NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search
Effect of scaffold end frame carrying strategies on worker stepping response, postural stability, and perceived task difficulty.
Hsiao-H; Hause-M; Powers-JR Jr.; Kau-T-Y; Hendricks-S; Simeonov-PI
Hum Factors 2008 Feb; 50(1):27-36
Objective: This study determined the most favorable strategy for carrying scaffold end frames while minimizing the risk of injuries from being struck by an object, falling, and overexertion. Background: scaffold erectors are at risk of high exposure to the aforementioned hazards associated with the dynamic human-scaffolding interface and work environments. Identifying an optimal work strategy can help reduce risk of injuries to the worker. Method: Three carrying methods, four types of work surfaces, two weights of scaffold frames, and three directions of stepping movement were tested in a laboratory with 18 construction workers. Results: The effects of carrying method on postural instability and task difficulty rating were significant for handling the 22-kg end frame. Response time, postural instability, and perceived task difficulty rating were significantly reduced when the 9-kg end frame was used as compared with the 22-kg frame. Conclusion: The symmetric side-carrying method was the best option for handling 22-kg scaffold end frames. A 9-kg end frame (e.g., made of reinforced lightweight materials) has the potential to reduce injury risk among scaffold handlers during their scaffold erection and dismantling jobs. Application: Scaffold erectors may want to adopt the symmetric side-carrying method as the primary technique for handling the 22-kg scaffold end frame, which is currently the one most used in the industry.
Posture; Musculoskeletal-system; Skeletal-movement; Skeletal-system-disorders; Risk-factors; Risk-analysis; Work-analysis; Workplace-studies; Work-operations; Scaffolds; Biomechanics; Construction-equipment; Construction-workers; Construction-industry
Issue of Publication
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; Construction
Page last reviewed: April 12, 2019
Content source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Education and Information Division