IEN: What are the major health concerns facing industry?
Shumate: Preventing ergonomic injury without the benefit of accepted personal protective equipment product guidelines.
IEN: How can they be addressed?
Shumate: Ergonomic injury control is a very timely issue, and one that will be around for a while.
The word "ergonomic" has become a buzzword, and is slapped on products ranging from software to ceiling fans. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) may be labeled "ergonomic," but it''s all just so much chatter unless there is independent, reliable confirmation of the claim.
The incidence of ergonomic injuries in the U.S. borders on epidemic. Certain ergonomic injuries, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, are well documented: safety officers and workers themselves are attentive to the causes and symptoms of common repetitive stress disorders. Other health problems, although part of the ergonomic lexicon in many nations around the world, are only now being recognized as serious health threats deserving attention here in the U.S. For example, thousands of cases of vibration-induced HAVS (Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome) have been diagnosed, but due to the wide variety of symptoms and a lack of awareness of the syndrome, and perhaps because of lack of media attention, undoubtedly thousands of cases go unreported and untreated.
Ergonomic injuries, which are often musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) involving soft tissue, can be difficult to diagnose and equally difficult, if not impossible, to remedy. Although some ergonomic injuries may be noticed immediately, the majority can simmer unnoticed, progressing steadily for weeks or even years before the victim realizes they have suffered an injury. By then, it may be too late to reverse the damage, and palliative measures may be the only option left. Therefore, it is clear that prevention is the first line of defense against ergonomic maladies.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), as part of the hierarchy of controls proposed during the 2000 OSHA Ergonomic Rule hearings, was the subject of a lot of testimony and discussion. But since no fundamental standards of performance for ergonomic PPE have been established, and the Rule itself has fallen by the wayside, the problem of choosing the right product to prevent ergonomic injury is as sticky as ever.
Without specific directions from OSHA about what constitutes effective ergonomic injury protection, safety professionals need to be aware of international and U.S. standards that can help them choose the best product for their specific need.
General categories which fall under the ergonomic PPE umbrella, and which were discussed during the OSHA hearings, are cold weather gloves, palm and kneepads, back supports, and anti-vibration or vibration-reducing gloves. I''ll quickly discuss the last item, since the selection of a glove to prevent injury caused by exposure to vibration need not be a complicated procedure.
At this time, only two laboratories in the world (both in Europe) are certified to test gloves for compliance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 10819:1996, which has set the criteria for testing anti-vibration gloves since 1996. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) confirmed this ISO standard for the United States in April 2002 (ANSI S3.40-2002: ISO 10819:1996). Asking a factory representative or distributor sales associate whether his or her AV gloves have passed the ISO (and now ANSI) standard for effective vibration reduction is a good way to verify "anti-vibration" claims. Ask to see the test results. Ask if those results have been certified CE for hand-arm vibration attenuation by the ISO. You don''t have to be an acoustics and vibration specialist or understand all the minutiae of the data. The glove either passed the only vibration-glove testing standard in existence, or it didn''t.
Developing, testing, and producing effective vibration-reducing pads and gloves is a lengthy and expensive procedure, so you won''t find marginal manufacturers with accredited certification. But anyone who has made it over the hurdles should be able to provide details of performance criteria upon request.
In this time of transition from no U.S. standard to confirmation of the ISO standard by ANSI, it is particularly important to challenge all claims for vibration reducing properties. Manufacturer and distributor catalog copy may be erroneous and is certainly out of date. Currently, there are only four glove brands offering products manufactured to meet the new ANSI specifications. Even these glove brands are not able to obtain certification for each of their glove styles under the strict ISO requirements, so a prospective buyer needs to ask about specific gloves.
Almost 20 years ago, in a Current Intelligence Bulletin (Pub. #83-110, 1983), NIOSH noted that "Vibration syndrome has adverse circulatory and neural effects in the fingers, the signs and symptoms include numbness, pain, and blanching (turning pale and ashen). Of particular concern is evidence of advanced stages of vibration syndrome after exposures as short as one year. . ." One can only hope that the U.S. takes the lead in recognizing and certifying other ergonomic personal protective equipment, so safety professionals will have a method of evaluating a product''s efficiency in protecting from specific exposure to ergonomic injury in every industrial category.