See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/235304352

Ergonomic solutions for an aging workforce

Article  in  Journal of Facilities Management · July 2007

DOI: 10.1108/14725960710775054

CITATIONS READS
18 2,149

2 authors:

Kathy O. Roper Daniel Yeh

Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology
37 PUBLICATIONS   550 CITATIONS    1 PUBLICATION   18 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kathy O. Roper on 12 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1472-5967.htm

JFM
5,3 Ergonomic solutions
for an aging workforce
Kathy O. Roper and Daniel C. Yeh
172 College of Architecture, Building Construction Program,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on obstacles faced by older workers in the workplace
and provide three main ergonomic solutions designed to mitigate and prevent age-related injuries.
Design/methodology/approach – Research methodology includes a comprehensive literature
review to identify issues, best practices, and improvements for ergonomic conditions in the workplace,
especially those impacting aging workers.
Findings – Solutions presented include strategies for reducing extreme joint movement, reducing
extreme pressure, and reducing repetitive tasks. Examples of engineering improvements,
administrative improvements, and safety equipment additions are also presented.
Practical implications – This paper provides ergonomic solutions and examines the importance of
providing effective workplace ergonomics for the older worker. The examples demonstrated can be
directly applied by facility planners and managers who wish to create safe and productive working
environments.
Originality/value – With an increasing percentage of older workers compromising that workforce,
it is critical that companies and workplace managers make effective workplace ergonomics a top
priority. The paper focuses on the role of the facility manager in implementing ergonomic solutions.
Keywords Ergonomics, Older workers, Employees, Occupational health and safety
Paper type General review

Introduction
Ergonomics is a significant factor in achieving and maintaining high levels of
worker productivity. As the USA and other industrialized nations face a
demographic shift towards an aging workforce, the role of ergonomics in the
workplace has become increasingly important. The American Association for
Retired Persons (AARP) reports that between 2000 and 2020, the number of
individuals in the 55-64 age range will increase nearly 40 percent, and those in the
65 þ category will increase more than 40 percent (AARP) With these projected
increases, facility planners and managers are forced to consider workplace
designs that are not only tailored toward older workers, but also take safety
issues into account and are designed to prevent injury. This paper will examine
the obstacles faced by older workers in the workplace and provide potential
ergonomic solutions.

Journal of Facilities Management
Vol. 5 No. 3, 2007
pp. 172-178
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1472-5967
DOI 10.1108/14725960710775054
Ergonomics overview
Ergonomics, the applied science of equipment design intended to reduce operator
fatigue or discomfort, has become an indispensable area of knowledge for today’s
facility managers. Although ergonomics have been applied for years, mostly by
industrial designers, it has recently gained attention in the facility management area.
 As a result of the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Ergonomic
proposed ergonomic compliance program since 1999, facility managers in nearly every solutions for an
industry have had to ensure programs were in place in order to prevent complaints by
employees. This OSHA program requires that employers with positions which have aging workforce
led to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) provide ergonomic training, remediation and
reporting. For a facility manager, ergonomics may be specifically defined as the study
of how to improve fit between the physical demands of a workplace and the employees 173
who perform the work. This involves considering the variability in human capabilities
when selecting, designing, or modifying equipment, tools, work tasks, and the work
environment.

Declining abilities
In order to provide effective ergonomic solutions for older workers, facility planners and
managers must take into account that physical capabilities decline with age. Physical
declines related to age include strength, speed of movement, range of motion, fatigue, and
motor skills (Haight, 2003). Researchers have also found that there is age-related slowing
in all facets of movement initiation – including response preparation, selection,
programming, complexity, and movement execution (Stelmach, 1992).
In addition to these age-related declining abilities, planners and managers must also
consider cumulative trauma disorders (CTD). CTD occur in the musculoskeletal and
nervous systems, and may be caused or aggravated by repetitive motion, forceful
exertion, vibration, mechanical compression, and sustained or awkward posture
(McMahan, 1999). CTDs can affect nearly all tissues (nerves, tendons, tendon sheaths,
and muscles), but it most frequently affects the upper extremities (National Safety
Council, 1997). These painful and sometimes crippling injuries develop over time, and are
usually the result of repeated actions, such as twisting and bending the arms or wrists.
Since, an aging workforce is one of the key factors contributing to an increase in
CTDs, workplace managers must take CTDs into account when creating and updating
workplaces (Putz-Anderson, 1988). The aging workforce contributes to CTDs because
of normal, age-related changes in the body’s resilience to chronic wear and tear. The
three main musculoskeletal changes that occur are:
(1) reduction in joint mobility;
(2) decrease in muscular strength; and
(3) slowing of reaction and movement times.

One of the most significant changes in the ability to move occurs in the joints, which
are responsible for small motor movements (grasping, gripping, and twisting), and
large motor movements (walking, bending, sitting, and climbing). Changes in small
motor movements affect dexterity and the ability to grasp and manipulate objects.
Although, joint mobility itself decreases slightly from the ages of 20-60, the incidence
of arthritis increases dramatically beyond the age of 45 (Morgan et al., 1963).
In addition to a decrease in joint mobility and its associated impacts, the aging
workforce also faces decreases in muscular strength. Muscular strength in humans
peaks between the ages of 25 and 30. Around the age of 40, a steady decline can be
evidenced (Vittasalo et al., 1985), With reductions in physical strength, common job
tasks can become hazardous. Older workers, who are required to exert high amounts of
JFM muscular force such as lifting, lowering, or carrying of heavy loads, become more
5,3 susceptible to injury and developing CTDs.
The literature shows a disturbing trend in fatalities from falls, which can be
correlated to reductions in physical strength and flexibility. While it is not the only
factor, reduced strength may affect an older worker’s ability to recover balance or
footing to avoid a fall (Spriduso, 1990). Fatality rates from falls increase beginning in
174 the 45-54 age group, and account for 20 percent of fatalities among workers over the
age of 55 (Agnew, 1993). Agnew also reported that one-third of all compensable injuries
to workers over the age of 65 were due to falls. As research and statistics have shown,
it is very important for workplace managers to consider inevitable declines in strength
among an aging workforce.
The third main musculoskeletal change that occurs in older adults is the slowing of
reaction and movement times. Davies and Mebarki (1983) found that there was a
significant decrease in movement time between the ages of 16-25 and 28-56. They also
found that average reaction time of older groups (age 66-87) was 30 percent slower than
that of younger groups (age 18-30). From a performance standpoint, however, older
workers have much more experience than younger workers. This may enable older
workers to achieve satisfactory performance that compensates for any slow-down.
In general, research has shown that while decreased capacity may cause a potential
increase in error rates, it does not necessarily lead to reduced work performance.
However, when job demands exceed the worker’s capacity, the older worker may
compensate by using increased physical effort or taking fewer rest periods to complete
tasks in a timely manner (McMahan, 1999). The application of force and frequent
repetition (lack of rest) increases the risk for CTDs.

Economic impacts
In addition to its physical effects, CTDs also have a tremendous economic impact.
CTDs account for more than 50 percent of all occupational illnesses in the USA (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 2003). Among major disabling injuries and illnesses, carpal tunnel
syndrome, a type of CTD which compresses the nerves from the forearm to the hand,
causing pain and numbness in the fingers, accounted for the greatest number of days
away from work, surpassing fractures and amputations. In addition, injuries caused by
repetitive motion, such as grasping and typing, resulted in the longest absences from
work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004). These injuries cost businesses $15 to 20 billion
in workers’ compensation costs each year, and indirect costs run as high as $45 to 60
billion dollars a year (OSHA, 1999).
Additional negative financial impacts can occur due to inflated insurance and
healthcare costs driven by the relatively higher risks associated with older workers.
Conditions unrelated to work are exacerbated with age, such as obesity and uncontrolled
blood pressure, and can result in substantially higher costs for workers’ comp insurance
and filed claims. Although data demonstrates substantially higher incident rates and costs
for specific injuries among older workers, there are proactive steps that management can
take to reduce the impact of aging on workers’ comp experience.

Solutions for preventing injuries

With a solid understanding of the musculoskeletal changes that occur in older adults,
this paper now examines ergonomic solutions that help reduce and prevent CTDs.
These ergonomic solutions in workplace design are needed to compensate for the Ergonomic
diminished physical capacities of older workers.
Putz-Anderson (1988) describes three main objectives in achieving ergonomic
solutions for an
control over CTDs. The first objective focuses on reducing extreme joint movement, aging workforce
since excessive stress on joints and tendons is a principle cause of CTDs. Workplace
designers should also consider minimizing working conditions that require unusual
posture such as twisting the spine, reaching above the head, and leaning to one side. 175
Research also shows that using distinctive textures and shapes when tactile
identification is required and replacing knobs with levers or push buttons is beneficial.
Studies conducted by Nichols (1966) show that a lever control is preferred over knobs
because twice as much torque can be exerted without sacrificing joint movement.
Because these simple but important decisions can impact all workers, workplace
planners and managers need to be aware of potential effort-saving devices and
ergonomic opportunities. If these risk factors are taken into account early in the
planning process, the incidence of CTDs can be dramatically reduced.
The second objective towards minimization of CTDs is the reduction of excessive
force. Workplace designers and facility managers can achieve this by modifying job
tasks that require prolonged and excessive muscle contractions to maintain a posture.
Given the reduced strength in older workers, any design that compromises grip,
leverage, or mechanical advantage would not be suitable. Any design that does not
allow older workers to apply maximum strength would also not be suggested. This
often occurs in industrial settings, where workers must often operate various controls;
this also occurs in standard office settings where workers are required to turn valve
hand wheels, push or pull levers, and turn dials or knobs of various shapes and sizes.
An example is provided by Bordett’s (1988) study where elderly females were found to
have difficulty generating enough torque in water faucet handles of various shapes.
The use of jigs, clamps, and mechanical assists satisfy some of these requirements and
help reduce the use of excessive force.
The third and final objective is to reduce highly repetitive tasks. Repetitive
motion-related injuries can be prevented through proper workplace design and set-up.
Workplace designers and managers can provide solutions including mechanizing
special tools with power drivers, automating processes, and providing workers with a
larger and more varied number of tasks to perform. Ergonomic furniture options and
accessories can also provide the needed support and alignments needed to prevent
many common injuries.

Implementing ergonomic improvements

Once the contributing factors for each task are determined, ergonomic improvements
must be implemented to improve the fit between a job and the capabilities of the
employee performing it. These improvements are commonly grouped in the literature
into either one of three categories:
(1) engineering improvements;
(2) administrative improvements; or
(3) safety gear.

Engineering improvements involve rearranging, modifying, redesigning, or replacing

tools, equipment, workstations, packaging, parts or products. The best time to select
JFM engineering improvements is when new facilities, processes, or works are being planned.
5,3 These improvements can be very effective because they may reduce or eliminate the
factor contributing to workplace injuries. An example of an engineering improvement is
raising or lowering the work surface for the employee, thus reducing bending, reaching
and awkward postures. Other examples of engineering improvements include: using
cut-out work surfaces to allow employees to get closer to their work; reducing visual
176 effort and awkward postures; repositioning the work to reduce bending and reaching;
and reconfiguring the work station to replace lifting and carrying with sliding and
rolling. Providing adjustable equipment, providing close, convenient storage for
frequently used materials, parts and tools, providing lifting aids and mechanical aids for
transporting materials and products, all help reduce force, repetition and awkward
positions in everyday tasks. Finally, providing tools with rounded, soft padded handles
for employees reduces the pressure points on the hands and fingers.
Administrative improvements usually require continuous management and
employee feedback to ensure that the new practices and policies are effective. These
improvements include changing work practices or changing the way work is
organized. Some improvement options include: providing a variety of jobs for each
employee; adjusting their work schedule and work pace; providing muscle relaxation
time; and ensuring regular housekeeping and maintenance of work spaces, tools and
equipment. Using tags to identify heavy or unstable loads and encouraging exercise, as
well as training, are all valid administrative improvements.
The use of safety gear, or personal protective equipment (PPE), includes gloves,
knee and elbow pads, footwear and other protective items. Each of these items is
designed to protect a specific body part and should be properly worn by employees at
all times to reduce the risk of a MSD. Training for the proper use of each PPE should be
given to employees.
While effective workplace ergonomics provide positive impacts for everyone involved,
it is important to remember the significant numbers of older adults that are continuing in,
entering, or re-entering the work force. Given that the average worker spends over
one-third of his/her time on the job (McMahan, 1999), the importance of creating effective
workplace ergonomics has increased. OSHA is developing a program that calls for
employers to establish ergonomic programs to prevent work-related MSDs (OSHA, 1999).
Because workplace ergonomics cannot be a “one-size-fits-all” program, the role of the
aging worker will be especially important in complying with a programmed approach.
With such an approach, company management would need to step forward and involve
employees, conduct job hazard analyses, and provide proper training to all workers.
A proactive approach is needed by any facility manager who wishes to transform the
work environment into an ergonomically compliant one. Trying to solve a problem once
it exists is usually much more expensive than solving one that is still in its early stages.
With an understanding of age-related declines and what workplace managers can do to
mitigate and prevent them, it is also important to note that the implementation of any of
the suggested improvements would likely benefit all workers, not just older workers.

Conclusion
With an increasing percentage of older workers compromising the workforce, it is
absolutely critical that companies and workplace managers make effective workplace
ergonomics a top priority.
 When solving ergonomic-related problems, a comprehensive, integrated and Ergonomic
multi-disciplinary approach should be considered. Areas in which changes would solutions for an
occur include organizational policy, individual behavior, and physical environment.
Organizational policy changes would include limiting repetition and prompting aging workforce
mandatory breaks, setting weight limits and lifting guidelines for aging workers, and
involving the worker in planning tasks. Individual behavioral changes would include
promoting exercise programs, stretching and strength training programs, and 177
informing employees about the risks of CTDs. The physical environment involves
implementing many of the ergonomic solutions outlined in this paper. This
responsibility not only lies with facility planners and workplace managers, but also
with company management as well. Creating effective workplaces not only reduce the
risks of CTDs, but also create better quality of life for workers and reduce the
tremendous financial losses and medical costs to companies and the economy.

Limitations and recommendations for future research

This review does not prescribe specific solutions which need to be based on individual
work settings and situations; recommendations apply to the general workplace. Future
studies may consider specific job categories in order to provide more individualized
solutions for itemized job categories, as outlined in the OSHA proposal.

References
Agnew, J. (1993), “Age and fatal work related falls”, Human Factors: Journal of the Human
Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 35, pp. 731-6.
Bordett, H.M. (1988), “Torque required from elderly females to operate faucet handles of various
shapes”, Human Factors: Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 30,
pp. 339-46.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2003), “Lost-worktime injuries and illnesses: characteristics and
resulting time away from work”, available at: www.bls.gov/news.release/osh2.nr0.htm
(accessed February 12, 2006).
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2004), “Repetitive motion results in longest work absences”, available
at: www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2004/mar/wk5/art02.htm (accessed February 12, 2006).
Davies, B.T. and Mebarki, M. (1983), “Speed of forward hand movement (the effects of age, sex,
posture and hand)”, Ergonomics, Vol. 26 No. 11, pp. 1077-9.
Haight, M.J. (2003), “Human error and the challenges of an aging workforce: considerations for
improving workplace safety”, Professional Safety, Vol. 43, pp. 18-24.
McMahan, S. (1999), “Ergonomic solutions for reducing the risk of CTDs”, American Journal of
Health Studies, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 199-205.
Morgan, C.T., Cook, J.S., Chapanis, A. and Lund, M.W. (1963), Human Engineering Guide to
Equipment Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
National Safety Council (1997), Management of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders
Accredited Standards Committee Z365, National Safety Council, Washington, DC.
Nichols, J. (1966), “Door handles for the disabled: an assessment of their suitability”, Annals of
Physical Medicine, Vol. 8, pp. 180-3.
Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) (1999), “Background on the working draft
of OSHA’s proposed ergonomics program standard”, June, available at: www.osha-slc.
gov/SLTC/ergonomics/backgroundinfo.html
JFM Putz-Anderson, V. (1988), Cumulative Trauma Disorders: A Manual for Musculoskeletal Diseases
of the Upper Limbs, Taylor & Francis, Ltd, Bristol, PA.
5,3 Spiriduso, W.W. (1990), “Motor performance and aging”, in Birren, J.E. and Shae, K. (Eds),
Handbook of the Psychology of Aging, 3rd ed., Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Stelmach, G.E. (1992), “Cognitive-motor abilities of the elderly driver”, Human Factors Journal of
the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 34, pp. 53-65.
178 Viitasalo, J., Era, P., Leskinen, A. and Heikkenen, E. (1985), “Muscular strength profiles and
anthropometry in random samples of men aged 31-35, 51-55, and 71-75 years”,
Ergonomics, Vol. 28, pp. 1563-74.

Further reading
Pirkl, J.J. (1995), “Transgenerational design: prolonging the American dream”, Generations: The
Journal of the American Society on Aging, Spring, pp. 32-6.

About the authors

Kathy O. Roper is an Assistant Professor in the Integrated Facility and Property Management
graduate program at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. She is a
Certified Facility Manager with IFMA, a Master of Corporate Real Estate with CoreNet Global
and a LEED Accredited Professional with the US Green Building Council. Kathy O. Roper is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: kathy.roper@gatech.edu.
Daniel C. Yeh is a recent graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology’s Facility and
Property Management Masters program. He is a Project Manager for New South Construction in
Atlanta, Georgia. E-mail: daniel67@gmail.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

View publication stats