Ergonomics
Origins, Focus, and Implementation Considerations
R e petitive motion injuries cost
employers millions ..." (Daily
Reportfor Executives, June 27, 1991);
" ... more than $10 billion-about a
third of workers' compensation-in
1988 was paid out for repetitive mo-
tion injuries, according to the Occu-
pational Safety and Health Adrnini-
stration"(BNA, 1991). Allegations of
repetitive motion problems in nu-
merous worksites from meatpacking
plants to supermarkets to computer-
ized offices have created great inter-
est in the field of ergonomics.
Within the occupational health
community, individuals and organi-
zations, especially OSHA, are pro-
moting ergonomic programs as a
means to improve the workplace and
alleviate occupational injuries and
illnesses such as cumulative trauma
disorders (CTDs). This article pro-
vides a background of the field of
ergonomics-its history and major
focus areas within an occupational
setting-and offers suggestions
which may be useful to the occupa-
tional health nurse when involved in
an ergonomic program. The article
concentrates on the work related or
occupational aspects of ergonomics.
ORIGINS OF ERGONOMICS
The term ergonomics is derived
from two Greek words, "ergos,"
meaning work, and "nomos," mean-
ing laws of Thus, in its simplest
translation, ergonomics means "the
laws of work." The term ergonomics
was introduced into the literature by
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
The goal of ergonomists is
to match the demands and
requirements of the job
to the abilities and
capabilities of the worker.
Wojciech jastrzebowski (1799-1882),.
a Polish educator and scientist (East-
man-Kodak, 1983). However, ergon-
omics was not used in its current
context until 1950 when it was "re-
invented" by K.F.H. Murrell, one of
the pioneers in the field. Today, a
standard definition of ergonomics is
difficult to find. However, the fol-
lowing definition should suffice:
Ergonomics is thc study of human
behavioral and biological characteris-
tics for the appropriate design of the
living and working environment.
The terms ergonomics and human
factors are synonymous. If a distinc-
tion is drawn between ergonomic
and human factors, it comes from a
historical perspective only. Ergo-
nomics, as the term evolved in
Europe, traditionally focused on is-
sues of how work affected the indi-
vid ual; the goal was red uction of
fatigue caused by the job. In the
United States, on the other hand,
human factors focused on how indi-
viduals behaved in relation to their
work environment and the equip-
ment with which they came in con-
by Thomas J. Sluchak, MSIE
tact (Eastman-Kodak, 1983). Today,
such subtle distinctions are rarely
mentioned.
However, one distinction main-
tained among ergonomic profession-
als is between study and application.
Ergonomics is viewed as the study of
humans to gather data and establish
principles regarding human charac-
teristics. In contrast, applied
ergonomics is the application of the
data and principles to the design of
equipment and systems for humans.
Applied ergonomics is synonymous
with human factors engineering
(Christensen, 1988). Other terms
used to refer to applied ergonomics
are: human engineering, engineering
psychology, applied experimental
psychology, biomedical engineering,
and systems research.
Finally, in an occupational setting
in which the goal is improvement of
the working environment, the modi-
fiers occupational or industrial are
often assumed for ergonomics. Thus,
for the occupational health profes-
sional, who may be asked to educate
employees of varying education lev-
els, the following definition is
straightforward and accurate:
(Occu pational/I nd ustrial) Ergonomics
is the design or modification of the
workplace to match human characteris-
tics and capabilities.
Regardless of the definitions, the
goal of ergonomists is the same:
match the demands and require-
ments of the job to the abilities and
capabilities of the worker.
105
Ergonomics
HISTORY OF ERGONOMICS
Ergonomics as a recognized sci-
ence is relatively new, especially
when compared to medicine, psy-
chology, and engineering. There has
been interest in human productivity
for centuries. However, because of
the abundance of inexpensive labor,
little attention was paid to the design
of work to accommodate the worker.
In the late 1800s and the early
1900s, Frederick W Taylor began to
quantitatively look at ways to organ-
ize work and manage workers to
increase output. His books, Principles
of Scientific Management (1911) and
Shop il1anagement (1919) are consid-
ered classics in ergonomics and in-
dustrial engineering. In one instance,
Taylor experimented by giving
workers shovels of different sizes to
see which shovel resulted in the
maximum productivity over an en-
tire work shift. At about the same
time, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth
were working on time and motion
analysis techniques for consistently
analyzing work activities. The work
by Taylor and the Gilbreths gener-
ally is regarded as the beginning of
the scientific study of the relation-
ship of workers and work.
One unfortunate outcome of the
early work of Taylor and the Gilbre-
ths is the misconception that there is
one best way. Attempts to design
work activities into the one best way
for all workers as a group may not be
appropriate for each individual
(Christensen, 1987). Ergonomics
takes into consideration the individ-
ual differences among workers, and
designs a work environment flexible
enough to accommodate this varia-
bility without sacrificing safety or
productivity. For example, when
conducting a study such as Taylor's
shovel study, one should determine
the best tool for each individual
worker, not just for the workers as a
group.
During World War I, the military
was particularly interested in rapidly
selecting, classifying, and training
men for a variety of jobs. Ergonomic
questions about the relationship be-
tween the criteria for selection of
106
personnel and their subsequent per-
formance intrigued researchers.
However, post-World War I research
into such questions was not widely
pursued, largely because of the De-
pression, which made funding scarce
and laborers plentiful and inexpen-
sive again.
With the onset of World War II,
interest in personnel selection/
performance questions revived.
Early in the war, the British began
the first true ergonomic research cen-
ter-the Applied Psychology Unit of
Cambridge University under Sir
Frederic Bartlett, another pioneer in
the field. In the United States during
World War II, ergonomics, or engi-
neering psychology as it was called,
achieved the status of a recognized
discipline. Within the military, per-
plexing problems arose: experienced
pilots crashed their aircraft on take
off; bombs were dropped on wrong
targets; and submarine operators
failed to detect enemy ships or mis-
takenly attacked marine life.
Often, investigators found that the
equipment had functioned reliably
and the operators were among the
most qualified.
In many cases, however, it was recog-
nized that the design of a weapon was
at fault. It may have called for superhu-
man abilities, interfered with existing
habits, or in other ways encouraged
human errors (Grether, 19(8),
Put simply, the demands of oper-
ating the equipment exceeded the
human expectations and ability to
cope with them.
Following the war, several military
human engineering research facili-
ties were established in the United
States to understand and solve the so
called human-machine problems. In
addition, research grants went to sev-
eral universities to begin building
the knowledge base about humans
and their relationship to equipment.
In these facilities, ergonomics be-
came deeply rooted in the design
and development of most defense
related equipment and systems.
With their efforts in research at
these facilities, Paul M. Fitts, Frank-
lyn V. Taylor, and Alphonse
Chapanis established reputations as
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
founders of the human factors move-
ment in the United States. Fitts,
incidentally, is frequently given
credit for the term human factors.
The field of ergonomics expanded
rapidly during the 1950s. Several
ergonomic professional organizations
were established: The British Ergon-
omics Research Society in 1950; the
Human Factors Society (HFS) in
1957; and the Society of Engineering
Psychologists, a division in the
American Psychological Association,
in 1957. With membership available
to qualified individuals in all fields,
the Human Factors Society came to
be viewed as the ergonomic profes-
sional organization in the United
States, with human factors the pre-
ferred term for the field.
Today, the HFS has nearly 4,800
members. Because of its early ties to
psychology, HFS membership is still
about 45% psychologists, but the
number of professionals from other
fields such as engineering, medicine,
and the life sciences, computer sci-
ence, and business have been in-
creasing yearly. Occupational or in-
dustrial ergonomics is one of the
most active areas of interest within
the Society.
DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF
ERGONOMICS
Throughout its history, ergonom-
ics has had two distinguishing fea-
tures-its interdisciplinary nature
and its systems approach to the
human-work relationship. Together,
these features tend to set ergonomics
apart from other disciplines.
Ergonomics is interdisciplinary in
nature in that it draws on any and all
scientific and human related disci-
plines to obtain relevant knowledge
about a situation. The areas of
knowledge consulted often are re-
ferred to as ergonomic databases
(See Table).
Within ergonomics, knowledge
about human performance, bio-
mechanics, and anthropometry is
available to ergonomists; however,
fields outside of ergonomics also are
consulted. For example, ergonomics
draws heavily on various areas of
 Sluchak

psychology for knowledge about

human information acquisition and
processing relevant to mental tasks.
TABLE
Similarly, ergonomics draws on the Ergonomic Databases
life sciences for knowledge of human
Disciplines Consulted Knowledge Used
physical/physiological capabilities
for manual tasks. The willingness to
• Ergonomics
use knowledge from other fields per- o Human performance -Motor skills
mits the ergonomist to take a -Reaction
broader, systems perspective of an
o Biomechanics -Muscular strength
occupational setting.
-Coordination
Ergonomists view the human,
tool, task, workstation, and environ- o Anthropometry -Body dimensions
ment as a complex system of inter- • Psychology -Attention
acting components. This complex -Motivation
system is depicted in Figure 1, which o Perception -Sensory recognition
also lists many of the factors consid-
o Cognition -Memory
ered ergonomically important for -Decision making
each of the components.
At the center of the systems ap- • Life Sciences/Medicine -Vision, audition, etc.
-Human physiology
proach is the human. Immediately
-Effects of stress
affecting the human are the tool,
task, and workstation components. • Engineering -Time and motion analysis
Lastly, the all-encompassing envi- -Equipment design
ronment consists of physical factors • Personnel management -Training techniques
and other managerial/operational
considerations which may have a di-
rect or indirect influence on the
human or the other components. In Mounling UUingITVoiStinglBending
this article, the collection of task, Location Work Methods
Weight WOIk Pace
tool, workstation, and environment Grip Rest Breaks
components is referred to as the Vibration
Repetition
workplace or the job. Posture
Using the systems approach, er- Force
gonomists center their attention on
the human and the effects of the
surrounding workplace components
on the human. Typically, the human
under consideration is the primary
worker (e.g., assembler, secretary,
dock worker), but other personnel
who occasionally work in the area
(e.g., managers, housekeeping, or in- Education
Training
stallation and maintenance person- MOlivalion
nel) and who may be affected by the Conditioning
workplace are kept in mind. Knowl- Furniture
Seating
WORKSTATION Anthropometry
Job Satisfaction
edge of the human abilities and limi- Work Surtace Personal Prolective Equipment
Fixtures/Jigs
tations, drawn from the ergonomic Heighl/ReachIClearance Dimensions
databases, is used to assess the im-
pact on the human of all the
workplace components, either indi-
OSHA Regulations
vidually or in combination. This
U~~:~
Legal Considerations
broad perspective is a necessary part
Temperature
ENVIRONMENT Ethical Considerations
Medical Management
of the ergonomic systems approach. Management Commilment
For example, in a manual assem-
bly job where CTDs are a concern, it
Figure 1: Ergonomic job considerations.
is insufficient to concentrate on

AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3 107

Ergonomics
human considerations only (e.g.,
physical conditioning, training, pro-
tective equipment, and anthropome-
try). The ergonomist must take a
broader view of the situation and
evaluate the individual effects of the
task (force, repetition, hand posture
while performing the task, overall
work pace, and frequency of rest
breaks); tools (location and mounting
of tools to encourage a neutral wrist
posture, or use of torque attenuating
grips); workstation (bench height
needed for the worker and the task,
or adjustable fixtures for use as a
work surface to position and hold the
part); and environment (tempera-
ture, pressure on workers to produce,
or management attitude toward
workers).
Further, the ergonomist must
evaluate the effect on the human of
all possible workplace interactions
(e.g., high temperatures could lead to
perspiration and the need for greater
hand force than expected to hold a
tool or part). In essence, the ergon-
omist views the system as a gestalt-
more than the sum of the individual
components-and evaluates it appro-
priately.
The methodology used in the sys-
tems approach is traditional problem-
solving:
1. Define the problem; specify the
objectives of any solution.
2. Formulate alternatives.
3. Evaluate the alternatives against
the objectives.
4. Select the best and try it.
S. Repeat the process until satisfied
with the results.
This ergonomic methodology is
analogous to the nursing process:
assessment, planning, implementa-
tion, and evaluation. This methodol-
ogy should lead to an improved
workplace, especially when com-
bined with the broad view taken by
the ergonomist in the systems ap-
proach. Defining problems, deter-
mining where they exist and their
extent, and then developing and ap-
plying solutions are the basic ele-
ments of an ergonomic program,
which is addressed next.
Sound ergonomic programs have
108
two distinguishing features: an inter-
disciplinary nature and a systems
approach. The physical and mental
capabilities of the worker, gathered
from many relevant disciplines, pro-
vide the basis against which the task,
tools, and workstation are evaluated.
The environment is the backdrop
against which overall workplace im-
provement is sought. Ergonomics at-
tempts to mold an ergonomically
sound workplace through the itera-
tive application of the traditional
problem solving methodology.
FOCUS AND ELEMENTS OF AN
ERGONOMIC PROGRAM
The goal of ergonomics is to match
the demands of the job to the capa-
bilities of the worker. Thus, the
focus is clear: Fit the job to the
worker, not the worker to the job.
Perhaps the best prescription for
an ergonomic program is that de-
scribed in OSHA 3123, Ergonomics
Program Management Guidelines for
Meatpacking Plants, (U.S. Depart-
ment of Labor, 1990) which takes a
systematic approach. OSHA 3123
was written to address the growing
number of CTDs and other work
related ergonomic problems in the
meatpacking industry. Regardless of
the industry, the OSHA ergonomic
guidelines can be adapted for use in
any company.
The OSHA ergonomic guidelines
are intended to "provide information
on steps employers should take:
1. To determine if they have ergon-
omic related problems in their
workplaces.
2. To identify the nature and loca-
tion of those problems.
3. To implement measures to re-
duce or eliminate them" (U.S.
Department of Labor, 1990).
Detailed discussion of OSHA 3123
is beyond the scope of this article,
but significant aspects are men-
tioned. Also, supplemental materials
beyond those mentioned in the
OSHA ergonomic guidelines are sug-
gested.
The thrust of the early work in an
ergonomic program is obtaining the
requisite management commitment
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
and employee involvement in the
program. The OSHA guidelines
spell out four steps:
1. Obtain management commit-
ment for a policy of ergonomic
responsibility and accountability
at all levels of the organization.
2. Document the program in writ-
ing; communicate it to all employ-
ees.
3. Educate and involve employees
in the recognition, reporting, anal-
ysis, and resolution of ergonomic
problems. Organize teams to sys-
tematically perform this work.
4. Establish means to monitor the
progress of the program.
The OSHA guidelines discuss
four elements of an ergonomic pro-
gram.
Worksite Analysis
The intent of this analysis is to
determine if any ergonomic hazards
exist in the workplace. OSHA 3123
includes a checklist which might be
used during a worksite analysis. Ad-
ditional checklists can be found in
publications from Eastman-Kodak
(1983) and the National Safety
Council (1988). Unlike the OSHA
ergonomic checklist which is di-
rected at CTDs, both of these check-
lists are directed at larger muscle
groups and wider consideration of
the workplace (See Figure 2).
During a worksite analysis, re-
viewers should be particularly alert
to worker instituted changes to the
workplace. Tape, extra padding or
"homemade" fixtures are typically
indicative of potential ergonomic
hazards.
It is important that a "qualified"
ergonomic person conduct the re-
view. Some companies can hire ei-
ther a full time ergonomist or an
ergonomic consultant. Suggestions
for choosing an ergonomic consultant
are discussed later in this article.
Companies may want to have other
ergonomic trained individuals on
site. Several ergonomic short courses
are available in the United States,
typically during the summer. For
example:
• University of Michigan (Ann

Arbor): "Occupational Ergonom-
ics," "Human Factors Engineer-
ing;"
• University of Lowell (MA):
"Human Factors/Ergonomics;"
• National Safety Council (Chicago,
IL): "Fundamentals of Occupa-
tional Ergonomics;"
• Harvard School of Public Health
(Boston, MA): "Industrial Ergo-
nomics: Human Factors in
Occupational Health and Safety;"
• University of North Carolina
(Chapel Hill): "Workplace Ergon-
. "
omics.
This listing is not all inclusive, nor
is it an endorsement of any of these
courses. Attendance at these short
courses can increase one's under-
standing of ergonomics and its bene-
fits. However, it is important to note
that completion does not make one
an ergonomist.
Hazard Prevention and Control
The goal of a true ergonomic pro-
gram is to change the workplace to
accommodate the worker. One hier-
archical model for hazard prevention
through ergonomics is promoted by
Christensen (1987):
Design-Remooe-Guard- Warn-
(Train). The first two components
constitute engineering controls as
defined by OSHA. That is, either the
hazard is designed out of the
workplace or the worker is totally
separated from the hazard.
• Design: Most effective is a rede-
sign of the job which totally elimi-
nates a hazard. That is, no hazard,
no injury.
• Remove: Give the worker the abil-
ity to perform the work without
direct personal contact with the
hazards. Remotely operated
equipment, or even robotics, are
possible solutions.
The third component is a type of
work practice control, in that the
worker is required to follow some
procedure which is otherwise extra-
neous to the job. In some respects,
this component also relates to per-
sonal protective equipment.
• Guard: If a worker must perform a
hazardous job, place a physical
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
Sluchak
Physical Demands
o Does the task require strenuous two-hand lifting?
o Lifting at too great a horizontal distance
o Lifting more than once per minute
o Lifting over too great a vertical distance
o Does the task require strenuous one-hand lifting and reaching?
(Such as too long a reach feeding parts into a machine)
o Are lifts awkward because they are near the floor, above the
shoulders, or too far from the body?
o Does the job require twisting while lifting?
o Must the worker handle difficult-to-grasp items? (Are the items
difficult to reach? Is the hand-hold poor?)
Does the job require continual manual handling of materials?
Does the job require handling of oversized objects?
Does the job require two-person lifting?
Must force be exerted in an awkward position (for example, to
the side, overhead, or at extended reaches)?
Is help for heavy lifting or exerting force unavailable?
Does the job involve peak loads of muscular effort?
How often do peak loads occur?
How long do they last?
Can the job be designed to alternate periods of exertion
and rest?
Can the job be designed to alternate periods of static effort
and movement?
Is the pace of material handling determined by a machine?
(Feeding machines, conveyors, etc.)
Does the job lack material handling aids such as air hoists
or scissor tables?
Does the job involve static muscle loading (such as holding
or carrying)?
Does the job involve the use of hand tools that are difficult
to grasp?
Is there a high level of hand-tool vibration?
Must the worker stand on a hard surface for 45% or more of the
work shift?
Is there frequent daily stair or ladder climbing?
Figure 2: Workplace checklist. Excerpted from the National Safety Council (1988).
109
Ergonomics
barrier between the worker and
the hazard which minimizes the
chances of injury.
The fourth component might be
viewed as administrative in nature.
• Warn: When no other engineering
controls are possible, the worker
must be made aware of any poten-
tial hazard in the scope of the job.
This may involve education and
demonstration about a particular
workplace, as well as the judicious
placement of appropriate warning
signs near hazards.
The last component of the hierarchy,
Train, is a necessary part of all jobs,
and is discussed below.
Medical Management
OSHA 3123 covers this section
well, especially pointing out the
major responsibilities of the occupa-
tional health nurse. Particular atten-
tion should be paid to the discussion
of techniques for treating CTDs.
Training and Education
Training is not a substitute for
engineering control of ergonomic
hazards. However, it is a necessary
part of every worker's experience.
Keep in mind that under conditions
of stress or fatigue, training can break
down. The human-machine prob-
lems among World War II pilots and
submarine operators are indicative of
situations where extensive selection
and training failed. Care should be
taken to see that all training given to
employees is well done and fre-
quently reinforced.
CHOOSING AN ERGONOMIC
CONSULTANT
As a result of the interest in ergo-
nomics, many firms are trying to hire
a consulting ergonomist and some
have reported problems. The Rocky
Mountain News ("Concerns for safety
of computers users spawn bogus ex-
perts," January 29, 1991, p. 4) re-
ferred to ergonomics as the new
"snake oil." It reported furniture and
other salespersons in San Francisco
attaching "ergonomist" to their title
in hopes of making a sale. In one
instance, a self titled ergonomist was
110
found to have a degree in ceramics
(pottery), but only after the equip-
ment he was selling had caused in-
jury to several workers. Thus, for
those seeking to hire an ergonomic
consultant, caveat emptor-let the
buyer beware-applies.
Currently, ergonomists or human
factors professionals are not certified.
However, the Human Factors Soci-
ety and the American Industrial Hy-
giene Association are discussing the
possi biliry, Until certification be-
comes a reality, the following sugges-
tions will help in the search for a
qualified ergonomic consultant:
• Check with peers or trade associa-
tions within one's industry. They
may have someone they recom-
mend highly.
• Consult the company insurance
carrier. They may have ergo-
nomists on staff or a list of recom-
mendations.
• Find out which universities in the
area have a graduate program in
ergonomic or human factors. Call
the program directors, and inquire
about consultants for the particu-
lar industry. A Directory of Human
Factors Graduate Programs in the
United States and Canada (Human
Factors Society, 1991) lists 70 er-
gonomics graduate programs in
the United States. A similar publi-
cation, International Directory of
Education Programs in Ergonomics/
Human Factors (Pearson, 1988),
lists S9 programs in the United
States and several others from
around the world.
• Call the local OSHA office to de-
termine if they maintain a list of
recommended ergonomists for the
particular industry.
• Consult the Directory of Human
Factors/Ergonomics Consultants
(Human Factors Society, 1988),
which lists 99 individuals and nine
companies.
Once a prospective list is assem-
bled, verify the credentials of the
consultants.
• Check references to determine if
work has been acceptable to previ-
ous clients. Ideally, the consultant
should have several years experi-
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
ence in ergonomics, preferably in
the specific industry or a related
one.
• Check the academic credentials of
the consultant. Most recognized
ergonomists or human factors pro-
fessionals possess some graduate
training in the field, particularly in
psychology, engineering, or physi-
ology. Again, check the directories
of ergonomic graduate programs
mentioned earlier.
• Determine the professional socie-
ties to which the consultant be-
longs. The Human Factors Soci-
ety, the Ergonomics Society of
Great Britain, and the American
Industrial Hygiene Association are
three of 19 professional societies
of relevance to ergonomics in the
Handbook ofHuman Factors (Chris-
tensen, 1987). Often these socie-
ties screen prospective members
to maintain the credibility of the
society. (For example, to become
a [full] Member of the Human
Factors Society, an individual
must have at least a bachelor's
degree and S years experience in
human factors work.) Most reputa-
ble consultants belong to several
societies.
• Call the federal and local OSHA
offices. Ask if any complaints have
been filed against the consultant,
or if they recommend the candi-
date. (Ergonomists at the federal
OSHA office have stated that if
they do not recommend an ergo-
nomist highly, the consultant
should be carefully checked.)
Once an ergonomist is chosen,
meet with the consultant to ensure
that the attitude and approach of the
expert matches that of the company.
A good consultant should generally
offer the following items in any dis-
cussion of an ergonomic program for
a company.
• Familiarity with OSHA 3123.
• To conduct an initial review of the
site goals/objectives for the ergo-
nomics program.
• To develop a plan for awareness,
education and involvement of all
employees in the company/site.
• Recommendations for the contin-

uous improvement of the
workplace by moving from short
term immediate actions to long
term engineering changes to the
equipment, facilities, and proce-
dures within the workplace.
• Plans for the company to continue
its ergonomic program after the
consultant is gone.
THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
NURSE AND ERGONOMICS
The occupational health nurse has
a key role in the ergonomic program
at any work site or company. Every
occupational health nurse should be
familiar with the basics of OSHA
3123. In many companies, the occu-
pational health nurse may be the
only ergonomics-assare individual, that
is, the only professional with some
familiarity or training in ergonomics.
The occupational health nurse will
be involved in much of the work of
starting an ergonomic program. The
nurse can help make the case for an
ergonomic program by citing perti-
nent injury and illness statistics, and
the workers' compensation costs as-
sociated with those injuries and ill-
nesses. Subsequently, the occupa-
tional health nurse can actively
participate in writing the company
policy on ergonomics, insuring its
completeness and coverage of all
employees.
Perhaps the most time consuming
job of the occupational health nurse
will be the education of all employ-
ees about ergonomics, and involve-
ment in the creation of safety and
health committees. The develop-
ment of procedures to monitor the
progress of the ergonomic program,
through the analysis of the injury/
illness trends is a natural extension of
the current role of the occupational
health nurse in most occupational
settings. Finally, the occupational
health nurse may be asked to assist
management in hiring professional
ergonomics help.
Once the program is underway,
the occupational health nurse will be
very active. The occupational health
nurse will most likely be the eyes
and ears of the safety and health
AAOHN JOURNAL, MARCH 1992, VOL. 40, NO.3
Sluchak
committee and the ergonomic teams ered in light of the possible alterna-
because of the day to day contact tives. These words from Weiner
between the occupational health (1950), also cited by Christensen
nurse and the employees. (1987), sum up the problem of taking
The occupational health nurse a narrow, short term view of the
must remain alert to all actual and workplace, and the consequences of
potential ergonomic problems in the failing to actively strive for improved
workplace, and bring these promptly ergonomic working conditions:
to the attention of the analysis and It is a degradation to a human being to
correction teams established by the chain him to an oar and usc him as a
source of power; bur it is an almost
ergonomic program. Whether alone equal degradation to assign him purely
or one of several ergonomics aware repetitive tasks in a factory, which
professionals, the occupational demand less than a millionth of his
health nurse has a major role in the brainpower. Bur it is simpler to organ-
ize a factory or galley which uses indi-
ergonomic program at any work site vidual human being for a trivial fraction
or company. of their worth than it is to provide a
world in which they can grow to their
SUMMARY full stature (Weiner, 1950).
Ergonomics is not a panacea. Er-
gonomics focuses first on fitting the REFERENCES
job to the worker, then on fitting the BNA (Bureau of National Affairs). (1991).
Cllmlliotive Trauma Disorders ill the
worker into the job. The appropriate 1V0rl.plflce: Costs, Preoention 0110 Progress.
application of ergonomic principles, BSP-204.
while keeping in mind the individual Christensen, j.M. (1987). The human factors
differences among workers, will lead profession. In: Salvendy, G. (Ed.) HOllo-
to improvement in the health and hook of Human Factors. New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons.
safety of any occupational setting. Christensen, j.M. (1988). Human factors defi-
Perhaps the real significance of nitions. Human Factors Society Bulletin,
ergonomic programs is best consid- . 31(3),8-9.
Ergonomics
IN SUMMARY
Ergonomics: Origins, Focus and Implementation Considera-
tions. Sluchak, T.J. AAOHN Journal 1992; 40(3):105-112.
1 • Ergonomics (or human factors) is defined as the design or
modification of the workplace to match human character-
istics and capabilities. Its goal is to match the demands
and requirements of the job to the abilities and capabili-
ties of the worker.
Sound ergonomics programs are those which take advan-
2 • tage of the two distinguishing features of ergonomics: its
interdisciplinary nature and its systems approach.
3 • Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meat-
packing Plants (OSHA 3123) presents an excellent pre-
scription for an ergonomics program. The guidelines can
be adapted for use in any company.
Occupational health nurses must remain alert to all actual
4 • and potential ergonomic problems in the workplace,
acting as the eyes and ears of the safety and health
committee and the ergonomics teams, and quickly direct-
ing their attention to problematic work areas.
111
Ergonomics

Eastman-Kodak. (1983). Ergonomic Design for
People at Work: Volllllle I. Belmont, CA:
Lifetime Learning Publications.
Grether, WF. (1968). Engineering psychology
in the lJnited States. America» Psychologist,
23(10),743-751.
Human Factors Society. (1988). Directory of
Human Factors/Ergonomics Oonsultants.
Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Soci-
ety.
Human Factors Society. (1991). Directory of
Human Factors Gmduatr Programs ill the
Ullited States alit! Canada. Santa Monica,
CA: Human Factors Society.
National Safety Council. (1988). Ergonomics: A
Practical Gllide.
Pearson. R.G. (Ed.) (1988). lnternationalDirec-
to,)' of Educatiosa! Programs in Ergonomicsl
HIIIIIOIi Factors. International Ergonomics
Association. Available from Human Fac-
tors Society, Santa Monica, CA.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1990). Occupa-
tional Safety and Health Administration.
Erganomia Program M01lflgellielit Gllidelilles
for ,Ueatpackillg Plants. OSHA 3123. Wash-
ington, DC.
Weiner, N. (1950). The Human Use of Human
Beings: Cybemetics and Society. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Mr. Slu-
chak is Human Factors Engineer,
International Business Machines
Corporation; Human Factorsl
Store Systems, Raleigh, NC.

Custom-made for Journal of the American Association

your copies are valuable of Occupational Health Nurses, these magazine cases
and binders will keep a year's copies clean, orderly, and

KEEP THEM FOR readily accessible for reference. Rich in appearance with a
leatherette cover and embossed lettering, these coverings
are distinctive companions for your finest bindings. One

READY REFERENCE magazine case is priced at $7.95; 3 cases, $21.95; and 6

cases $39.95. The magazine binders are priced at $~.95
each; 3 for $27.95; and 6 for $52.95.
Journal of the American Association of Occupational
Health Nurses
Jesse Jones Industries, Dept OHN, 499 East Erie Ave.,
Phila., PA 19134
I am enclosed $_ _ for (check or money order only)
_ _ Magazine cases priced at $7.95 each, 3 for $21.95,
and 6 for $39.95.
_ _ Magazine binders priced at $9.95 each, 3 for
$27.95, and 6 for $52.95.
For credit card orders ($15 min) call Toll Free
1(800)972-58587 days 24 hrs.
Please make check payable to Jesse Jones Industries. Add
$1 per unit Postage and Handling. Outside USA, $2.50 per
unit (US funds only).
Name _
Address _
(No P.O. Box Please)
Cily _
State Zip Code _
PA residents add 6% sales tax. Satisfaction Guaranteed.