the impulses.

However, the left upper limbsand hand pulling the

thread out, has no rest since the same muscles work

during pulling up concentrically and while bringing it

down eccentrically. Unless the design of charkha is

modified, this can not be rectified. However in addition

to the percentage of muscoloskeletal complaints we

have studied the working posture using Rapid Upper

limb Assessment Technique developed by McAtamney

and Corlett. The similar work is carried out by

Tirthankar Ghosh, Banibrata Das, Somnath

Gangopadhyay related to posture adapted by the

goldsmiths in their working conditions in India[10].

The RULA supports to assess the postural discomfort

of the operators at their average working posture. The

RULA score indicates that the posture is poor and

needs urgent attention for modification.

V. CONCLUSION

From the observation and analysis of the result it

can be concluded that the female operators are working

in awkward postures with the potential risks of MSDs

primarily affecting shoulder and upper and lower back

region. The musculoskeletal pain in study participants

was high about 50% although the workload was light.

The overall workload values including ergonomic

environment indicates the improper design of the

workstation. Excessive bending, twisting and

overreaching are the resultant of poorly designed

workstation. These actions in the working condition lead

to the work related musculoskeletal disorders in the

operators. As they have to work for longer period in the

same posture in squatting positions, discomfort feeling

magnitude gets amplified. The ergonomic environment

also affects them to a great extent. So based on the

observations made in this study it could be concluded

that there is an ample scope for improvement in

workplace design, work posture and ergonomic



20

environment. Improvement in workstation design in

spinning section from ergonomic view point will

definitely lead to the betterment in women operators health and enhancement in productivity.

VI. REFERENCES

[1] Robert Norman, Richard Wells. Ergonomic Interventions for Reducing Musculoskeletal

Disorders: An Overview, Related Issues and

Future Directions, For the Institute for Work & Health To the Royal Commission on Workers

Compensation in British Columbia, May 1998.

[2] D. C. Metgud, Subhash Khatri, M. G. Mokashi, P.

N. Saha. An ergonomic study of women workers in a woolen textile factory for identification of

health related problems, Indian Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine Vol.2 Issue 1, pp. 14-19, Apr. 2008.

[3] Adarsh Kumar. Stooped and squatting posture problems in agriculture: International perspective

(India), in Proc. International conference on stooped & squatting postures in the workplace,

Okland, California, USA, July 29-30, 2004

[4] Neville Stanton et al. Handbook of Human

Factors and Ergonomic Methods CRC press ltd.

Chapter 33 pp. 33-1, 2005

[5] McAtamney, L., Corlett, E.N. RULA: A survey method for the investigation of work related

upper limb disorders, Applied Ergonomics,Vol. 24(2), pp. 91-99,1993

[6] Hildebrandt, V.H., Bongers, P.M., van Dijk, F.J.,

Kemper, H.C., and Dul, J, Dutch musculoskeletal questionnaire: description and

basic qualities, Ergonomics, 44, 10381055. 2001

[7] Montreuils S, Laflames L, Pellier C. Profile of musculoskeletal pain suffered from textile tufting

workers handling thread cones according to work,

age and employment duration Journal of Applied Ergonomics, vol. 27, pp. 85-91,1996

[8] Punnett L, Robins JM, Wegman DH, Keyserlings

WM, Soft tissue disorders in the upper limbs of female garment workers Scand I Work Environment Health, Vol. 11, 417-25, 1985.

[9] Grandjean E. Fitting the task to the man: An Ergonomic Approach, London, Taylor & Francis, 1982.

[10] Tirthankar Ghosh, Banibrata Das,Somnath

Gangopadhyay. Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorder: An Occupational Disorder of the

Goldsmiths in India, International Journal of Community Medicine, Vol.35, Iss. 2, pp. 321-325,

Apr. 2010.

Documents

Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Cotton Spinning