Human factors and ergonomics methods in practice: three fundamental constraints

Including the ergonomist's voice in integrating MSD prevention and psychological health and safety: Challenges, tools, and considerations

The purpose of this study was to gather ergonomists' perspectives and experiences, describing current challenges and contextual considerations in risk assessment, exploring how ergonomists are currently integrating the multiple domains of ergonomics for MSD and/or psychological health and safety and highlighting key considerations in the design and format of future tools. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty Canadian ergonomists to explore risk assessment tool use, favoured characteristics and format of tools, commonly addressed risk factors in their practice, and tools relating to both MSD prevention and psychological health and safety. The range of practitioner years of experience highlighted differing needs and approaches to the use and formatting of risk assessment tools. Practitioners reported using quantitative outcomes (levels of risk, values) from traditional physical tools complemented by a general observation of psychosocial or organizational factors. Though many respondents had not yet encountered the need for psychological injury assessment in their sectors it was identified as a quickly emerging area citing a need for valid and reliable tools. Practitioners noted a lack of available tools that integrated cognitive and psychosocial items presenting a future challenge for integrated tools that covered multiple ergonomic domains. Along with recommendations for future tool development, the authors reflect on the process of qualitative inquiry as an essential step in the risk assessment process. Future studies will be needed to develop and evaluate measurement properties of integrating psychosocial factors and their respective tools in traditional MSD assessment.

We have to go back, back to the future! Reflecting on 75 years of human factors in the UK to shape a future of responsible artificial intelligence innovation

The origins of Human Factors (HF) are rooted in the Second World War. It is a sign of the times that 75 years on from the formation of the Ergonomics Research Society, discussions occur as to whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) could/should be capable of controlling weaponry in a theatre of war. HF can support the design of safe, ethical, and usable AI: but there is little evidence of HF influencing industrial organisations developing AI. A review of the history of HF was conducted to understand how the influence of discipline on AI development may be optimised. The field may need to become broader and more inclusive, given the potential implications of innovation such as AI. The field of Responsible Research and Innovation can help the HF Practitioner ensure that the design and application of AI based technology serves to improve human well-being and optimise system performance over the next 75 years.Practitioner summary: A review of the history and origins of Human Factors was conducted. The review aimed to learn from the development of the discipline over the last 75 years to provide insights of what can be done to optimise the influence of HF to design safe, ethical, and usable artificial intelligence.

The Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors at 75: perspectives on contemporary challenges and future directions for Ergonomics and Human Factors

As the UK's Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (CIEHF) celebrates its 75th anniversary, it is worth reflecting on our discipline's contribution, current state, and critical future endeavours. We present the perspectives of 18 EHF professionals who were asked to respond to five questions regarding the impact of EHF, contemporary challenges, and future directions. Co-authors were in agreement that EHF's impact has been only limited to date and that critical issues require resolution, such as increasing the number of suitably qualified practitioners, resolving the research-practice gap, and increasing awareness of EHF and its benefits. Frequently discussed future directions include advanced emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, the development of new EHF methods, and enhancing the quality and reach of education and training. The majority felt there will be a need for EHF in 75 years; however, many noted that our methods will need to adapt to meet new needs.Practitioner statement: This article provides the perspectives of 18 Ergonomics and Human Factors (EHF) professionals on the impact of EHF, contemporary challenges and critical future directions, and changes that are necessary to ensure EHF remains relevant in future. As such, it provides important guidance on future EHF research and practice.

Testing the reliability of accident analysis methods: a comparison of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet

Accident analysis methods are used to model the multifactorial cause of adverse incidents. Methods such as AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and recently AcciNet, are systemic approaches that support the identification of safety interventions across sociotechnical system levels. Despite their growing popularity, little is known about how reliable systems-based methods are when used to describe, model and classify contributory factors and relationships. Here, we conducted an intra-rater and inter-rater reliability assessment of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet using the Signal Detection Theory (SDT) paradigm. A total of 180 hours' worth of analyses across 360 comparisons were performed by 30 expert analysts. Findings revealed that all three methods produced a weak to moderate positive correlation coefficient, however the inter-rater reliability of STAMP-CAST was significantly higher compared to AcciMap and AcciNet. No statistically significant or practically meaningful differences were found between methods in the overall intra-rater reliability analyses. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

Using systems thinking-based risk assessment methods to assess hazardous manual tasks: a comparison of Net-HARMS, EAST-BL, FRAM and STPA

Formal risk assessment is a component of safety management relating to hazardous manual tasks (HMT). Systems thinking approaches are currently gaining interest for supporting safety management. Existing HMT risk assessment methods have been found to be limited in their ability to identify risks across the whole work system; however, systems thinking-based risk assessment (STBRA) methods were not designed for the HMT context and have not been tested in this area. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of four state-of-the-art STBRA methods: Net-HARMS, EAST-BL, FRAM and STPA to determine which would be most useful for identifying HMT risks. Each method was independently applied by one of four analysts to assess the risks associated with a hypothetical HMT system. The outcomes were assessed for alignment with a benchmark analysis. Using signal detection theory (SDT), overall STPA was found to be the best performing method having the highest hit rate, second lowest false alarm rate and highest Matthews Correlation Coefficient of the four methods.Practitioner summary: A comparison of four systems thinking risk assessment methods found that STPA had the highest level of agreement with the benchmark analysis and is the most suitable for practitioners to use to identify the risks associated with HMT systems.

The problem with "ergonomics injuries": What can ergonomists do?

Effects of psychosocial hazards on risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are often very substantial, but workplace risk management practices focus largely on biomechanical hazards, as do the risk assessment methods used by ergonomists. Translation of research evidence into more effective workplace practices demands a more holistic risk management framework that encompasses both types of hazard. In this context, we evaluate the validity of different MSD risk assessment methods for different purposes, focusing particularly on requirements for routine workplace risk management. These include choice of fit-for-purpose assessment methods, prioritisation of hazards that are most affecting risk, and control actions as high as possible in the risk control hierarchy. Ergonomists could facilitate more effective workplace risk management by promoting: awareness of the need for change; improvements to guidance from OHS regulators; research on MSD-related workplace management issues; and professional development programs on this topic for ergonomists and other OHS practitioners.

Multi-task exposure assessment to infer musculoskeletal disorder risk: A scoping review of injury causation theories and tools available to assess exposures

Exposure assessment is critical for understanding musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) risk. Previous reviews summarized the tools available for single-task exposure assessment, however no reviews summarize tools available to assess the accumulation or aggregation of exposure associated with the performance of multiple tasks (i.e., multi-task assessment). We address this gap by using a scoping review methodology to: 1) summarize the theories explaining how multi-task exposures may lead to MSDs, and 2) summarize the models and tools available to assess multi-task exposures, stratified based on prevailing theories. Using a systematic search strategy, 3230 articles were identified, of which 34 were retained for data extraction. Of the retained articles, 13 described MSD causation theories, 12 described mathematical models (not yet accessible as tools), six described readily accessible tools, and three described both theories and a model or tool. We summarized the state-of-the-art in multi-task exposure assessment and highlight the need for more tools that assess muscle fatigue and inform on recovery.

Musculoskeletal disorder risk assessment tool use: A Canadian perspective

Canadian ergonomics professionals from the Association of Canadian Ergonomists (ACE) and Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (BCRSP) participated in a web-based survey of their awareness, use, and factors influencing use of ergonomics musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) risk assessment tools. A total of 791 respondents (21.0% response rate) participated in the survey. Certified ergonomics professionals represented an important subpopulation of MSD risk assessment tool users, however; the vast majority (86.4%) of users within Canada were certified safety professionals. Average tool use varied between ACE and BCRSP groups, where ACE respondents on average use more tools than BCRSP respondents, however the top 10 tools used were similar between the groups. Over 45% of assessment tools were learned at school and average tool use was not influenced by years of experience or continuing education.

Using cognitive work analysis to identify competencies for human factors and ergonomics practitioners

While several competency frameworks have been proposed for Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) practitioners, these are not commonly based on structured analyses. The aim of this research was to develop a sociotechnical systems model of the HFE practitioner role in Australia and identify the competencies required to fulfil the role. Study One applied the Work Domain Analysis phase of cognitive work analysis (CWA) to model the HFE practitioner role. Model refinement was undertaken with seven subject matter experts. In Study Two, the model was used to elicit the competencies (knowledge, skills, abilities, other characteristics) required for successful performance, via a survey of 28 HFE practitioners. Most competencies related to skills (i.e. communication skills) and knowledge (i.e. domain knowledge). Gaps in competencies were also identified, linked to a lack of HFE education pathways in Australia. The findings have practical utility for designing HFE practitioner roles and educational programs. Practitioner summary: Cognitive work analysis provided a structured analysis of the role of the Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) practitioner and to support the identification of competencies. The results suggest that HFE practitioners are generalists rather than specialists and have implications for the job design and education of HFE practitioners. Abbreviations: BCPE: board of certification in professional ergonomics; CIEHF: chartered institute of ergonomics and human factors; CWA: cognitive work analysis; HFE: human factors and ergonomics; HFESA: human factors and ergonomics society of Australia; IEA: International Ergonomics Association; KSAO: knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics; O*NET: occupation information network; SME: subject matter expert; SRK: skills, rules, knowledge; UK: United Kingdom; USA: United States of America; WDA: work domain analysis.

Knowledge, Awareness and Practice with Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes among Healthcare Providers in a Ghanaian Tertiary Hospital

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant problem in global health today, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where antimicrobial stewardship programmes are yet to be successfully implemented. We established a partnership between AMR pharmacists from a UK NHS hospital and in Ho Teaching Hospital with the aim of enhancing antimicrobial stewardship knowledge and practice among healthcare providers through an educational intervention. We employed a mixed-method approach that included an initial survey on knowledge and awareness before and after training, followed by qualitative interviews with healthcare providers conducted six months after delivery of training. This study was carried out in two phases in Ho Teaching Hospital with healthcare professionals, including pharmacists, medical doctors, nurses and medical laboratory scientists. Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection. In the first phase, we surveyed 50 healthcare providers, including nurses (33%), pharmacists (29%) and biomedical scientists (23%). Of these, 58% of participants had engaged in continuous professional development on AMR/AMS, and above 95% demonstrated good knowledge on the general use of antibiotics. A total of 18 participants, which included four medical doctors, five pharmacists, four nurses, two midwives and three biomedical scientists, were interviewed in the second phase and demonstrated greater awareness of AMS practices, particularly the role of education for patients, as well as healthcare professionals. We found that knowledge and practice with AMS was markedly improved six months after the training session. There is limited practice of AMS in LMICs; however, through AMR-focused training, we demonstrated improved AMS skills and practice among healthcare providers in Ho Teaching Hospital. There is a need for continuous AMR training sessions for healthcare professionals in resource-limited settings.

Using Operational Scenarios in a Virtual Reality Enhanced Design Process

Maritime user interfaces for ships’ bridges are highly dependent on the context in which they are used, and rich maritime context is difficult to recreate in the early stages of user-centered design processes. Operations in Arctic waters where crews are faced with extreme environmental conditions, technology limitations and a lack of accurate navigational information further increase this challenge. There is a lack of research supporting the user-centered design of workplaces for hazardous Arctic operations. To meet this challenge, this paper reports on the process of developing virtual reality-reconstructed operational scenarios to connect stakeholders, end-users, designers, and human factors specialists in a joint process. This paper explores how virtual reality-reconstructed operational scenarios can be used as a tool both for concept development and user testing. Three operational scenarios were developed, implemented in a full mission bridge simulator, recreated in virtual reality (VR), and finally tested on navigators (end-users). Qualitative data were captured throughout the design process and user-testing, resulting in a thematic analysis that identified common themes reflecting the experiences gained throughout this process. In conclusion, we argue that operational scenarios, rendered in immersive media such as VR, may be an important and reusable asset when supporting maritime design processes and in maritime training and education.

Complexity theory in accident causation: using AcciMap to identify the systems thinking tenets in 11 catastrophes

The quest to explain and understand the cause of accidents is both ever-present and ongoing amongst the safety science community. In an attempt to advance the theory and science of accident causation, researchers have recently formalised a set of '15 systems thinking tenets' that cover the conditions and characteristics of work systems that are believed to contribute to the cause of accidents. The purpose of this study was to attempt to identify the systems thinking tenets across a range of different systems and accidents using the Accident Mapping (AcciMap) method. The findings suggest that the tenets can be attributed to play a role in accident causation, however as a result of this process, the capability of AcciMap has been brought into question. Implications and directions for future research are described. Practitioner Summary: This study is an extension of previous work that suggested there was a need to test for the 'systems thinking tenets of accident causation' in a multi-incident dataset. We used AcciMap to evaluate whether it has the capability to support ongoing accident analysis activities in ergonomics research.

Application of Human Factors in the Development Process of Immersive Visual Technologies: Challenges and Future Improvements

This study investigates how Human Factors (HF) is applied when designing and developing Immersive Visual Technologies (IVT), including Augmented Reality, Mixed Reality, and Virtual Reality. We interviewed fourteen people working at different organizations, that develop IVT applications in the Nordic region. We used thematic analysis to derive themes from the interviews. The results showed an insufficient knowledge and application of HF in IVT development, due to the lack of awareness of both scope and significance of HF, resource allocation strategy, market inertia, stakeholder's involvement, standardization of HF application and IVT uses, and technology maturity. This situation could be improved by allocating experts, adjusting organizational strategy to balance resource allocation, training developers and user organizations to raise awareness and to encourage co-creative design and knowledge sharing, create a sense of ownership amongst stakeholders, and ensure the usefulness of the technology to the user's work.

Out of control? Using STAMP to model the control and feedback mechanisms surrounding identity crime in darknet marketplaces

Darknet marketplaces have emerged as a facilitator of identity crime and trading. This study aimed to (1) understand the entities and control and feedback mechanisms that influence identity crime prevention and occurrence on the darknet in the Australian system and to (2) comprehensively identify the implications of control failures across all system levels. The Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) was used to develop an identity crime control structure in consultation with subject matter experts and then the Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) was applied. The STPA identified 310 risk states, resulting from control failures and which were associated with the range of agencies, organisations, and individuals present across system levels. As darknet marketplaces rapidly evolve, alignment between these entities is necessary to enable agile system responses. STAMP and STPA have promise in understanding the potential for intervention across all system levels in preventing societal issues such as identity crime.

Causes of and Preventive Measures for Complacency as Viewed by Officers in Charge of the Engineering Watch

Complacency has been recognised as a cause of maritime accidents, and there is a need to develop and execute relevant preventive measures. The effectiveness of preventive actions depends on the contribution of the seafarers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify causes and elicit proposals for preventing complacency by officers in charge of the engineering watch. A total of 63 Croatian engineering officers participated in four deliberative workshops, facilitated by an expert in the teaching of leadership and management. As causes of complacency, intensive workload, poor knowledge/understanding of the equipment, steep authority gradient, lack of collaboration, poor communication, efficiency-thoroughness trade-off, crewing strategies, and lack of organisational justice were identified. Efficient training on workload management, adequate familiarisation, reporting issues with technology, producing one’s own manuals, more effective leadership courses, more emphasis on non-technical skills as criteria for a promotion, joint workshops on teamwork for land-based managers and seafarers, open and objective performance evaluation, and direct communication between land-based managers and seafarers were proposed as feasible preventive measures. Human-centred design and standardisation of the equipment were evaluated as unlikely to be feasible. Some practical implications from the findings were discussed.

Interactive ergonomic risk mapping: a practical approach for visual management of workplace ergonomics

Current studies identify an increasing need to develop enriched tools for ergonomic risk management that can foster an atmosphere enhancing commitment of all stakeholders to create a safe and heathy work environment using ergonomic principles. In this study, a new tool for visualization of ergonomic practices in the workplace is proposed. For developing this tool, an interactive ergonomic risk mapping (intERM) methodology is introduced consisting of five steps while integrating the company's strategic vision and helping to accommodate the impacts of changes in policy and regulatory context, economic and demographic environment, technology and employment context. The proposed systematic and practical methodology is demonstrated on a real-life example. This visual and interactive tool enables prompt identification of and reaction to ergonomic risks, anticipating changes for reducing/eliminating ergonomic risks, as well as increasing company-wide awareness for ergonomic risks and enhancing engagement and ownership of stakeholders.

Ergonomics assessment methods used by ergonomics professionals

A web-based survey was conducted of ergonomics practitioners holding certifications in the U.S., Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. The survey follows 12 years after an earlier initial survey reported by Dempsey et al. (2005). Approximately 1221 eligible participants were invited by e-mail to participate, and 405 surveys were included in the final analysis. The survey queried use of basic instruments relevant to ergonomic practice as well as more specific analytical tools such as observational techniques for assessing postural demands of work and instrumentation for direct measurement of such demands. Some ergonomic assessment methods appear to have increased in their overall use by U.S. ergonomists compared to 2005 data. This was observed for: RULA, REBA, Psychophysical Upper Extremity Data, Strain Index, and ACGIH TLV for Hand Activity Level. There is minimal evidence of increased overall use of direct measurement approaches in the U.S. There appear to be geographic differences between countries/continents in terms of use of various methods. The use of mobile device/smart phone "apps" by ergonomists was queried and these technologies presently appear to be in early adoption phase with 24-28% of practitioners reporting use of an app in their ergonomics practice.