Core Methods for Significantly Preventing Soft-Tissue Injuries
Soft-tissue injuries are prevalent, persistent and pernicious, and result in significant direct costs and pain and lost productivity, as well as hampered workflow.
- By Robert Pater
- Jun 11, 2024
Soft-tissue injuries are prevalent, persistent and pernicious, and result in significant direct costs and pain and lost productivity, as well as hampered workflow. These injuries are also known as strains/sprains, musculoskeletal disorders, repetitive motion injuries, repetitive strain injuries, cumulative trauma disorders, etc. You can see the impacts of these injuries through lost-time and cost reports, such as the Traveler’s Insurance “Injury Impact Report” and Liberty Mutual’s “Workplace Safety Index.” This unacceptably steady state has continued despite sincere interest, commitment and pledges on the part of safety leaders to reduce these injuries.
However, with all that said, we’ve seen numerous companies dramatically reduce the incidence of soft-tissue injuries. I’m referring to reports of up to 85 percent of larger organizations that previously thought they’d “tried everything.” What those companies were actually doing was attempting variations on the same theme: Common “solutions” tended to strongly emphasize workplace controls — the aspect of ergonomics that focuses on adjustments and modifications to tools, workstations, environment, etc. to make these safer and reduce cumulative trauma. While a well and good initial step, it’s not enough.
Here’s what has made considerable, substantive improvements: Start by redefining “ergonomics” as “improving the fit between people and their tasks”, rather than merely “redesigning or adapting tools and workstations to fit the work and workers.” This alternate cast goes well beyond word-splitting hairs.
That’s because an “improving fit” mindset can expand to incorporate three methods:
1. Fitting tasks “closer” to people by redesigning, modifying and purchasing external tools where possible (the “traditional” approach to ergonomics mentioned above.) While I agree this should be the first method applied, this doesn’t always work. For example, where it’s not cost-effective in an older plant, or where capital budgeting doesn’t allow for this now, or where people are exposed to sources of cumulative trauma in uncontrollable environments (in the field, in the elements, at home or off work) only enlisting this strategy is like trying to help someone significantly lose weight by monitoring and controlling what they eat at work while ignoring what they consume at home.
This article originally appeared in the June 2024 issue of Occupational Health & Safety.