Conference Summary: ErgoX 2016 Shruti Gangakhedkar | Genentech, Inc. | SHE Program Manager, Hillsboro Technical Operations | Email: gangakhs@gene.com

• Review of AIHA Ergonomic Toolkit • Proposed methodology (flowchart) • Assessment tools:

– Overview of tools: QEC, Liberty Mutual psychophysical tables, NIOSH 1991 LI, Composite lifting index for multiple lifts, Worksafe BC, Strain Index, RULA, REBA

– Pros and cons for each tool – Proposed Computer Checklist to replace ANSI

VDT checklist (Major additions: touchscreens, multiple monitors , mobile devices, sit/stand)

• Hands-on application: watch videos and in-class simulations

• Discussion of assessment: – Continue to use standards to advance the

knowledge in applied settings, – Analysis by paralysis – Overview of free tools – Discussion of real-world scenarios

• Tips to make safety messages fun, memorable and practical

• Misconception test: fun activity to highlight biases, misconceptions

• Emotions drive behavior, not logic • Ideas to make safety and ergonomics fun:

– Include it as one of your program goals – Use marketing that touches home – Have real competitions – Use themes, metaphors, stories & icons – Go beyond posture, focus on mindfulness – Make employees feel famous and

appreciated

• Be present and a better listener • Imagine: a safety focused rendition • Website: http://www.makesafetyfun.com/

• Very informative talk on root causes of low back injuries

• Discussed different experiments in research on contributing factors of low back pain

• Shear loading and compressive forces on spine are important

• Difficult cultures or bad environments lead to increased reporting of symptoms and back pain

• Odds-ratio as a tool for predicting “high risk” jobs in a workplace

• Some root causes are counter-intuitive and more safety managers should learn the true science behind back injuries

• Exposure contributors: Physical exposures, work organization exposures and physical characteristics

• Should all office workers have sit/stand workstations based on the perceived health benefits?

• Lively debate highlighting pros and cons to this argument with each speaker presenting opening arguments followed by a moderated session and open to attendees for Q&A

• Alter positions during the day: avoid prolonged seated postures

• Those with sit/stands are known to stand on average for 1 – 1.5 hours each day

• Those who can benefit from sit/stands – Back and neck relate issues – Those who cant fit in regular chairs and work

environments

• Standing is not an alternative to physical activity and exercise

• Need to introduce movement not just related to occupational but total sitting time

• Risk for cardiovascular disease reduces with exercise, not standing

• Exert caution on what we promote and don’t highlight any false sense of benefit

• Contrast between traditional workspaces and contemporary mobile work

• Need for ergonomics to keep up due to new devices, ubiquitous access to technology and changing work environment like shared spaces, work studios

• Balancing performance and wellbeing is the newer definition of ergonomics

• Some ideas: Revise fixed seating height to 28.5”, power strip on top of desk, height adjustability for work surfaces and chairs, lounge furniture seat pans not too deep, pull out cushions to provide back support for shorter population

• Practical guidelines for design and selection of furniture and other work space elements

• Partnering with planning, facility and IT design teams to maximize impact of recommendations

• Overview of Liberty Mutual Research Institute’s areas of focus: Driving, Workplace, Built environment, Disability

• Focus on knowledge transfer systems from experts to seekers

• Used mobile app to get live responses from audience to questions like (fun interactive activity) – Leading cause of unintentional injuries in US: a)

Driving; b) Workplaces; c) Building environments – #1 cause of workplace injuries: a)

slips/trips/falls, b) repetition, c) overexertion – Common cause of automobile accidents: a)

driver fatigue, b) driver distraction, c) pedestrian errors

• Bridging the science-practice divide: coauthoring research in safety

• Core competencies: Scientist (understand); Consultant (experience); Technician (ability) and Communicator (outputs)

• Overview of Lawrence Berkeley Research Lab ergonomics program: site details, environment, challenges

• Transition in focus from micro to macro, reactive to proactive

• Ergo programs save money! ROI 2:1 to 3:1 • De-medicalization during early reporting and

discomfort periods • Rapid response kits to cut down the time on

providing tried & tested interventions to those with discomfort

• Use of Remedy Interactive online self assessments to map out categories of those requiring assistance

• Educate and train larger group of employees – ergo advocates

• Standard product catalogs based on type of risk and environment

• Bad planning = bad ergonomics

• Focus not only on biomechanical exposures but also psychosocial and organizational contributors to worker/ work fit

• Need macro-ergonomic approach so interventions don’t have counterproductive or suboptimal effects

• Total Worker Health approach, developed through NIOSH

• “Salutogenesis”: designing work to be health and creativity promoting

• Success of ergonomic interventions depend on employee health status

• Figure out ways to increase amount of time to do the right thing and use right tools

• Discussion on right way to assess return to work/fit for duty

• Pros and cons of various work hardening programs: well written job descriptions, quantitative evaluations, RTW programs

• Max medical conditioning: post injury: 8 hrs/day for multiple days (3-5)

Networking ribbons – indicate interest or expertise in domain

Exhibitors: • Ohio State University’s Spine Research

Institute • Auburn Engineers software • Liberty Mutual Research Institute • Efficiency software • Grandstands ergonomic workstation

solutions