Checklists can effectively assess work-related risk of musculoskeletal injuries

A new paper by Thomas J. Albin, PE, CPE, of High Plains Engineering Services in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, confirms that observational assessment tools, often called checklists, used to assess risk factors such as wrist extension and motion repetition, can be valid tools in identifying work-related risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries. Published in Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment, and Rehabilitation, Albin presents a comprehensive, multi-step yet simple approach for improving the use and effectiveness of checklists.

Previous scholarship regarding the reliability and validity of checklists is limited and sometimes contradictory. Some critics suggest that checklists may overestimate the presence of risk factors and others have questioned their reliability. In this paper, Albin presents a well-founded approach that an ergonomics practitioner can use to dynamically measure the reliability and validity of checklists that he or she uses in order to be sure that they are effective tools.

Traditionally the reliability of a checklist is based on correlating two ratings of the same job performed by a single evaluator or by assessing the agreement of the ratings given to a job by a group of evaluators. Albin argues that alternate methods of assessing consistency are equally appropriate, for example, the use statistical process control tools such as control charts.

Albin also questions how well un-validated checklists serve as a tool to put resources against an at-risk job. "If you have to persuade a manager to release resources to remediate a high-risk job based on checklist findings, what assurance can you give that you are committing limited resources to the appropriate job or ?" Albin said.

Albin recommends a thorough yet concise approach for assessing a checklist's predictive quality. Using the basic information gathered from analyzing jobs with a checklist, the practitioner can construct a 2 x 2 statistical table that serves as the basis for probability calculations, which ultimately yield the probability that at-risk jobs are correctly identified. He also discusses testing the significance of differences between alternate forms of a checklist, fine-tuning checklists, generalizing findings to new situations, and assessing the relative importance of to the identification of the problem job.

More information: "Measuring the Validity and Reliability of Ergonomic Checklists," by Thomas J. Albin. Work 43(3) (2012), pp. 381-385. DOI 10.3233/WOR-2012-1464

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Making a better medical safety checklist

Feb 16, 2010

In the wake of Johns Hopkins' success in virtually eliminating intensive-care unit bloodstream infections via a simple five-step checklist, the safety scientist who developed and popularized the tool warns medical colleagues ...

Surgical checklists save lives

Nov 15, 2011

(Medical Xpress) -- Using checklists to improve work practices has long been normal in the aviation and oil industry. Checklists are now also implemented worldwide in the operating room.

A one-stop shop for minimal information standards

Aug 08, 2008

More than 20 grass-roots standardisation groups, led by scientists at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) and the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH), have combined forces to form the "Minimum Information about ...

Pilot safety protocol could help dentists reduce errors

Aug 02, 2010

Pilots and dentists have more in common than one might think: Both jobs are highly technical and require teamwork. Both are subject to human error where small, individual mistakes may lead to catastrophe if not addressed ...

Recommended for you

Testosterone testing has increased in recent years

Nov 21, 2014

(HealthDay)—There has been a recent increase in the rate of testosterone testing, with more testing seen in men with comorbidities associated with hypogonadism, according to research published online Nov. ...

AMA: Hospital staff should consider impact of CMS rule

Nov 21, 2014

(HealthDay)—Hospital medical staff members need to consider the impact of a final rule issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that revised the conditions of participation for hospitals ...

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.