Data processing costs for three posture assessment methods

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Jens Wahlström¹  Jennie Jackson³  Svend Erik Mathiassen³  Catherine Trask² 

[1] Department of Public Health & Clinical Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Umeå University, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden;Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 103 Hospital Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0W8, Canada;Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Occupational and Public Health Sciences, University of Gävle, SE - 801 76 Gävle, Sweden

关键词: Methods development;    Work related musculoskeletal disorders;    Questionnaire;    Observation;    Inclinometry;    Back;    Shoulder;    Exposure;    Cost-efficiency;   

Others  :  866651
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-124

 received in 2013-02-08, accepted in 2013-10-10,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Data processing contributes a non-trivial proportion to total research costs, but documentation of these costs is rare. This paper employed a priori cost tracking for three posture assessment methods (self-report, observation of video, and inclinometry), developed a model describing the fixed and variable cost components, and simulated additional study scenarios to demonstrate the utility of the model.

Methods

Trunk and shoulder postures of aircraft baggage handlers were assessed for 80 working days using all three methods. A model was developed to estimate data processing phase costs, including fixed and variable components related to study planning and administration, custom software development, training of analysts, and processing time.

Results

Observation of video was the most costly data processing method with total cost of € 30,630, and was 1.2-fold more costly than inclinometry (€ 26,255), and 2.5-fold more costly than self-reported data (€ 12,491). Simulated scenarios showed altering design strategy could substantially impact processing costs. This was shown for both fixed parameters, such as software development and training costs, and variable parameters, such as the number of work-shift files processed, as well as the sampling frequency for video observation. When data collection and data processing costs were combined, the cost difference between video and inclinometer methods was reduced to 7%; simulated data showed this difference could be diminished and, even, reversed at larger study sample sizes. Self-report remained substantially less costly under all design strategies, but produced alternate exposure metrics.

Conclusions

These findings build on the previously published data collection phase cost model by reporting costs for post-collection data processing of the same data set. Together, these models permit empirically based study planning and identification of cost-efficient study designs.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Trask et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Winkel J, Mathiassen SE: Assessment of physical work load in epidemiologic studies: concepts, issues and operational considerations. Ergonomics 1994, 37(6):979-988.
• [2]van der Beek AJ, Frings-Dresen MH: Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Occup Environ Med 1998, 55(5):291-299.
• [3]Rezagholi M, Mathiassen SE: Cost-efficient design of occupational exposure assessment strategies–a review. Ann Occup Hyg 2010, 54(8):858-868.
• [4]Trask C, Mathiassen SE: Price versus precision: cost efficiency in trunk posture observation. in Proceeding of the 7th International Scientific Conference on Prevention of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (PREMUS 2010) CD-rom. Angers, France: University of Angers; 2010.
• [5]Mathiassen SE, Trask C: Cost efficiency of adding another subject or another day to an exposure dataset. In Proceeding of the 7th International Scientific Conference on Prevention of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (PREMUS 2010) CD-rom. Angers, France; 2010. (available from University of Angers)
• [6]Mathiassen SE, Bolin K: Optimizing cost-efficiency in mean exposure assessment - cost functions reconsidered. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:76. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Mathiassen SE, Liv P, Wahlström J: Cost-efficient measurement strategies for posture observations based on video recordings. Appl Ergon 2013, 44:609-617.
• [8]Travers EM: Cost analysis in the toxicology laboratory. Clin Lab Med 1990, 10(3):591-623.
• [9]Brown JL, Vanable PA, Eriksen MD: Computer-assisted self-interviews: a cost effectiveness analysis. Behav Res Methods 2008, 40(1):1-7.
• [10]Trask C, et al.: Data collection costs in industrial environments for three occupational posture exposure assessment methods. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012, 12:89. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Rezagholi M, Mathiassen SE, Liv P: Cost efficiency comparison of four video-based techniques for assessing upper arm postures. Ergonomics 2012, 55(3):350-360.
• [12]Trask C, et al.: Measuring low back injury risk factors in challenging work environments: an evaluation of cost and feasibility. Am J Ind Med 2007, 50(9):687-696.
• [13]Mathiassen SE, et al.: Efficient one-day sampling of mechanical job exposure data--a study based on upper trapezius activity in cleaners and office workers. AIHA J (Fairfax, Va) 2003, 64(2):196-211.
• [14]Jackson JA, Mathiassen SE, Dempsey PG: Methodological variance associated with normalization of occupational upper trapezius EMG using sub-maximal reference contractions. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2009, 19(3):416-427.
• [15]Liv P, Mathiassen SE, Svendsen SW: Theoretical and empirical efficiency of sampling strategies for estimating upper arm elevation. Ann Occup Hyg 2011, 55(4):436-449.
• [16]Hansson GA, et al.: Precision of measurements of physical workload during standardised manual handling. Part II: Inclinometry of head, upper back, neck and upper arms. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2006, 16(2):125-136.
• [17]Hansson GA, et al.: Validity and reliability of triaxial accelerometers for inclinometry in posture analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2001, 39(4):405-413.
• [18]Kazmierczak K, et al.: An integrated analysis of ergonomics and time consumption in Swedish 'craft-type' car disassembly. Appl Ergon 2005, 36(3):263-273.
• [19]Wahlstrom J, et al.: Upper arm postures and movements in female hairdressers across four full working days. Ann Occup Hyg 2010, 54(5):584-594.
• [20]Bao S, et al.: Interrater reliability of posture observations. Hum Factors 2009, 51(3):292-309.
• [21]Mathiassen SE, Burdorf A, van der Beek AJ: Statistical power and measurement allocation in ergonomic intervention studies assessing upper trapezius EMG amplitude. A case study of assembly work. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2002, 12(1):45-57.
• [22]Galesic M, Bosnjak M: Effects of Questionnaire Length on Participation and Indicators of Response Quality in a Web Survey. Public Opin Q 2009, 73:349-360.
• [23]Abernethy AP, et al.: Improving health care efficiency and quality using tablet personal computers to collect research-quality, patient-reported data. Health Serv Res 2008, 43(6):1975-1991.
• [24]Jackson J, Punnett L, Mathiassen SE: Statistical precision of categorical PATH observations of trunk posture. Work 2012, 41(Supplement 1):5519-5521.
• [25]Kazmierczak K, et al.: Observer reliability of industrial activity analysis based on video recordings. Int J Ind Ergon 2006, 36:275-282.
• [26]Svendsen SW, et al.: Work related shoulder disorders: quantitative exposure-response relations with reference to arm posture. Occup Environ Med 2004, 61(10):844-853.
• [27]Tak S, et al.: Physical ergonomic hazards in highway tunnel construction: overview from the Construction Occupational Health Program. Appl Ergon 2011, 42(5):665-671.
• [28]Trask CM, et al.: EMG estimated mean, peak, and cumulative spinal compression of workers in five heavy industries. Int J Ind Ergonom 2010, 40(4):448-454.
• [29]Burdorf A, van der Beek AJ: In musculoskeletal epidemiology are we asking the unanswerable in questionnaires on physical load? Scand J Work Environ Health 1999, 25(2):81-83.
• [30]Wells R, et al.: Assessment of physical work load in epidemiologic studies: common measurement metrics for exposure assessment. Ergonomics 1997, 40(1):51-61.
• [31]Spielholz P, et al.: Comparison of self-report, video observation and direct measurement methods for upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder physical risk factors. Ergonomics 2001, 44(6):588-613.
• [32]Village J, et al.: Development and evaluation of an observational Back-Exposure Sampling Tool (Back-EST) for work-related back injury risk factors. Appl Ergon 2009, 40:538-544.
• [33]Fethke NB, et al.: Variability in muscle activity and wrist motion measurements among workers performing non-cyclic work. J Occup Environ Hyg 2012, 9(1):25-35.
• [34]Trask CM, et al.: Optimising sampling strategies: components of low-back EMG variability in five heavy industries. Occup Environ Med 2010, 67(12):853-860.
• [35]Samuels SJ, Lemasters GK, Carson A: Statistical methods for describing occupational exposure measurements. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1985, 46(8):427-433.
• [36]Chen CC, et al.: Sampling strategies for occupational exposure assessment under generalized linear model. Ann Occup Hyg 2009, 53(5):509-521.
• [37]Hoogendoorn WE, et al.: Flexion and rotation of the trunk and lifting at work are risk factors for low back pain: results of a prospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000, 25(23):3087-3092.
• [38]Ariens GA, et al.: High quantitative job demands and low coworker support as risk factors for neck pain: results of a prospective cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001, 26(17):1896-1901. discussion 1902-3
• [39]Burdorf A, Jansen JP: Predicting the long term course of low back pain and its consequences for sickness absence and associated work disability. Occup Environ Med 2006, 63(8):522-529.