Risk Factors and Economic Impact of Musculoskeletal Disorders in Employees of a Port Operations Company in Southwestern Côte d’Ivoire in 2020 ()
1. Introduction
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a group of multifactorial conditions with occupational components that affect the peri-articular soft tissues, including muscles, tendons, nerves, joints, cartilages, and menisci. These disorders primarily manifest as pain and functional limitations in one or more joints [1]-[3]. Typically, they arise from a combination of biomechanical, personal, and organizational factors that disrupt the balance between workers’ functional capacities and the demands of their jobs [1].
Regarded as a “pandemic in the workplace”, MSDs are prevalent across various industries, posing a significant public health challenge due to their high incidence and the serious socio-economic and professional impacts they entail [4]-[6].
In the United States, MSDs constituted between 29% and 35% of all occupational illnesses from 1992 to 2010 [6]. Similarly, in 2016, MSDs accounted for 41% and 65% of work-related diseases in Great Britain and Korea, respectively, with their economic impact estimated to be 40% of global work-related illness costs [7]-[9].
The economic burden of these disorders is primarily due to costs associated with the absenteeism of skilled and experienced workers, leading to decreased productivity, opportunity costs, and medical treatment expenses.
Between 1994 and 2002, in Washington State, USA, the annual productivity loss attributed to MSDs was estimated to be approximately 3.3 billion dollars [10]. Additionally, these disorders are among the leading causes of disability worldwide [11].
In Africa, MSDs have been investigated in various studies. For instance, in Tunisia, Nada Kotti et al reported in 2016 a 41.02% prevalence of low back pain among machine operators, mainly associated with biomechanical factors [12]. Similarly, J Muzembo Ndundu et al., in a study conducted in Kinshasa, identified a 25.2% prevalence of chronic low back pain in a transport company, primarily linked to ergonomic and psychosocial factors [13].
In 2019, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) were the most frequently reported compensable occupational diseases in Côte d’Ivoire, as documented by the social security fund reports. Employees face exposure to MSD risk factors during activities such as manual handling of heavy loads, maintaining awkward working postures, exposure to mechanical vibrations, and repetitive motions. This study was prompted by the rising incidence of lower back pain and other musculoskeletal complaints within a port company. Its objective was to decrease the prevalence of these peri-articular pains and to enhance the quality of the working environment.
1.1. General Objective
To investigate musculoskeletal disorders among employees of a port industry company in 2020 and know the prevalence of MSDs in a port company, as well as related variables and associated costs.
1.2. Specific Objectives
1) To ascertain the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among the employees of the company under study in 2020 and its relationship with the variables: age, sex, and type of work.
2) To identify the various anatomical locations of diagnosed MSDs among the company’s employees in 2020.
3) To describe the occupational risk factors associated with the diagnosed MSDs among the company’s employees in 2020.
4) To assess the economic impact of the identified MSDs on the company in 2020.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Type, Setting, and Duration
This research was a cross-sectional, descriptive investigation into musculoskeletal disorders that emerged in 2020 within a port operations company based in San-Pedro, Côte d’Ivoire. The study was conducted over a three-month period, from November 2, 2020, to February 2, 2021.
2.2. Study Population
The study population included all company workers, including employees, interns, and contractors.
Sampling
We carried out an exhaustive sampling of all workers meeting the inclusion criteria, with voluntary participation and consent from the company and the workers to the use of the data for epidemiological purposes, while preserving their confidentiality.
Inclusion Criteria
Participants included in the study were personnel regardless of gender or job position, aged 18 years or older, with a minimum of six months of professional tenure, who consented to participate in the study and were present during the data collection period.
Exclusion Criteria
We were unable to include in this study any personnel who were
contractual or interns,
suffering from infectious joint pathologies or being on sick leave for any medical reason,
with a history of joint trauma.
2.3. Data Collection Instruments
The data were gathered using a survey based on the following validated questionnaires:
TMS INRS (National Institute for Scientific Research) October 2000 version, which provides information on complaints related to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) [14];
SALTSA method, a tool for detecting upper limb MSDs in the workplace based on early signs [15];
Quick Exposer Check: a tool that evaluates whether a worker, while performing their tasks, is exposed to risks of musculoskeletal disorders affecting the most frequently used body segments (hand, wrist, elbow, shoulder, neck, back). This tool provides information on the risk factors for MSDs [16].
This method enables the calculation of scores to assess the risk level. The measurement of risk is achieved through the combination of responses from both the observer and the worker. A high-risk level necessitates immediate corrective action, while a medium-risk level permits the deferral of intervention within a reasonable time frame. Conversely, a low-risk level allows for an observational approach. The results obtained furnished critical information for initiating a preventive strategy. (Table 1)
Table 1. Distribution of risk levels based on obtained scores [16].
Body Segments |
Scores and Corresponding Risk Levels |
|
Low |
Medium |
High |
Back |
10 - 28 |
30 - 42 |
44 - 56 |
Shoulder and arm |
10 - 28 |
30 - 42 |
44 - 56 |
Wrist and hand |
10 - 14 |
26 - 34 |
36 - 46 |
Neck |
4 - 14 |
16 |
18 |
2.4. Body Mass Index (BMI, WHO) [17]
Interpretation of body mass index.
(BMI) |
Interpretation (as per WHO guidelines) |
Below 18.5 |
Underweight (thinness) |
18.5 to 25 |
Normal weight |
25 to 30 |
Overweight |
30 to 35 |
Moderate obesity |
35 to 40 |
Severe obesity |
Above 40 |
Morbid or massive obesity |
2.5. Methodology
2.5.1. Data Collection Approach
With the management’s approval, our study commenced with an initial phase focused on increasing awareness among employees about musculoskeletal disorders. Following this, we conducted visits to each department to distribute survey forms to the workers. Subsequently, the workers were invited to the company’s medical facility for a clinical examination. This examination assessed all body joints using the SALTSA method [15]. The questionnaire was completed through an interview with the staff, which was then followed by the clinical examination. Diagnostic data were gathered during an examination conducted in accordance with the SALTSA method. This method, developed by the INRS, serves as a tool for detecting early signs of upper limb musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace. Its purpose is to refine prevention strategies and enhance the epidemiological monitoring of musculoskeletal disorders.
2.5.2. Economic Cost of MSDs
The economic impact of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) has been evaluated based on the criteria outlined in Table 2 below.
Table 2. Parameters of the socio-economic impact of MSDs [17].
Socio-economic Parameters |
Definition |
Formula |
Direct Cost (CD) |
Health-related expenses directly associated with managing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) |
Costs for consultations + pharmacy + hospitalization + imaging + functional rehabilitation |
Indirect Cost (CI) |
Expenses resulting from employee absenteeism |
Absenteeism cost (Cabst) + Opportunity cost (Cp) |
|
Absenteeism cost (Cabst) |
Calculated as the average salary multiplied by the total monthly absenteeism |
Average monthly salary × total absenteeism (months) |
|
Opportunity cost (Cp) |
Represents the potential earnings the company lost due to MSDs |
Revenue × total months of absenteeism ÷ (number of employees × 12) |
Total Cost |
The comprehensive cost of MSDs within the company, combining both direct and indirect costs |
Direct Cost (CD) + Indirect Cost (CI) |
Euro/XOF exchange rate on 27/03/2025. 1 euro = 655.957 XOF.
2.5.3. Data Analysis
The data gathered were inputted and analyzed utilizing Word and Epi Info 7 software. Graphical representations were generated using Excel 2013. Quantitative data are characterized by mean and standard deviation, while qualitative variables are represented by proportions.
2.5.4. Ethical Considerations
This research was carried out with the approval of the company’s management. The findings are exclusively used for scientific and social objectives, adhering strictly to the confidentiality of the collected data. No conflicts of interest are reported.
3. Results
3.1. Workforce Composition
The study sample included 125 workers from a total workforce of 206, achieving an inclusion rate of 60.67%.
3.2. Socio-Demographic and Occupational Characteristics
3.2.1. Age and Gender
The workers had an average age of 42.83 years with a standard deviation of 7.5, ranging from 24 to 62 years. Participants aged between 40 and 49 constituted 51.2% of the total; 73.6% were male, resulting in a sex ratio of 2.78.
3.2.2. Body Mass Index and Handedness
In this cohort, 41.6% of workers were classified as overweight, 25.6% as obese, and 89.6% were right-handed.
3.2.3. Length of Professional Experience
The average length of professional experience was 12 years with a standard deviation of 4 years, ranging from 2 to 42 years. Participants with 10 to 14 years of experience constituted 46% of the total sample.
3.2.4. Workstation
Table 3. Allocation of workers by workstation.
Department |
Headcount |
Percentage (%) |
Medical Department |
6 |
4.8 |
Quality, Hygiene, and Safety |
8 |
6.4 |
Administrative Services |
25 |
20 |
Financial Department |
21 |
16.8 |
IT and Communication |
10 |
8.4 |
Infrastructure and Technical |
16 |
12.8 |
Legal Department |
2 |
1.6 |
Fire and Rescue Services |
18 |
14.4 |
Port Authority Police |
19 |
15.2 |
Total |
125 |
100 |
The workforce composition included 20% administrative staff, 16.8% finance agents, and 14.4% firefighters, collectively accounting for 51.2% of the total personnel. (Table 3)
3.3. Data on Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs)
3.3.1. Prevalence
Within a sample of 125 workers, 114 individuals reported experiencing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) over the past 12 months, indicating a prevalence rate of 91.2%.
The breakdown of MSDs by anatomical location is detailed in Table 4.
Table 4. Distribution of MSDs by anatomical location.
Body Region |
Number of Cases |
Percentage (%) |
Neck |
56 |
49.1 |
Upper spine |
48 |
42.1 |
Lower spine |
76 |
66.6 |
Shoulder |
31 |
27.2 |
Elbow |
12 |
10.5 |
Wrist/Hand |
35 |
30.7 |
Knee |
41 |
36 |
Ankle/Foot |
29 |
25.4 |
The reported musculoskeletal disorders were found in the lumbar spine, cervical spine, and dorsal spine at rates of 66.6%, 49.1%, and 42.1%, respectively.
Clinical signs indicative of this risk were assessed using the Saltsa method, which identified dorsolumbar pain in 66.6% of cases and cervical pain in 32% of cases.
3.3.2. Identified Risk Factors for Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs)
Table 5. Distribution of workers based on their perception of workload
Items |
Frequency |
Percentage (%) |
Effort |
Light load |
85 |
68 |
Moderately heavy load |
29 |
23,2 |
Heavy load |
8 |
6,4 |
Very heavy load |
3 |
2,4 |
Duration of Effort |
Less than 2 hours |
36 |
28,8 |
Between 2 and 4 hours |
18 |
14,40 |
More than 4 hours |
71 |
56,8 |
Force Exerted |
Low |
91 |
72,8 |
Moderate |
20 |
16 |
High |
14 |
11,2 |
Précision visuelle |
Low |
90 |
72 |
High |
35 |
28 |
Movement Alternation |
Never |
93 |
74,4 |
Occasionally |
29 |
23,2 |
Frequently |
4 |
2,4 |
Stress Level |
Minimal or no stress |
95 |
76 |
Moderately stressful |
11 |
8,8 |
Highly stressful |
19 |
15,2 |
Efforts to manage heavy loads and their variation were noted in 32% of the workforce, with over 56.80% of cases involving more than 4 hours dedicated to the task. Additionally, high visual precision was required for these activities in 72.60% of cases, and 24% of workers reported finding their tasks stressful. (Table 5)
Workers identified prolonged static sitting posture (75.2%) and screen work (71.2%) as the primary biomechanical risk factors.
Table 6. Distribution of workers based on the observed postures.
Items |
Frequency |
Percentage (%) |
Position/level of stress of the neck |
Neutral |
27 |
21.6 |
Occasional demands |
77 |
61.6 |
Frequent demands |
21 |
16.8 |
Back position |
Neutral |
54 |
43.2 |
Moderately forward-flexed |
48 |
38.4 |
Highly forward-flexed |
23 |
18.4 |
Back Support |
Stationary |
65 |
52 |
Alternating |
60 |
48 |
Elbow Position |
Waist height |
65 |
52 |
Chest height |
60 |
48 |
Shoulder height |
0 |
0 |
Shoulder Demand |
Occasionally |
38 |
38.4 |
Frequently |
54 |
43.2 |
Very frequently |
33 |
26.4 |
Hand/Wrist Position (Flexion/Extension/Deviation Movements) |
10 fois/min |
27 |
21.6 |
11 - 20 fois/min |
77 |
61.6 |
+20 fois /min |
21 |
16.8 |
The restrictive gestures and postures identified among numerous workers included frequent strain on the neck, bending of the back, static positioning of the back, elevation of the elbow to the level of and beyond the thorax, and excessive strain on the shoulders, with hands and wrists in motion. (Table 6)
The assessed risk levels for each body segment are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Distribution of workers based on the risk levels of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) by body segment.
Body Segment |
Risk Level |
Frequency |
Percentage (%) |
Cervical Region |
Low |
68 |
54.4 |
Moderate |
39 |
31.2 |
High |
18 |
14.4 |
Lumbar Region |
Low |
83 |
66.4 |
Moderate |
42 |
33.6 |
High |
00 |
0 |
Shoulder-Arm |
Low |
70 |
56 |
Moderate |
54 |
43.2 |
High |
01 |
0.8 |
Wrist-Hand |
Low |
54 |
43.2 |
Moderate |
56 |
44.8 |
High |
15 |
12 |
The risks were significant in the regions of the neck, the shoulder-arm, and the wrist-hand segment.
3.4. Consequences of Musculoskeletal Disorders
3.4.1. Work Absences and Days Not Worked
In 2019 and 2020, musculoskeletal disorders led to the issuance of 328 medical certificates for work absences or temporary work interruptions (TWI). The number of days not worked due to these TWIs is outlined in Table 8.
Table 8. Annual distribution of lost working days.
Year |
≤3 jrs |
4 - 7 jrs |
8 - 15 jrs |
16 - 30 jrs |
>30 jrs |
Total duration |
2019 |
300 |
15 |
23 |
67 |
404 |
809 |
2020 |
159 |
21 |
15 |
42 |
135 |
372 |
2019-2020 |
459 |
36 |
38 |
109 |
539 |
1181 |
The cumulative ITT for the two-year period resulted in a total of 1181 days of work absence, which is equivalent to three years, two months, and 13 days.
3.4.2. Costs Associated with Musculoskeletal Disorders
Table 9. Distribution of costs attributable to musculoskeletal disorders.
Socio-economic parameters |
2019 |
2020 |
Total en XOF |
Direct cost |
Specialized rheumatology consultation |
886,950 |
116,060 |
1,003,010 |
Medical imaging |
870,000 |
400,000 |
1,270,000 |
Pharmaceutical expenses |
648,000 |
216,000 |
864,000 |
Purchase of adapted wheelchairs |
10,799,071 |
1,100,000 |
11,899,071 |
Rehabilitation |
439,200 |
387,500 |
826,700 |
Total directcosts |
13,643,221 |
2,219,560 |
15,862,781 |
Indirect costs |
Cost of absenteeism |
16,653,089 |
7,296,206 |
23,949,295 |
Opportunity cost |
101,827,058 |
74,677,871 |
176,504,929 |
Total indirectcosts |
118,480,147 |
81,974,077 |
200,454,224 |
Total cost |
132,123,368 |
84,193,637 |
216,317,005 |
The overall cost of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) amounted to 216,317,005 XOF (329,773.25€), with indirect costs accounting for 200,454,224 XOF (305,590.65€), which constitutes 92.67% of the total MSD costs.
The cost related to productivity loss, or opportunity cost, was 176,504,929 XOF (269,080.17€), making up 81.59% of the total MSD costs.
4. Discussion
Limits of the study
There are methodological limitations to this study. Selection bias associated with the exclusive inclusion of salaried workers could underestimate the prevalence of low back pain. The cross-sectional design and potential self-reporting bias are also limitations. The use of retrospective data certainly led to information bias, particularly in the case of under-reporting or reporting errors.
Another source of weakness in the study could be related to the differences in salaries between the occupational groups, which is perceived as a limitation in the evaluation of the economic cost.
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) represent a category of conditions that emerge from the interplay of multiple risk factors. Prominent among these are individual or personal factors such as age, gender, length of service in the position, and medical history [18]-[20].
The study’s workforce, predominantly male, had an average age of 42 years, ranging from 24 to 62 years. As individuals age, their susceptibility to lower back pain increases due to the physiological aging of soft tissue functional capacities, reduced stress resistance, and decreased muscle strength, which contribute to the frailty of older individuals [21]. The male predominance in the sample contrasts with literature findings, which typically indicate a female majority [19] [22]-[24]. This male predominance may be attributed to the demographic composition of the general population, which is dominated by young men in developing countries, as well as the physical nature of the work involved. The majority of this population had been employed for approximately 12 years. Such prolonged exposure, identified as a risk factor for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), was documented by Ouédraogo and Troussier, who reported 31.4% and 37.9% prevalence in their respective study populations [24] [25]. Frequent and sustained joint use over time results in lesions from repeated microtraumas, as described by the biomechanical theory of MSD development [26]. This extensive exposure duration accounts for the occurrence of MSDs in nearly all workers (91.2%) over the past year. (Table 5)
It is observed that more than half of the workforce consists of office employees. These roles are predominantly sedentary, involving prolonged periods of sitting. This extended static posture is linked to sustained muscular activity, which may result in the overloading of muscular structures and increase the risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). (Tables 3-6) While seated work does not require significant physical exertion, it can still lead to a variety of MSDs when performed over extended durations and under constrained postural conditions.
Additionally, the working environment for office employees is typified by intense cognitive demands, extensive hours spent at a computer, and the frequent use of a keyboard and mouse within a stressful setting. These factors are widely acknowledged as contributing to the incidence of MSDs among this group of workers (see Table 5) [27]-[31].
In addition, certain job roles, such as those of port police officers and firefighters, are notable for their specific characteristics. Port police officers conducted daily foot patrols covering 4 to 5 kilometers and climbed ladders to board vessels. Firefighters managed heavy loads manually, ranging from 9 kg to 144 kg, and operated 5-ton pump trucks, which are heavy vehicles that generate vibrations. These working conditions place continuous stress on the workers’ joints, making them susceptible to soft tissue injuries around the joints.
Contrary to common beliefs and traditional views, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are not limited to workers who engage in intense physical activities. They also occur in professions involving more sedentary tasks, particularly in office settings where computer usage has been linked to MSDs such as neck pain and trapezius myalgia (Tables 3-6) [30] [31].
Prolonged seated activities with intricate tasks, such as working on a computer screen for over two consecutive hours or data entry, are common. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) predominantly affect the spine. Clinical examination using the SALTSA method confirmed the lumbar region as the primary site of pain (65.6%). (See Table 4) In occupational settings, spinal issues are the foremost cause of osteoarticular morbidity. Alternating back postures (48%) was observed to be beneficial, as it facilitates joint relaxation. We noted that elevating the elbow to or above the thorax (48%) can lead to tension, fatigue, and shoulder pain if maintained or repeated for extended periods. Furthermore, tasks involving arms above shoulder level, lifting heavy loads, and repetitive arm abduction movements increase the risk of MSDs. (Table 1)
Frequent wrist flexion and gripping motions have been identified as causes of carpal tunnel syndrome (1 case), primarily due to compression at the base of the hand during computer data entry tasks.
Our findings indicate a significant risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) of the wrists and hands in 12% of the workforce. Consequently, this necessitates the implementation of priority measures to prevent MSDs affecting the hands and wrists.
The repercussions of these disorders include absenteeism and its associated costs, healthcare expenses, costs for workplace modifications, and opportunity costs as shown in Table 2 and Table 9.
Specifically, in 2019 and 2020, MSDs resulted in 209 and 119 instances of sick leave, respectively. These absences accounted for 26.9 months (2019) and 12.4 months (2020) of lost work time, equating to 1181 non-working days over two years, with a financial loss of 23,949,295 FCFA. MSDs thus pose a significant challenge to company productivity and sustainability, given their multifaceted impact. They lead to absenteeism and disrupt team dynamics. (Table 2)
In addition, our study found that the productivity cost, or opportunity cost, amounted to 176,504,929 CFA francs, representing 81.59% of the overall cost. The indirect costs were calculated at 200,454,224 CFA francs, accounting for 92.67% of the total cost, while direct costs were 15,862,700 CFA francs, corresponding to 7.33% of the total cost associated with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). This indicates that the financial impact of MSDs in the workplace is predominantly influenced by indirect costs.
5. Conclusions
The prevalence of MSDs was 91.2%. Almost all the workers reported having suffered from them in the last 12 months. These disorders mainly affected the lumbar spine, cervical spine and dorsal spine, and were generally the result of prolonged average physical effort in a context of stress, and awkward movements and postures, with a relatively high level of risk in the cervical, shoulder-arm and wrist-hand areas.
These problems have resulted in many days not working, at a total cost of XOF 216,317,005 (€329,773.25). These disorders should be prevented by applying preventive measures based on postural education.
Questionnaire—Travailleur
SURVEY FORM/QUESTIONNAIRE
Poste
SOCIO-PROFESSIONAL DATA
Sex: a-male /__/ b-female /__/
Age: ………………… ans.
Height (cm): ………………………………………………………………/________/
Weight (Kg): …………………………………………………… /_________/
BMI………(taille/m2)
/__/ Right-Handed /__/ Left-Handed /__/ Ambidextrous
Matrimonial situation:
a- single /__/ b- married /__/ c- cohabiting partner /__/ d- widow / widower /__/ e- divorced /__/
Profession: …………………….…………………………………………………
Service: ………………….………………………………………………………..
Professional seniority: ........................ Years.
Number of hours worked per week: .................. Hours.
Type of work organization: a- Shift work /__/ b-Fixed schedule/__/
I. DATA ON MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS
Have you had any problems (aches, pain, discomfort) in the last 12 months with your |
On average, how intense is this problem? Low = 1 moderate = 2 strong = 3 insupportable = 4 not concerned = 5 |
How common was this problem? 1. Almost never = 1 (every 6 months) 2. rarely = 2 (every 2 or 3 months) 3. sometimes = 3 (monthly) 4. frequently = 4 (every 8 days) 5. almost always = 5(every day) - not concerned = 9 |
of the neck? |
|
|
|
From the upper back? |
|
|
|
Lower back |
|
|
|
Shoulder |
|
|
|
Elbow |
|
|
|
Wrist |
|
|
|
Main |
|
|
|
Knee |
|
|
|
Ankle – foot |
|
|
|
Other …………………………. (specify) |
|
|
|
H. Effort The load you are handling appears to you: |
1 |
Light |
|
2 |
Medium Heavy |
|
3 |
Heavy |
|
4 |
Very heavy |
|
|
|
|
|
J. Duration How many hours on average per day do you devote to this job or task? |
1 |
Less than 2 hours |
|
2 |
2 to 4 hours |
|
3 |
More than 4 hours |
|
|
|
|
|
K. Force You must, with your hand, force |
1 |
A little |
|
2 |
Averagely |
|
3 |
A lot |
|
|
|
|
|
L. Visual Accuracy The level of visual accuracy you need is |
1 |
Low (no need to see details) |
|
2 |
high (need to see details) |
|
|
|
|
|
M. Vehicle Vibration Do you drive a vehicle to work? If so, for how many hours per day |
1 |
Never or less than an hour |
|
2 |
Yes, from one to 4 hours |
|
3 |
Yes, more than 4 hours |
|
|
|
|
|
N. Hand Tool Vibration Do you use hand tools that vibrate? If so, for how many hours a day? |
1 |
Never or less than an hour |
|
2 |
Yes, from one to 4 hours |
|
3 |
Yes, more than 4 hours |
|
|
|
|
|
P. Rhythm Are you having trouble keeping up with the pace of production? |
1 |
Never |
|
2 |
Sometimes |
|
3 |
Often |
|
|
|
|
|
Q. Stress In general, how do you find your job? |
1 |
Not or low stress |
|
2 |
Quite stressful |
|
3 |
Very stressful |
|
II. EXAMEN GENERAL
CLINICAL EXAMINATION (DOCTOR) According to Salta |
Right |
Left |
NECK |
Active movements of the cervical spine |
|
|
Rotation passive du rachis cervical |
|
|
SHOULDER |
Painful arch test during abduction |
|
|
Active shoulder elevation |
|
|
Thwarted abduction of the glenohumeral joint |
|
|
ELBOWS |
Thwarted elbow flexion |
|
|
Upset wrist extension |
|
|
WRIST HAND |
Test de Finkelstein |
|
|
Carpal tunnel flexion/compression |
|
|
Tinel’s Test |
|
|
Test the Phalen |
|
|
RACHIS |
Pain on pressure of the spinatus vertebrae of the dorsal vertebrae |
|
Pain on pressure of the spinatus vertebrae of the lumbar vertebrae |
|
Point |
|
talon |
|
Finger-to-Ground Distance |
|
Indice de Schobert |
|
Star of Maigne |
|
Lasègue |
|
Léri |
|
KNEE |
Pain on percussion—mobilization |
|
|
Plane |
|
|
Patellar shock |
|
|
Tendinitis |
|
|
ANKLE—FOOT |
Pain on pressure of the Achilles tendon |
|
|
Foot flexion |
|
|
Foot extension |
|
|
Questionnaire—Observer
Poste:
DESCRIPTION OF THE TASK BEING EVALUATED: |
|
|
|
A. Dos Position of the back during labor, is: |
1 |
In a neutral or nearly neutral position |
|
2 |
Moderately flexed (forward or sideways) or rotating |
|
3 |
Very strongly flexed (forward or sideways) or rotated |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Back—Frequency of Movement Does the worker handle (lift, move, push, pull, carry a load, even a light one)? If no, answer B1 or B2 only. If yes, answer B3, B4, or B5 only. |
1 |
The worker stays in the same position most of the time |
|
2 |
The worker does not stay in the same position most of the time |
|
3 |
The worker does occasional handling. (Approximately 3 times per minute) |
|
4 |
Worker frequently handling (about 8 times per minute) |
|
5 |
The worker does handling very frequently.(about 12 times per minute) |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Shoulder/Arm—Position How high is the elbow? |
1 |
Waist-high |
|
2 |
At chest height |
|
3 |
At or above shoulder height |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Shoulder/Arm—Frequency of Movement The worker makes the movement that solicits his shoulder and arm |
1 |
Occasionally (from time to time) |
|
2 |
frequently (regularly with stops) |
|
3 |
very frequently (almost continuously) |
|
|
|
|
|
E. Wrist/Hand—Position What position are the worker’s wrists and hand in? |
1 |
In a neutral position most of the time |
|
2 |
In extension, bending or deflection |
|
F. Wrist/Hand—Frequency of Movement How many times does the worker make this movement of the wrist and hand? |
1 |
10 times per minute or less |
|
2 |
11 to 20 times per minute |
|
3 |
More than 20 times per minute |
|
|
|
|
|
G. Cou—Position Does the worker have to turn or tilt his head to accomplish his task? |
1 |
No, if the head is straight |
|
2 |
Yes, occasionally |
|
3 |
Yes, frequently |
|
Q. Stress In general, how do you find your job? |
1 |
Not or low stress |
|
2 |
Quite stressful |
|
3 |
Very stressful |
|