Senthil Kumar.R.K et al. AJE Vol.9 2009 99-107
102
Statistical tests were used to compare the posture, range of motion and strength of individuals who had worked for less than 5 years to those who had worked for
more than 5 years Table 4. These tests did not show any significant differences.
TABLE 1. Demographic Features
Occupation Experience years
1-4 5-9
10 Total
Male Female
Male Female
Male Female
Tailors 3 72 2 40 0 7 124
Checkers 0 11 0 5 0 0 16
Cutters 1 0 1 0 0 0 2
Ironers 3 8 1 3 0 0 15
Helpers 0 9 0 4 0 0 13
Feeding Helpers 0 6 0 3 0 0 9
Others 3 1 2 0 0 0 6
Total 10 107 6 55 0 7 185
TABLE 2. Health seeking behaviour and previous treatment effectiveness
Previous treatment Treatment effectiveness
Yes 29 27.1
Yes 107 57.8
No 78 72.9
No 78 42.2
Not applicable
Total 185
107
TABLE 3.
Physical assessment
Measurement Condition
Posture Range
Strength
Abnormality 23 12.4
20 10.8 22 11.9
No abnormality 162 87.6
165 89.2 163 88.1
Total 185 185 185
Table 4. Relationship between experience and physical assessment
Posture Abnormality
Range Abnormality Strength Abnormality
Years of experience
+ - + - + - 1-4 years
17 100 16 101 16 101
5 years 10 58 5 63
7 61
χ2 = 0.00, p 0.05 χ2 = 1.71, p 0.05
χ2 = 0.45, p 0.05
A study of ergonomic factors contributing to the occurrence of occupation-related musculo-skeletal problems in garment workers
103
3.4. Risk Factor Analysis
The possible risk factors in the garment industry were identified using the Ergonomic Hazard Identification checklist Occupational Safety and Health
Administration 2007. The risk factors were mainly exertion of force with their hands 157; 83.8; usage of handle tools or handle parts 157; 83.8; continuous
standing 45; 24.3 and continuous sitting 140; 76.8; use of electronic devices 1; 0.5; bending and twisting at waist 147; 79.4 and exposure to vibration 126;
68.6.
3.5. Work Station Analysis
Work station analysis showed that static muscle loading contributed to the musculo-skeletal pain in all 185 100 workers. Of these, 169 91.3 were not able
to vary posture during their work time. Out of 138 workers who worked in a sitting position, 137 99.3 were not provided with an arm rest on their chair, and 50
36.2 had chairs that were not adjustable. None of the 185 100 workers were provided with a foot rest while they were at work. Floor mats were not provided for
any of the 24 100 workers who had to stand for long durations..
3.6. Task Analysis
Task analysis revealed that 157 84.9 workers had to bend or twist their back during work; 139 75.1 workers had to sit in a hunched posture continuously for
long periods; and 172 93 workers had to work with raised elbows. All of the workers had to sit or stand continuously for long durations, which increased the
static muscle load on their back muscles. None of the workers in the company were trained in proper work practices including adjustment of work chairs and early
recognition of signs and symptoms of their potential problems. None of the workers had any job rotation, self pacing, sufficient rests or adjustment of job skill level,
which are all standard procedures to prevent ergonomic problems.
3.7. Mental Health Status
The GHQ-12 test showed that 11 5.9 of the workers were under severe psychological distress Score
≥ 20; 18 9.7 had evidence of some distress Score 15 to 20, and the rest 156; 84.3 were normal.
4. Discussion
Few studies in the garment industry have evaluated the parameters that are described in this study. Health-seeking behaviour, physical assessment, risk factor
