Hi Jane, I don't believe the gloves will alter the actual vibration that workers are being exposed to from hand tool use, unlike your other controls that engineer out the risk, or control via time of exposure. But I say that without a specific review of current literature around that - there should probably be some detailed evaluations of HAV measures taken - external and internal to such gloves? Like you I would be suspicious of the manufacturers claims. However offering them as an option might be the way to go. Some people may find them beneficial and helpful, whereas others might not. They might be useful for those who are sensitive to the circulatory effects of vibration, for example. Gloves may offer some 'better grip' from a more 'sticky' grasp surface, which can also be helpful as it may reduce the grasp forces required, but gloves can also have inherent additional grasp force if they are not a great fit or design. So gloves may have multiple plus/minus aspects. Another plus is that they might be better in cold weather as they help to keep the hands warm, and therefore aid better circulation and therefore ease of grasp. In summer they might get sweaty and slippery on the inside and do more harm than good. In practice many people will have an inherent feel for whether they help or hinder, so it might be a great opportunity to offer workers some latitude with deciding how they will do the task/what gear to use.

Indeed it is a shame that this resource has been 'retired' without thought to the development of suitable (technically updated and contemporary) replacement resources. I believe that has fallen into the gap between ACC and WorkSafe, with WorkSafe only now beginning to move into greater leadership around musculoskeletal health risk management. The loss of HabitAtWork follows on from ACC's completely unannounced 2019 'turning off' of the associated WorkSmart Tips resources (developed in liaison with 16 different industries). I can only hope that WorkSafe will now pick up on this issue and show leadership and links with professional expertise to develop suitable replacement materials. I am aware that HASANZ strongly advocated for the keeping of both sets of ACC resource until such time as replacements were made available, but this was unfortunately not successful. I believe that those businesses that were utilising the intranet-based version of HabitAtWork will be able to continue utilising this, if the internal IT system has been maintained to support it. I too am shaking my head in despair.

This is the sort of issue an ergonomist can assist you with sorting out. Happy to speak further.

Good work then Mark! My own mental checklist would include: legs supported so weight is spread between feet, backs of thighs, and trunk support; lumbar support; steering wheel positioned so not over-reaching; rest position at wheel with hands low and with a range of alternate hand positions possible - including those necessary for all driving maneuvers; and overall position so that you can see and do all the necessary driving tasks, and you are generally relaxed. Some vehicles do have poor fit for individuals that makes it hard to comfortably maintain a driving position - modifications or alternate vehicle models are sometimes necessary. Also for some people they need to be told not to hold onto the gear lever all the time (I have seen injuries related to that habit), or other odd habits and positions. Some of the central consoles aren't the right height for people, and create constrained postures.

Hi Tony, a doctor or physio might answer this differently, but in my experience, in NZ the occupational medicine fraternity have been well aware of the benefit of remaining as active as possible with many back injuries/ 'sore backs', and there has been a huge amount of information in the injury treatment/management sector about the recommended 'keep active' approaches. It may not be that well appreciated by some in the health and safety roles/sector though?

Just a comment for the cleaning related query... I am guessing that with the increased cleaning activity that has occurred due to Covid-19, that most cleaners will have had a physical work-load increase, alongside the likelihood of an increase in stress. Have employers recognised the associated risks? Same thing applies for those thrust into working from home without preparation - less well set-up, plus stress and for some longer hours of work, results in the potential for much increased health risk. I feel sure that physio's/ACC will be picking up the pieces over the next months.

I think that working to change how the work is designed and done is the crucial element. In NZ because good musculoskeletal risk assessment and intervention is reasonably rarely done, I suspect that many times a basic 'assessment' (of varying skill level) reduces the issues to "it's common sense" and restricts the intervention to 'training'. Thus, the risk remains.

Posture, break practices, work (and other) stressors, fitness and stretching, nutrition ad hydration, the consideration of exposure to whole body vibration, hours of work, cognitive load, etc etc etc.... The 'ergonomics' of driving are about considerably more than simple physical set-up and fit!

Hi Robyn, It sounds like a good call for a more robust assessment that includes broader job design aspects, and the design of the equipment itself, as well as considering your work force issues and needs. This is work that an ergonomist can assist you with. You can track down certified ergonomists (also called human factors professionals) via the HASANZ Register, and by looking at the 'Find a Professional' page for the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of NZ.

HI Craig, I've just read a 2018 report by Yves Roquelaure (Belgium) 'Musculoskeletal disorders and psychosocial factors at work' (Report 142). It had some good discussion of the way that the physical and psychosocial elements work and how, for risk causation. You might enjoy the read.

I have had initial conversations with the La Trobe team regarding APHIRM, and am interested in NZ human factors/ergonomics professionals getting a good look at this, in liaison with the WorkSafe team who are beginning their work on addressing these now fully recognised health risks.

Hi Joanne, knowing that you are a recent arrival from the UK, can you comment on how well other jurisdictions are integrating the common MSDs/psychosocial work risks in terms of the interventions and programmes they are running. Have you seen any gems that we should steal?

To answer Joanne's question, in New Zealand we have been somewhat hamstrung by ACC being the lead agency for addressing the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) for much of the last couple of decades. This tends to see most things somewhat two-dimensionally in terms of causation. Having said that, ACC led a very good musculoskeletal injury prevention programme between 2006-2012, that had a very systems based framework for understanding the many factors that contribute to to the risks associated with manual tasks and sedentary work - including organisational factors, psychosocial factors, and individual factors. This was the 'Discomfort, Pain and Injury Prevention and Management Programme', known as the 'DPI Programme'. Unfortunately, this was not strongly connected to regulatory action, and not well connected to health and safety actions generally - it was probably better connected to injury management. This programme was however ahead of its time in connecting the dots between psychosocial and physical issues... though it has not been supported by ACC for a number of years now..

Hi Tony,

I completely agree with Trudy that you need to not just consider the immediate health effects of the noise, but also to consider the other effects of noise... Noise also contributes to stress, can make concentrated work and cognitive effort more difficult, and contributes to fatigue. It can make communication difficult, and this can contribute to musculoskeletal health risks (as can stress), and it can create related safety concerns, while raised voices can contribute to vocal health risks.

It is always important to ensure that you are also doing what you can to eliminate the noise at source - rather than just accepting that the noise is something unavoidable to work with. Ensure that noisy machinery is well maintained, mounted properly, and sound-proofing etc used appropriately. The noise may be more avoidable than you think.

Absolutely. And thanks for fixing that pandemic :) !

Let's catch up off-line, we may need to consider ways that we can assist the the linking up of the staff/patient health and safety goals more strategically. There will be multiple levels, but probably some levers that we can look to tweak to move this thinking forward. And for some plotting about the practicalities of bringing this human factors thinking into healthcare, and how the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of NZ can assist with and support that.

I am laughing... 'It depends' ... I have always said that this is a standard ergonomist/human factors professional's response! It is about the inherent understanding of system complexity and the multiple possible pathways and actions. When you 'get' that... one structured response is too restrictive and almost guaranteed to be wrong, at least from someone's perspective.

Good morning Carl, great to have you as part of this sort of forum.

What are your thoughts about how well the Ministry of Health, from a strategic perspective, understands the relationship between actions and initiatives that address worker/staff health and safety, and those that address patient safety initiatives? I see a significant disconnect and that this is an area for some focused work?

Marion

I think my response would be that our work (and his part in that), helps to ensure that he keeps all his fingers on his hands, and brains in his head, and his back in good working order, so that he can get on and build. Keep the answer as simple as the honest and excellent question.

Thanks to Michelle Dykstra for covering some of the key messages! If you look under resources on my website Jennifer, I have a free DIY computer workstation setup sheet that you are welcome to use - www.optimiseltd.co.nz.

The musculoskeletal health risks and guidance around this has not yet been picked up by WorkSafe but I am hopeful that 2020 will see a range of helpful resources in this field, and greater clarity about what good looks like. It has not yet received the attention it requires. Unfortunately the WorkSmart Tips web resource was several months ago taken down by ACC (without consultation) and has not been replaced with anything similar. HabitAtWork is getting 'clunky' on many IT systems, but is still a useful resource if you can get it to go (try it on Internet Explorer if it is being problematic).

I don't believe that it is always necessary or desirable to use external assessors, and believe we could do much better at ensuring that managers and operational teams have appropriate knowledge to manage the day to day risks appropriately - along with H and S generalists. However these people do need to be given the right expertise, so should be able to demonstrate some specific training in the field. There are providers out there offering what I believe are pretty sketchy assessments and recommendations.

Through HASANZ we have done some initial work on breaking down the skills of professionals from the various H and S disciplines and their contributions to this issue. Ensuring effective job and task design, and making sound equipment procurement decisions is critical. I note that rehab providers focused on individual injury rehab needs may not have the requisite skill sets to provide this knowledge.

Desks and chairs might not be rocket science... but it sure is people science.

Merry Christmas folks!
Marion, Ergonomist, Optimise Ltd