Everett, J G (1999) Overexertion injuries in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(2), pp. 109-114. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Overexertion injuries are the single largest classification of injury in construction, accounting for about 24% of all injuries. Overexertion injuries generally occur as a result of performing a given task as planned. While overexertion injuries are not intentional, the underlying causes of these injuries are built into the prescribed tools and work methods. If the causes can be identified, it should be possible to engineer them out of the work. This paper presents a summary of research to investigate 65 construction activities for the presence of risk factors for overexertion injuries. Each activity has been broken into its constituent tasks, and each task has been analyzed for each of seven generic risk factors for overexertion injuries: (1) repetitive exertions; (2) static exertions; (3) forceful exertions; (4) localized mechanical stresses; (5) posture stresses; (6) low temperature; and (7) vibration. Ratings for each risk factor have been made on a three point scale: insignificant, moderate, and high. This analysis shows that virtually all construction activities have moderate-to-high ratings for at least one risk factor, and thereby place craft workers at increased risk for overexertion injuries and disorders.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | injury, vibration, accounting, engineer, construction activity, presence, risk factor, low temperature |
| Subjects: | environmental hazards, thermal systems, health conditions and diseases, economic analysis, environmental science, construction operations, mechanical systems, profession |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here