以現場介入探討鋼鐵業ＭＳＤｓ適用性

目前針對鋼鐵業鋼品作業人員的相關人因工程研究並不多，鋼品作業人員由於重複性的動作及搬運重的物件，因此是肌肉骨骼傷害的高風險族群。人因工程檢核表(Ergonomic Checklist)是用來確認存在於工作場所中的人因工程風險因素(Risk Factors)，本研究目的為探討肌肉骨骼傷害人因工程檢核表 ( Musculoskeletal Disorders，MSDs )用於鋼鐵業之適用性。本研究以鋼鐵工廠的7個製程區之作業人員為研究對象，研究可分成五個部份，（1）進行問卷調查，以瞭解作業人員肌肉骨骼不適的部位；（2）針對作業人員進行工作分析與人因工程檢核表，進行人因危害評估；（3）生物力學分析；（4）OWAS動作分析；（5）適用性評估。經過現場動作拍攝與工作分析，評估人員工作是否有潛在人因危害，本研究將MSDs檢核表與OWAS（Ovako Working Posture Analysing System）現場實地試用，用生物力學分析肌肉骨骼傷害，以及問卷調查等方式，以證實這些工具在國內是否適用。問卷調查結果顯示，有42.0%的人自述身體某部位感覺不適；適用性評估部分，以問卷與生物力學為判別傷痛的比較基準，對檢核表的結果進行量測。以問卷為基準時，MSDs檢核表敏感度為26.4％，特定度為74.8％，OWAS敏感度為64.0％，特定度為36.7％；以生物力學為基準時，MSDs檢核表敏感度為43.6％，特定度為60.0％，OWAS敏感度為89.3％，特定度為61.2％。研究者的經驗顯示MSDs檢核表在使用上較不費時，能迅速的評估出該場所中是否存在潛在的危害，所以能及時於現場施用；而OWAS檢核表敏感度相當的高，故強烈建議用在鋼鐵業作業的評估上。但本研究的MSDs檢核表敏感度並不高，故在鋼鐵業作業上以MSDs檢核表作為肌肉骨骼系統傷害之初步檢核工具有待商榷；由於OWAS評估方法較為複雜，若直接於現場施用較不易，故建議將人員，將人員動作加以攝影再進行影像分析，以得到較準確之結果。由本研究發現各種檢核表適用的場所不一樣。

關鍵字

鋼鐵業；肌肉骨骼傷害人因工程檢核表；敏感度；特定度

並列摘要

There were few ergonomic researches about the steel industry workers. The steel industry workers are the high risk of musculoskeletal disorders because of the repetitive action and heavy lifting. The ergonomic checklists are used to identify ergonomic risk factors in work environment. The aim of this study is to detect suitability for MSDs in the steel industry by in-plant intervention. In this research, personnel from 7 manufacturing process areas of the steel mills were selected as the research objects. This study have 5 parts: 1) using questionnaire to survey the musculoskeletal symptoms, 2) using musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) checklist to analyze jobs, 3) using biomechanics software to analyze stresses of muscles, 4) using the OWAS checklist to analyze jobs, finally, 5) calculating suitability for ergonomic checklists. The work was done by taking on-site videotapes recorded and work analysis to evaluate the potential ergonomics hazard for workers. MSDs and OWAS (Ovako Working Posture Analyzing System) were tried on-site, biomechanics analysis was used to analyze musculoskeletal disorders, and questionnaire was used to prove the validity of these tools in domestic factories. The MSD was 42.2% by self-reported. In the suitability test, questionnaire and biomechanics were used as the comparison basis to quantify the checklist. Based on the results of questionnaires survey, the calculated sensitivity and specificity of MSDs checklist were 26.4％ and 74.8％ and of OWAS checklist were 64.0％ and 36.7％. Based on the results of biomechanics, the calculated sensitivity and specificity of MSDs checklist were 43.6％ and 60.0％ and of OWAS checklist were 89.3％ and 61.2％. From the researcher's experience, MSDs is time-saving in use; it can quickly evaluate whether there exist potential risks on the site. Thus makes it suitable in on-site evaluation. However, the sensitivity of MSDs in this research is not very high. So, in the steel industrial operator MSDs was not very appropriable as the primary checking tool for musculoskeletal disorders. On the other hand, OWAS has higher sensitivity. But, because of the complexity of its evaluation methods, it is not suitable to be used on-site. We suggested taking videotapes recorded of personnel and then examining the images later to achieve more accurate results. From this research, it was found that different checklists have different applications.