*3.3.2. Environmental factors*

Noise, temperature, humidity and airflow, lighting, vibration, and chemicals are among the ergonomic risks. The organizer of the workplace should also pay attention to environmental factors. The obligation of the human body's limits, job requirements, and the characteristics of the equipment means to ignore the role of the environment.

The body of a working person may be exposed to certain environmental factors. Environmental interactions above the limits can cause different body parts, leading to cumulative trauma. The use of vibration absorbing equipment, the use of extreme cold or hot barriers or insulation clothing, the construction of barriers where there is airflow, and the introduction of a crusher on the computer screen for reflected light can reduce the environmental impacts of the body through simple, non-costly measures [41].

#### *3.3.3. Psychological factors*

Psychological risk factors include mental overload, psychosocial effects, social communication in the workplace, and organizational influences. It has been determined that these factors, which include all employees and employers, increase ergonomic risk and should therefore be considered [41, 44].

Many musculoskeletal system diseases that involve the abdomen, neck, upper extremity, and lower limbs in our country are accepted as occupational diseases in the law [41]. However, data on the frequency of these diseases, risk factors, workday loss, insurance indemnity, and cost are not available [41]. Work-related musculoskeletal diseases, which are among the most important problems of employees and which reduce work efficiency, and prevention of adverse effects of these diseases are possible with ergonomic education and initiatives [41, 53].

Employees, employers, and professionals and organizations dealing with occupational health should be informed about work-related musculoskeletal disorders and prevention, and community awareness should be established [41, 53–55]. Studies done with different groups of employees emphasize the importance of workplace assessment and health evaluations to be done actively, and continuous training should be provided for all workers [53–55].

**Conflict of interest**

No conflict of interest.

**Author details**

**References**

Beliz Belgen Kaygisiz

University of Lefke, Lefke, Turkey

s10926-013-9436-y

DOI: 10.1007/s10926-018-9756-z

10.1007/s10926-014-9548-z

Work. 2001;**16**:13-22

Address all correspondence to: bkaygisiz@eul.edu.tr

Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, European

Employment of People with Disabilities and Ergonomic Risk Factors at Workplace

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76721

83

[1] Pigini L, Andrich G, Liverani G, Bucciarelli P, Occhipinti E. Designing reasonable accommodation of the workplace: A new methodology based on risk assessment. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. 2010;**5**(3):184-198. DOI: 10.3109/17483100903488768

[2] Saunders SL, Nedelec B. What work means to people with work disability: A scoping review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 2014;**24**(1):100-110. DOI: 10.1007/

[3] Lindsay S, Cagliostro E, Albarico M, Mortaji N, Karon L. A systematic review of benefits of hiring people with disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 2018:1-22.

[4] Erbahceci F, Kayıhan H, Uyanık M, Akçay T, Kırdı N. Ankara Mesleki Rehabilitasyon

[5] US Department of Justice. A guide to Disability Rights Laws. [Internet]. 2005. Available from: http://www.ada.gov/publicat.htm#Anchor-14210. [Accessed: Jan 30, 2018]

[6] Başbakanlık TC. Özürlüler İdaresi Başkanlığı. 4. Özürlüler Şurası. İstihdam. Ankara:

[7] Nevala N, Pehkonen I, Koskela I, Ruusuvuori J, Anttila H. Workplace accomodation among persons with disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 2015;**25**(2):432-448. DOI:

[8] Wehmann PH, Revell G, Kregel J, Kreutzer JS. Supported employment: An alternative model for vocational rehabilitation of persons with severe neurologic psychiatric or physical disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 1991;**72**:101-105

[9] Lyth JR. Disability management and functional capacity evaluations: A dynamic resource.

Merkezinde işe yönelik eğitim. Optimal Tıp Dergisi. 2000;**13**(3):57-63

Komisyon Raporları ve Genel Kurul Görüşmeleri; 2009

## **3.4. Evaluation of ergonomic risk factors at workplace**

It is important to assess risk in terms of health and safety, including the situation of employees who are likely to be affected by the risks present at the workplace [41]. Following these assessments, the protective measures to be taken and the protective equipment to be used can be determined [41]. Ergonomic analysis methods are used to evaluate the ergonomic risk factors in the study area. Ergonomic analysis is a mechanism used to facilitate the identification of existing problems in the field of work [12, 41, 56]. The work is carried out by systematically recording the effects of work on the person or the specific views of the work [56]. With these analyses, ergonomic defects and possible health hazards can be identified and subsequently eliminated. During the analysis, all factors considered for each individual situation, technical and personal factors, should be evaluated [56].

When choosing which of the many analysis methods available today is to be used, the objectives should be [43, 56]:


Assessment methods include checklists, workplace analysis observations of work postures and movements, and self-filled surveys [43, 56]. Checklists are an evaluation method that consists of many questions and examines various factors. The most commonly used checklist is the 'General Ergonomic Risk Analysis Checklist' prepared by the International Ergonomics Association [56, 57]. Workplace analysis determines workplace characteristics such as workplace, general physical activity, lifting, work postures and movements, accident risk, occupational satisfaction, difficulty in decision-making, work repetition, attention, air temperature, and noise. Work postures and movement analysis are needed to be done at work to make a more precise analysis of the problems caused by work postures and movements. Today, there are many observation methods. The most commonly used pole is the pencil-paper method based on visual observation. In recent years, photography, videotape, and computer systems have also been used frequently.

The Ovako Working Posture Analysis System (OWAS) and Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) are commonly used methods for evaluation of easy and practical posture movements requiring direct observation. OWAS examines the upper extremity/shoulders, lower extremity, head, and load-lifting postures [56, 57], while RULA examines upper extremity working posture.
