Volume 7, Issue 2 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2019)                   Iran J Ergon 2019, 7(2): 1-10 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Sohrabi M S, Mahdavi N. The Effect of Participatory Ergonomic Interventions on the Level of Satisfaction and the Motivating Potential Score of Employees of a Medical Diagnostic Laboratory in Isfahan. Iran J Ergon. 2019; 7 (2) :1-10
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-613-en.html
Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medial Sciences, Hamadan, Iran , nmahdavi1@yahoo.com
Full-Text [PDF 1257 kb]   (2173 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (6111 Views)
Extended Abstract:   (870 Views)
Introduction

The Medical Diagnostic Laboratory is an organization that examines samples taken from the human body (blood, urine, faeces, saliva, etc.) to diagnose and control diseases on the one hand and to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment on the other. Medical diagnostics laboratories are one the important professional centers whose accuracy, authenticity and speed while providing services are closely linked to community health.
They require subtle grip over long periods of time and inappropriate postures during a shift to perform various tests and repeat them (if needed) using computer and laboratory equipment. Some of the staff are also responsible for recording, reporting and delivering test results to customers. For this reason, medical laboratories’ staff are usually exposed to a wide range of environmental, physical, biomechanical, cognitive, and psychosocial factors during a shift.
Therefore, by recognizing the risk factors and correcting ergonomic inappropriate conditions, in addition to providing comfort, decreasing all kinds of ergonomic disorders and injuries, service and productivity should be improved. Since employees have a more complete and accurate understanding of their job, they can offer more appropriate suggestions for ergonomic problems, so to have a strong commitment to maintain and develop effective improvements and interventions; this can result in job satisfaction and higher performance. Thus, one of the most effective ways to achieve ergonomic goals in a laboratory setting can be said to be "participatory ergonomics" or "identifying, evaluating, and proposing ergonomic interventions by employees themselves". It seems that participatory ergonomics programs for staff of medical diagnostics laboratories, who are heavily influenced by ergonomic risk factors in workplace have never been the focus of ergonomics researchers.
Based on the above explanations, this study aimed to investigate the results of implementing a participatory ergonomics program with an organizational ergonomics approach in a medical diagnosis laboratory and the relationship between the performance of participatory ergonomics interventions and the level of job satisfaction and potential of employees.


 

Materials and Methods

This study is a quasi-experimental intervention that was performed among all employees of the governmental medical diagnostic laboratory in Isfahan in 2017. In the implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions, maintenance of physical and mental health of employees was considered and interventions were selected to improve working conditions.

At the beginning of the project process, the support and commitment of the senior management of the clinic to initiate the collaborative ergonomics project in the laboratory was obtained and after joint meetings with staff and laboratory management, the members of the collaborative ergonomics team were selected from among interested, experienced and effective individuals. The team was named "Participatory Ergonomic Intervention Team (PEIT)" and membership cards were issued for all members. Next, three 2-hour PEIT training sessions were organized by the ergonomics facilitator focusing on ergonomics principles, goals of participatory ergonomics interventions, job stress, job satisfaction, employee productivity, familiarity with the tools used and implemented and conducting the project’s stages.
To identify organizational problems, the PEIT team conducted direct workplace visits and conducted group interviews with the staff. At this stage, the level of job satisfaction and job characteristics were measured by the research tools (Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire and Wagner Job Recognition Questionnaire). After finding the main problems related to the project objectives and identifying solutions, the necessary actions were taken and used one month after the implementation of reports and feedback of the staff and management to correct the actions. Finally, after two months, job satisfaction and job characteristics were measured again to assess the impact of the interventions. Some of the solutions were omitted from the program by the manager of the clinic, and some were temporarily suspended after a month of trial because of problems they caused for some staff and needed further investigation.


 

Results

The importance of the organizational problems identified by the PEIT team and the initial and corrective solutions implemented are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.


Comparing the two groups before and after the intervention, only the atmospheric scale had a significant difference (P=0.016) with an increase of 13.64%. Changes in other scales were not significant despite the increase or decrease. Employee satisfaction level increased by 1.56% but this value was not statistically significant (P=0.513).
In the significant analysis of comparison between the two states, before and after the components of job recognition profile, the independence dimension increased significantly (P=0.024) with a 0.48-unit increase. Potential motivational power also showed a significant change (P=0.013) with an increase of 8.4 points.


 

Discussion

This study aimed to implement interventions derived from collaborative ergonomics to increase the level of satisfaction and motivational potential of medical laboratory staff. Despite a significant increase in motivational potential, there was not a significant increase in job satisfaction. This appears to be due to the complexity of the relationships between the technical and social subsystems of the workplace and the multiple impacts of other unknown factors on employees' job satisfaction, productivity, and health.
In the present study, the payment system has the highest rate of dissatisfaction with the designated staff and the level of job satisfaction is about average. Also, the most important intervention by the participatory ergonomics intervention team increased autonomy in decision making, which significantly increased the 0.48 unit of independence in job recognition profile. Unfortunately, due to management constraints, there was no intervention to reduce the fatigue caused by the labor and payment systems. This can also lead to no change in job satisfaction levels for the employees.
Given the dramatic impact of employee motivation on job satisfaction and the coordination of potential motivational power distribution among participants in other previous studies (1), the longer-term effects of interventions on job satisfaction are likely to be determined. The researchers, in line with previous studies (2-7), have seen the positive effect of participatory ergonomics interventions in studios or small organizations, and the use of participatory ergonomics as a suitable tool to implement workplace improvements and motivate employees are recommend.


 

Conclusion

Collaborative ergonomics is one of the most effective ergonomics strategies for making changes to increase health and productivity. Therefore, in this study, participatory ergonomics was used to improve job satisfaction and motivation of employees. The results of this study showed that participatory ergonomics and increased involvement of employees in ergonomics related decisions increase some aspects of job satisfaction and motivation among employees. However, it is recommended that the time remaining to influence the interventions be longer to see more sustainable results.


 

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all those who helped them writing this paper.

 

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.


 

Type of Study: Applicable | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/02/15 | Accepted: 2019/05/26 | ePublished: 2019/11/6

References
1. Haile El, Taye B, Hussen F. Ergonomic workstations and work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the clinical laboratory. Laboratory Medicine. 2012 Nov 1;43(suppl_2):e11-9. [DOI:10.1309/LM7BQ15TTQFBXIS]
2. Wilson J, Haines H. Participatory ergonomics. In: Salvendy G, editor. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2nd Ed: New York: Wiley; 1997. p. 490-513.
3. Saleem JJ, Kleiner BM, Nussbaum MA. Empirical evaluation of training and a work analysis tool for participatory ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2003 Jun 1;31(6):387-96. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-8141(03)00024-6]
4. Kogi K. Facilitating participatory steps for planning and implementing low-cost improvements in small workplaces. Applied ergonomics. 2008 Jul 1;39(4):475-81. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2008.02.017] [PMID]
5. de Jong AM, Vink P. Participatory ergonomics applied in installation work. Applied ergonomics. 2002 Sep 1;33(5):439-48. [DOI:10.1016/S0003-6870(02)00033-9]
6. Kogi K. Participatory methods effective for ergonomic workplace improvement. Applied ergonomics. 2006 Jul 1;37(4):547-54. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2006.04.013] [PMID]
7. Van Eerd D, Cole D, Irvin E, Mahood Q, Keown K, Theberge N, Village J, St. Vincent M, Cullen K. Process and implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions: a systematic review. Ergonomics. 2010 Oct 1;53(10):1153-66. [DOI:10.1080/00140139.2010.513452] [PMID]
8. Van Eerd D, Cole D, Irvin E, Mahood Q, Keown K, Theberge N, Village J, St. Vincent M, Cullen K. Process and implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions: a systematic review. Ergonomics. 2010 Oct 1;53(10):1153-66. [DOI:10.1080/00140139.2010.513452] [PMID]
9. Burgess-Limerick R. Participatory ergonomics: evidence and implementation lessons. Applied Ergonomics. 2018 Apr 1;68:289-93. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2017.12.009] [PMID]
10. Cervai S, Polo F. The impact of a participatory ergonomics intervention: the value of involvement. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2018 Jan 2;19(1):55-73. [DOI:10.1080/1463922X.2016.1274454]
11. Loher BT, Noe RA, Moeller NL, Fitzgerald MP. A meta-analysis of the relation of job characteristics to job satisfaction. Journal of applied psychology. 1985 May;70(2):280. [DOI:10.1037//0021-9010.70.2.280]
12. Anbari Z, Rahmani AR, Abbassinia M, Ahmadnezhad I, Sadeghian M, Asghari M, Ahmadianmoghadam S. The effect of job characteristics model (JCM) on job satisfaction in the automotive industry. Iran Occupational Health. 2014 May 1;11(3).
13. Faraji O, Ramazani AA, Hedaiati P, Aliabadi A, Elhamirad S, Valiee S. Relationship between job characteristics and organizational commitment: a descriptive analytical study. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal. 2015 Nov;17(11). [DOI:10.5812/ircmj.19815]
14. Khosrozadeh M, HOSSEINI M, Kashaninia Z, SEDGHI GN, Amini M. The correlation between organizational justice and job satisfaction among nurses. JHPM. 2016;5(2):10-9.
15. Saghaiyannejad S, Torki S, Bahrami S, Khorasani E. Job characteristic perception in medical record staff of training hospitals. International Journal of Educational and Psychological Researches. 2015 Jul 1;1(3):207-11. [DOI:10.4103/2395-2296.158327]
16. Azadeh AG, Majid H, Ali M, Moghaddam A. Motivating Potential Score (MPS) Determination Using By Job Characteristics And Its Relationship With Job Satisfaction Among Headquarters Staffs Of Tehran University Of Medical Sciences. Payavard Salamat. 2013 Oct 1;7(4).
17. Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Work redesign (Vol. 72). Reading: Addison-Wesley. 1980.
18. Rasmussen CD, Lindberg NK, Ravn MH, Jørgensen MB, Søgaard K, Holtermann A. Processes, barriers and facilitators to implementation of a participatory ergonomics program among eldercare workers. Applied ergonomics. 2017 Jan 1;58:491-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.08.009] [PMID]
19. Rasmussen CD, Holtermann A, Jørgensen MB, Ørberg A, Mortensen OS, Søgaard K. A multi-faceted workplace intervention targeting low back pain was effective for physical work demands and maladaptive pain behaviours, but not for work ability and sickness absence: stepped wedge cluster randomised trial. Scandinavian journal of public health. 2016 Aug;44(6):560-70. [DOI:10.1177/1403494816653668] [PMID]
20. Morag I, Luria G. A group-level approach to analyzing participative ergonomics (PE) effectiveness: The relationship between PE dimensions and employee exposure to injuries. Applied ergonomics. 2018 Apr 1;68:319-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2017.12.014] [PMID]
21. Lim CS, Rafee BM, Anita AR, Shamsul AS, Noor SM. Effectiveness of a Participatory Ergonomics Intervention to Improve Musculoskeletal Health: A Solomon Four-Group Study Among Manufacturing Industry Workers in Selangor, Malaysia. InErgonomics in Caring for People 2018 (pp. 169-179). Springer, Singapore. [DOI:10.1007/978-981-10-4980-4_22]
22. Motamedzade M, Shahnavaz H, Kazemnejad A, Azar A, Karimi H. The impact of participatory ergonomics on working conditions, quality, and productivity. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2003 Jan 1;9(2):135-47. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2003.11076559] [PMID]
23. Tompa E, Dolinschi R, De Oliveira C, Amick BC, Irvin E. A systematic review of workplace ergonomic interventions with economic analyses. Journal of occupational rehabilitation. 2010 Jun 1;20(2):220-34. [DOI:10.1007/s10926-009-9210-3] [PMID]
24. Nagamachi M. Requisites and practices of participatory ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 1995 May 1;15(5):371-7. [DOI:10.1016/0169-8141(94)00082-E]
25. Cole DC, Theberge N, Dixon SM, Rivilis I, Neumann WP, Wells R. Reflecting on a program of participatory ergonomics interventions: a multiple case study. Work. 2009 Jan 1;34(2):161-78.
26. Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, Mahood Q. Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Applied ergonomics. 2008 May 1;39(3):342-58. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2007.08.006] [PMID]
27. Driessen MT, Groenewoud K, Proper KI, Anema JR, Bongers PM, van der Beek AJ. What are possible barriers and facilitators to implementation of a Participatory Ergonomics programme?. Implementation Science. 2010 Dec;5(1):64. [DOI:10.1186/1748-5908-5-64] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Burgess-Limerick R, Dennis G, Straker L, Pollock C, Leveritt S, Johnson S. Participative ergonomics for manual tasks in coal mining. InProceedings of the Queensland Mining Industry Health and Safety Conference, Townsville, Australia 2005 Aug (pp. 14-17).
29. Dale AM, Jaegers L, Welch L, Gardner BT, Buchholz B, Weaver N, Evanoff BA. Evaluation of a participatory ergonomics intervention in small commercial construction firms. American journal of industrial medicine. 2016 Jun;59(6):465-75. [DOI:10.1002/ajim.22586] [PMID] [PMCID]
30. Jaegers L, Dale AM, Weaver N, Buchholz B, Welch L, Evanoff B. Development of a program logic model and evaluation plan for a participatory ergonomics intervention in construction. American journal of industrial medicine. 2014 Mar;57(3):351-61. [DOI:10.1002/ajim.22249] [PMID] [PMCID]
31. Haims MC, Carayon P. Theory and practice for the implementation of 'in-house', continuous improvement participatory ergonomic programs. Applied ergonomics. 1998 Dec 4;29(6):461-72. [DOI:10.1016/S0003-6870(98)00012-X]
32. Carrivick PJ, Lee AH, Yau KK, Stevenson MR. Evaluating the effectiveness of a participatory ergonomics approach in reducing the risk and severity of injuries from manual handling. Ergonomics. 2005 Jun 22;48(8):907-14. [DOI:10.1080/0014013042000327698] [PMID]
33. Gjessing CC, Schoenborn TF, Cohen A. Participatory ergonomic interventions in meatpacking plants.
34. Mijatovic D. Handbook on Participatory Ergonomics. Ontario, Canada: Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers Inc; 2005.
35. Weiss DJ, Dawis RV, England GW. Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Minnesota studies in vocational rehabilitation. 1967. [DOI:10.1037/t08880-000]
36. Arghami S, Noori Parkestani H, Noorian R. The Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Job Satisfaction in the Gas Company. Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering. 2015 Jun 15;2(1):37-44.
37. Doostkam K, Rohollahi AA. The effect of psychological ownership on Job satisfaction among airports supply chain staff. Iran Occupational Health. 2016;13(3):54-62.
38. Golzarpour M, Ghaedamini Harouni GR, Sajjadi H, Vameghi M. the relationship between child health and job satisfaction of parents among staff of education system in mashhad city. the journal of urmia nursing and midwifery faculty. 2016;13(12):1059-70.
39. Tavakkoli S, Asaadi MM, Pakpour AH, Hajiaghababaei M. Environmental psychology effects on mental health job satisfaction and personal well being of nurses. Iranian journal of psychiatry. 2015 Jun;10(3):158.
40. Egan M, Bambra C, Thomas S, Petticrew M, Whitehead M, Thomson H. The psychosocial and health effects of workplace reorganisation. 1. A systematic review of organisational-level interventions that aim to increase employee control. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 2007 Nov 1;61(11):945-54. [DOI:10.1136/jech.2006.054965] [PMID] [PMCID]
41. Kabir MJ, Heidari A, Etemad K, Gashti AB, Jafari N, Honarvar MR, Ariaee M, Lotfi M. Job burnout, job satisfaction, and related factors among health care workers in Golestan Province, Iran. Electronic physician. 2016 Sep;8(9):2924-30. [DOI:10.19082/2924] [PMID] [PMCID]
42. Maciel R. Participatory ergonomics and organizational change. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 1998 Nov 1;22(4-5):319-25. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-8141(97)00084-X]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


© 2021 All Rights Reserved | Iranian Journal of Ergonomics

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb | Co-Publisher: Farname Inc.