Advertisement

Evolution of a Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorder Risk Assessment Tool. The Case of CERA

  • Gyula SzabóEmail author
Conference paper
  • 18 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1215)

Abstract

The Composite Ergonomic Risk Assessment (CERA) is a well-known and popular tool in Hungary for estimating work-related musculoskeletal risks. CERA applies the requirements of the EN 1005 standard series and implements and practical solutions like discomfort mapping. The original paper-pencil version is available in Hungarian, English and Russian, and shortened versions are available for different jobs, e.g. office work, waste sorting and also motion-capture-based versions emerged. This paper describes the further development of this specific tool.

Keywords

Composite Ergonomic Risk Assessment Musculoskeletal risk assessment Hungary Ergonomics CERA 

References

  1. 1.
    Gyula, S.: Evaluation and prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in Hungary, In: Ahran, T.Z,, Waldemar, K. (eds.) Advances in Physical Ergonomics and Safety, pp. 195–202. CRC Press - Taylor and Francis Group, Orlando (2012). ISBN 9781439870389Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gyula, S. (ed.): Munkahelyi ergonómiai kockázatok csökkentésének lehetőségei, Budapest, Óbuda University (2013). 242 p. ISBN 9786155460012Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gábor, M., Gyula, S.: Just an other ergonomic tool: the ‘Composite Ergonomic Risk Assessment’, In: Mijović, B., Salopek Čubrić, I., Čubrić, G., Sušić, A. (eds.) Ergonomics 2013: 5th International Ergonomics Conference, Zadar, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. pp. 169–174 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ATP 5–19 Risk Management, Headquarters, Department of the Army (2014). https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/atp5_19.pdf. (utoljára letöltve 2019. július 13.)
  5. 5.
    EN 1005-4:2005+A1:2008 Safety of machinery. Human physical performance. Part 4: Evaluation of working postures and movements in relation to machineryGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    EN 1005-3:2002+A1:2008 Safety of machinery. Human physical performance. Part 3: Recommended force limits for machinery operationGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    EN 1005-2:2003+A1:2008 Safety of machinery. Human physical performance. Part 2: Manual handling of machinery and component parts of machineryGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    EN 1005-5 Safety of machinery - Human physical performance - Part 5: Risk assessment for repetitive handling at high frequencyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gyula, S.: ErgoCapture – a motion capture based ergonomics risk assessment tool, In: Jang, R., Ahran, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics 2014 and the Affiliated Conferences, pp. 313–321. AHFE International, Crakow (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eszter, P.V.: Hulladékválogatás ergonómiai vizsgálata, szakdolgozat a munkavédelmi szakember szakirányú továbbképzési szakon (konzulens Szabó Gyula és Földvári Péter). Óbudai Egyetem, Budapest (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    EN 16710-2:2016 Ergonomics methods – Part 2: A methodology for work analysis to support designGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gyula, S., Edit, N.: Development an office ergonomic risk checklist: composite office ergonomic risk assessment (CERA Office), In: Fujita, Y., Alexander, T., Albolino, S., Tartaglia, R., Bagnara, S. (eds.) - Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018), pp. 590–597. Springer, Cham (2019). Paper: Chapter 64, 8 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bánki Donát Faculty of Mechanical and Safety EngineeringÓbuda UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations