COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RULA EVALUATIONS USING KINEBOT SOFTWARE
Objective: to compare the use of the RULA observational method, with the postural analysis using Kinebot software, of workers in manufacturing stations. Background: The RULA is among the tools most used by ergonomists, but in search of improving ergonomic analyses, new instruments have emerged, amon...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Anhembi Morumbi (ANHEMBI) |
| Repositorio: | DATJournal |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.datjournal.anhembi.br:article/597 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://datjournal.anhembi.br/dat/article/view/597 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | RULA ergonomics musculoeskeletal disorders kinebot ewa Distúrbios musculoesqueléticos Kinebot Ferramentas de ergonomia Análise da postura de trabalho Trastornos musculoesqueléticos Herramientas de ergonomía Análisis de postura de trabajo |
| Sumario: | Objective: to compare the use of the RULA observational method, with the postural analysis using Kinebot software, of workers in manufacturing stations. Background: The RULA is among the tools most used by ergonomists, but in search of improving ergonomic analyses, new instruments have emerged, among them, video-based systems. Kinebot is a software that evaluates the worker through filming and digital recognition, capable of generating a volume of information and detail so superior to the methods currently used. Method: 50 manufacturing positions from an industry in Paraná were selected, in which both methods were applied separately, to then compare the data obtained in the analyses, being the observations in the application, the scores referring to the trunk, neck, left and right forearm, left and right arm, and level of final action. Results: Kinebot was much simpler and easy to apply, there was positive and weak correlation for trunk, neck, right forearm, left and right arm. For the variables left forearm and final action level, there was a positive and moderate correlation (R=0.36, p<0.001; R=0.58, p<0.001). Conclusions: the subjectivity of a conventional method has its evaluation levels decreased with the expansion of technological tools. Kinebot has proved easier and with the results being RULA-compliant. Application: the practical impact of this work is to bring the importance of studies that prove the use of technology in favor of a complete ergonomic analysis without subjectivity. |
|---|