Strategies of international cooperation in an international project: advantages and pitfalls.

The MEPS (musculoskeletal--eyestrain--psychosocial--stress) study involved an extensive degree of multidisciplinary and multicultural cooperation. The objective was to examine the effects of multiple ergonomic interventions on visual, musculoskeletal, postural, and psychosocial outcomes amongst operators of visual display terminals (VDTs). The inherent complexity of a comprehensive ergonomic investigation requires participation of researchers from a variety of disciplines, as well as comparisons among populations with different geographical and cultural backgrounds. The design and execution of the resulting research protocol presents a number of challenges. This paper discusses the advantages and pitfalls associated with multidisciplinary multinational cooperation. Advantages include the necessity for development of a common language and perspective providing a basis for future collaboration. Pitfalls include logistic and coordination difficulties associated with conducting standardized procedures in different locations, as well as the inherent potential for professional conflict. It is argued that such pitfalls ought to be understood and integrated into the project planning process.

The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT entry work: organization and methodology of the international study.

This special issue of the International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE) reports the results from an extensive multinational and multidisciplinary collaborative investigation of the impacts on visual display terminal (VDT) work of musculoskeletal, visual, ergonomic, and psychosocial factors. For brevity, this effort has been referred to as the MEPS project (musculoskeletal--eyestrain--psychosocial--stress). This paper lays out the basic methodological structure of the study. The study was conducted in 4 countries utilizing VDT data entry workers as the primary subject population. A battery of objective and subject assessment measures, including muscle load, visual function, physical and visual strain, postural, ergonomic and psychosocial factors, were assessed at 3 different points in time. A pre-test was given prior to an ergonomic intervention. Two post-tests were given 1 month and 1 year after the ergonomic intervention.

The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial, and visual strain of VDT data entry work: the United States part of the international study.

The United States MEPS (musculoskeletal--eyestrain--psychosocial--stress) study consisted of 1 group of 28 female data entry operators. The intervention was in 3 parts: workstation redesign (including advanced ergonomic chairs, motorized adjustable workstations, advanced adjustable keyboards, adjustable copyholders, adjustable footrests, monitor support surfaces) and ergonomic training/coaching and corrective lenses. After the intervention, statistically significant reductions in physical signs (trigger points, neck and shoulder mobility), subjective reports of intensity and frequency of musculoskeletal pain, and subjective reports of visual problems were observed. Static load during the work sample, as assessed by experts, improved after the intervention as did measured postural angles of head and trunk and subjective assessment of users of ergonomic characteristics of the workplaces. For all of these measures, improvements observed 1 month after intervention were also observed in the 1-year follow-up. Trapezius load, as assessed by electromyography (EMG), decreased after intervention, but then increased in the follow-up. The increase was interpreted as a calibration problem.

A cross-country comparison of short- and long-term effects of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal discomfort, eyestrain and psychosocial stress in VDT operators: selected aspects of the international project.

Three groups of data entry female visual display terminal (VDT) workers from Norway (n = 30), Poland (n = 33) and the USA (n = 29) were compared. Before intervention, the Norwegian group reported more neck pain compared with the Polish group. The Polish group reported less shoulder pain than both the U.S. and the Norwegian groups. The clinical examination documented fewer symptoms and signs of musculoskeletal illness among the Polish participants compared with the Norwegian and the U.S. groups. After intervention, the Norwegian group reported a reduction in neck pain while the U.S. group reported a reduction in shoulder pain. The Polish group reported an increase in neck, shoulder and forearm pain at follow-up compared to after intervention. The Polish group recorded higher flexion of the upper arm at follow-up parallel with an increase of pain in the upper part of the body. Visual discomfort showed variable results in the 3 countries.