commercial construction workers physical activity and loading...

CENTER FOR WORK, HEALTH, & WELL-BEING

Physical activity and loading among commercial construction workers

Oscar E. Arias, Alberto J. Caban-Martinez, Peter Umukoro, Sonja Stoffel, Glorian Sorensen and Jack Dennerlein


Construction workers


Physical Activity


Physical Activity

Moderate

Vigorous


Research question:

How does construction work contribute to a workers’ moderate and vigorous levels of activity?

Moderate and vigorous physical Activity

Physical demands at work

→


Aims

1. Measure and characterize physical activity at work and outside of work among 60 commercial construction workers during seven consecutive days.

2. Measure and characterize trunk flexion while at work during a single shift.

.


Hypotheses

● H1: Construction workers do not meet recommended U.S. levels of physical activity.

● H2:Construction workers have bending profiles associated with higher risk for low back pain.

.


Hypotheses

● H3: Physical activity at work is positively associated to levels of perceived exertion at work.

● H4: A construction worker’s trunk posture is associated to their direct measure of physical activity levels while at work.

.


Methods: Participants

● Cross-sectional observational study● Convenience sample 60 workers ● Dec/12 to Mar/13● Five construction sites


Self-Reported Survey Data Collected

● Day #1:● Accelerometer Log● End of Shift Physical Demands

● Day #7:● PACES Survey collected measures on:

● Worker Demographics● Job Demands● Fatigue● Pain and Injury● Physical Activity


● Parsed data into work and non-work● Each minute assigned to

● Sedentary (Sitting)● Lifestyle and Light (standing)● Moderate (walking)● Vigorous (running)

● Minutes of Moderate and Vigorous in modified 10-minute bouts

Physical Activity → Accelerometry 7 Days

Freedson. Med Sci Sports Exerc. May 1998;30(5):777-781. Troiano. Med Sci Sports Exerc. Jan 2008;40(1):181-188.


● Inclinometer ● G-Link, Microstrain● Recorded 5 samples per second

● Data processing● Duration in different levels of

flexion● Frequency of forward bends at:

● 20 degrees ● 45 degrees

Faber et al. J. Biomech. 2009;42(14):2406-2409Teschke et al. Ergonomics. 2009;52(9), 1067-1078

Trunk flexion


Participants


Work contribution to physical activity


Work contribution to physical activity

U.S. Guidelines recommend: 150 Minutes of moderate per week

Not including 10-minute bouts, the workers met recommended PA minutesWork → 231 minutes of the 150 required


Work contributions to physical activity



Work contributions to physical activity

Including 10-minute bouts, workers did not met recommended minutes



Whole week contribution to physical activity


Whole week contribution to physical activity

Not including 10-minute bouts, workers met the recommended minutesWeek → 375 minutes of the 150 required



Whole week contributions to physical activity

Including 10-minute bouts, workers did not meet recommended minutes



Construction Workers vs PCU workers* When comparing without 10 minutes bouts

At work

Whole week


Construction Workers vs PCU workers

* When comparing with 10 minutes bouts

At work


Trunk Flexion (% Shift)

7%

71%15%

7%

-10° 20°

45°


Frequency of flexion (% Shift)

177/hour

68/hour

-10° 20°

45°


Fathallah et al. Spine. 1998, 23(9), 1035-1042. Punnett et al. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1991, 17(5), 337-346. Keyserling et al. Journal of Industrial Ergonomics.1992, 9, 238 - 301.

Flexion did vary across individuals creating different exposure levels

< 15°of trunk flexion during 86% of the time at work is protective. Fathallah (1998).

MEDIUM

> 20° of trunk flexion during 33% of the time at work is an important risk. Punnet (1991) and Keyserling (1992) .

LOW

HIGH

16 30 10

Overall exposure


Construction Workers vs PCU workers

Trunk posture:


Spearman’s correlation

●Different parameters of trunk posture vs. physical activity in minutes


Spearman’s correlation

Perceived exertion vs. directly measured physical activity (minutes) during a single shift.


Study limitations

● Accelerometer

● Small convenient population

● Trunk flexion vs. Lifting


●Among construction workers, work contributes in meeting the recommended levels of physical activity.

● Compared to PCU workers, construction workers achieve much more moderate levels of physical activity at work.

Conclusions


● Among construction workers, trunk posture during a single shift contributes to meeting recommended levels for physical activity.

● Messages for improving and promoting cardiovascular health for construction workers must consider these results.

Conclusions


Acknowledgments

● Jack Dennerlein ● Glorian Sorensen● Alberto Caban● Torey Jerauld ● Peter Umukoro● Mia Goldwasser● Kincaid Lowe● Ergonomic Lab


Thank you !


Perceived exertion

.. How physically demanding was your shift today? Circle one of the numbers from 6 to 20.4.. On a typical shift, how physically demanding is your shift. Circle one of the numbers from 6 to 20.


Perceived exertion

commercial construction workers physical activity and loading...

Documents