Modification of the Revised National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Lifting Equation to Determine the Individual Manual Lifting Risk in Malaysia's Manufacturing Industry

• Published in: CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
• Main Authors: Dawad, Noor Adillah; Yasin, Siti Munira; Darus, Azlan; Jamil, Ahmad Taufik; Naing, Nyi Nyi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SPRINGERNATURE 2024
• Subjects: General & Internal Medicine
• Online Access: https://www-webofscience-com.uitm.idm.oclc.org/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001209647800032

Introduction: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) established the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation (RNLE) for manual lifting risk assessment. The objectives of this study were to determine the characteristics of physical factors using the RNLE and to explore additional factors to RNLE by modifying it to an Individual Lifting Equation (ILE). Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the manufacturing industry of three states in Malaysia among manual lifting workers. A questionnaire was administered, which comprised the sociodemographic characteristics and Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) assessing low back pain (LBP). The RNLE dataset includes a load constant and six manual lifting variables collected from observational ergonomic risk assessment. The RNLE was modified to ILE by incorporating age, gender, and BMI. The equations' Lifting Index (LI) computed provides an overall manual lifting risk estimate . Results: There were 165 participants, with a mean age of 28 years, and 108 (65.5%) were male. Most participants had a BMI within the normal range (60 (36.4%)) or were classified as overweight (54 (32.7%)). The lifting horizontal location showed the highest risk estimates, with the lowest mean multiplier value of 0.55. In contrast, age and BMI had the lowest risk estimates, with mean multiplier values of 0.99 and 0.98, respectively. Among the participants, LI values of one or less, indicating very low risk, were observed in 58 (35.1%) for RNLE and 39 (23.6%) for ILE. Additionally, RNLE and ILE showed figures of 11 (6.7%) and 20 (12.1%), respectively, signifying a very high risk of LI exceeding three. Conclusion: Studying the lifting factors and equation multipliers from RNLE is critical for evaluating the risk estimates of manual lifting. Exploring the ILE based on individual characteristics is appropriate to support the ergonomic program. Further study is needed to validate the ILE as an accurate screening tool for determining LBP risk estimates.