Working Late...

Caring for animal care workers

Who are we?

Esme Shanley
Researcher, Checkland Kindleysides

Elaine Yolande Williams

Research Associate, Loughborough Design School

Diane Gyi

Reader in Health Ergonomics and Design, Loughborough Design School Professor of Ergonomics, Loughborough Design School Professor of Construction Engineering Management, Department of Civil and Building Engineering

Roger Haslam Alistair Gibb

What is Working Late: Ageing productively through design?

This Working Late project investigates the role of good design and ergonomics in healthy working. The research will be used to create an online resource called OWL (Organiser for Working Late) which will facilitate healthy working through better more intelligent workplace design. Working Late is NOT about over time or long working hours

Working Late through design

fun intelligent desirable

non-stigmatising individual choice & control

preventative healthcare

Design
flexible

sustainable

encourages good habits accessible and intuitive

What is OWL?
The OWL resource will support line managers in facilitating healthy ageing at work through design. It will be made up of education & training tools
Generic tool kit tool box talks, discussion tools Personal Stories - design examples, video stories

OWL will empower and support worker involvement in design decision making processes especially when Working Late.

Introduction

Collaboration between an animal charity in the Midlands and Loughborough Design School, Loughborough University
Work & improve centre design

Caring for animal care workers Ergonomics Undergraduate research project In collaboration with the NDA Working Late

Introduction

The project was undertaken

October 2010 June 2011.

The site assessed has now moved

During the project they were in the process of moving.

Background

The animal care centre is a charity concerned with the prevention of cruelty to animals;
Care centres Animal hospitals Wildlife centres

The care centres adopt a range of jobs caring for animals

Concern for the animal care workers: Health & Safety Awkward postures Work related injuries; musculoskeletal ill health

Facts & Figures

Training Animal Care Workers in manual handling is limited
31% of UK small animal practices having trained staff in H&S (DSouza et al, 2009)

Animal care workers experiencing lower back problems

60% - 63% (OSullivan & Curran, 2008 & Smith et al, 2009)

75% of veterinary practices, around Hampshire in the UK, have access to adjustable tables
95% treat heavy dogs on the floor (DSouza et al, 2009)

Reducing manual lifting within the kitchen improved the protection of the shoulders (Pehkonen et al, 2009)

Methods
First stage: Baseline Data Collection
Preliminary meetings and informal discussions Questionnaire Survey

Second stage: In-depth Data Collection

Observations Focus Groups

Third stage: Feedback

Project write up Presentation of co-design solutions

Methods

Baseline Data Collection Questionnaire Survey

The working late questionnaire was used for this project to gain insights into the environment animal care staff work in.

The areas are:

Air qulaity, ligthing and noise Temperature MSD Working ability Ageing affects

Methods

In-depth data collection: Observations

These took place in the food preparation room.

The methods used include:

Ergonomic audit Link analysis REBA assessments

Methods
In-depth data collection: Focus Groups Two focus groups
animal care workers animal care managers 1. 2. 3. The three areas which were explored were: Storage Food preparation Cleaning

Results

Questionnaire Survey
26% (n=23) completed questionnaires 83% female Average age 34 (range 20-63) Height ranged from 1.52m 1.98m 32 average hours worked per week 3 years 5 months average time respondents had worked at the RSPCA The majority of equipment used was cleaning, follwed by medical and IT All respondents rate their ability to work between 7-10

Results
Questionnaire Survey

Results
Questionnaire Survey
Working posture & frequency

Results
Observations: Ergonomics Audit
Layout of the food prepartion room

Results
Observations - Ergonomic Audit
Lifting heavy equipment. Cleaning was an issue. Innefficent storage.

Results
Observations Link Analysis

Results
Observations REBA
Necessary action to be taken for both tasks Medium Risk Level; preparing food bowls High Risk Level; filling up food barrels

REBA Score 1 23 47 8 10 11 15

Risk Level Negligible Low Medium High Very High

Action Level 0 1 2 3 4

Action None necessary May be necessary Necessary Necessary soon Necessary NOW

Results
Co-Design Focus Groups
Wants
Waist height storage/access Higher sink Drying rack Disinfectant at worktop height Push swing door Set area for each food type More weighting scales Drawer for miscellaneous items

but unfortunately we dont live in an ideal world.

Ideally everything wants to be at waist height,

Do not want

Not keen on a dishwasher Not keen on hand dryer

Conclusions

Workers adopt awkward postures when performing job tasks

working posture; standing (74%), lifting and handling heavy equipment (78%).

Lower back period prevalence MSDs was 65% and 56% for shoulders. High occurrence of manual handling throughout the site.

Conclusions

Limited space is a major negative contributing factor to the manual handling of food Storage of dry food used for food preparation could be improved to reduce;
poor postures and manual handling.

Food bowls, barrels and scales were the most frequently used items in the food preparation room

Conclusions; Design Solutions

sink areas, worktops and storage of cleaning equipment
1. Improved manual handling training 2. Food storage to be in the same room as food preparation 3. Improved storage of cleaning equipment. 4. Swinging doors, with glass panels. 5. Sinks at higher levels. 6. Drying racks for food bowls. 7. Waist height food storage Height adjustable counters, sinks storage solutions

References

DSouza, E., Barraclough, R., Fishwick, D., Curran, A. 2009, Management of occupational health risks in small-animal veterinary practices. Occupational Medicine. 59, 316-322. OSullivan, K., Curran, N. 2008, It Shouldnt Happen to a Vet. Occupational injuries in veterinary practitioners working in Ireland. Ireland Veterinary Journal. 61, 584-587. Pehkonen, I., Miranda, H., Haukka, E., Luukonen, R., Takala, E-P., Ketola, R., Leino-Arjas, P., Riihimaki, H., Viikari-Juntura, E. 2009b, Prospective study on shoulder symptoms among kitchen workers in relation to self-percieved and observed work load. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 66, 416-423. Smith, D.R., Leggat, P.A., Speare, R. 2009, Musculoskeletal disorders and psychosocial risk factors among veterinarians in Queensland, Australia. Australian Veterinarian Journal. 87, 260-265.

Thank you!

Any questions please contact: Esme Shanley esme.shanley@hotmail.co.uk Elaine Yolande Williams e.y.williams2@lboro.ac.uk + 44 (0) 1509 228816 Diane Gyi d.e.gyi@lboro.ac.uk +44 (0) 1509 223043