112 acil sağlık hizmetlerinde çalışma duruşlarının ergonomik risk değerlendirmesi
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2023
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Öngörülemeyen görevler, rastgele talepler ve acil sağlık hizmetleri (ASH) gibi değişken ortamlar içeren mesleklerde ergonomik risk faktörlerini değerlendirmek zordur. Bu çalışma, Pisagor bulanık kümeler tabanlı Pisagor Bulanık AHP (PB-AHP) ve Pisagor Bulanık WASPAS (PB-WASPAS) metodolojisi ile ergonomik bir risk değerlendirme yöntemi seçme problemini ele almaktadır. Literatürden elde edilen aday kriterler üzerinde beş farklı isimsiz uzmana danışılarak yöntem seçim kriterleri elde edilmiştir. Karar kriterlerinin belirlenmesinin ardından beş uzmandan kriterleri değerlendirmeleri kriter-alternatif puanlama konusundaki görüşlerini belirtmeleri istenmiştir. Yöntem seçimi için iki aşamalı bir yöntem önerilmiştir. İlk aşamada kriterlerin ağırlığını belirlemek için PB-AHP, ikinci aşamasında ise OWAS, RULA ve REBA alternatiflerini sıralamak için PB-WASPAS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışma sonuçları REBA'nın (0.66) acil sağlık hizmetleri için en uygun gözlem yöntemi olduğunu göstermiştir. Çıktı sonuçları RULA (0,59) ve OWAS (0,55) olarak sıralanmıştır. Önerilen hibrit modelden elde edilen en iyi alternatif ile İstanbul İl Ambulans Servisi istasyonlarında gerçek vaka çalışması yapılmıştır. Analiz edilen görevler için elde edilen REBA Eylem Seviyesinin; D1: 4 (%100), D2: 4 (% 89,6), D3: 4 (% 96,6), D4: 4 (%100), D5: 4 (%100) seviyesinde olduğu hesaplanmıştır. Bu çalışma duruşlarının risk düzeyi 'Çok Yüksek', eylem düzeyi ise 'Acil Önlem Gerekli' kategorisindedir. ASH çalışanlarının kas iskelet sistemi yakınmalarına ilişkin anket sonucunda yakınmaların bel, sırt, boyun ve omuz bölgesinde yoğunlaştığı görülmüştür.
It is difficult to evaluate ergonomic risk factors in occupations with unpredictable tasks, random demands, and variable settings such as emergency medical services (EMS). This study deals with the problem of selecting an ergonomic risk-evaluation method with Pythagorean Fuzzy Sets based Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP (PF AHP) and Pythagorean Fuzzy WASPAS (PF-WASPAS) methodology. The method selection criteria were obtained by consulting five different anonymous experts on the candidate criteria obtained from the literature. After the decision criteria were determined, five experts were asked to evaluate the criteria and express their opinions on criteria-alternative scoring. A two-stage method is proposed for method selection. In the first stage, PB-AHP was used to determine the weight of the criteria, and in the second stage, the PB-WASPAS method was used to rank the OWAS, RULA and REBA alternatives. Study results showed that REBA (0.66) is the most appropriate observation method for emergency health services. Output results are listed as RULA (0.59) and OWAS (0.55). A real case study was conducted at Istanbul Provincial Ambulance Service stations with the best alternative obtained from the proposed hybrid model. The REBA Action Level achieved for the analyzed tasks; D1: 4 (100%), D2: 4 (89.6%), D3: 4 (96.6%), D4: 4 (100%), D5: 4 (100%) were calculated. The risk level of these work postures is 'Very High' and the action level is in the 'Immediate Action Required' category. As a result of the questionnaire regarding the musculoskeletal system complaints of ASH workers, it was seen that the complaints were concentrated in the waist, back, neck and shoulder regions.
It is difficult to evaluate ergonomic risk factors in occupations with unpredictable tasks, random demands, and variable settings such as emergency medical services (EMS). This study deals with the problem of selecting an ergonomic risk-evaluation method with Pythagorean Fuzzy Sets based Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP (PF AHP) and Pythagorean Fuzzy WASPAS (PF-WASPAS) methodology. The method selection criteria were obtained by consulting five different anonymous experts on the candidate criteria obtained from the literature. After the decision criteria were determined, five experts were asked to evaluate the criteria and express their opinions on criteria-alternative scoring. A two-stage method is proposed for method selection. In the first stage, PB-AHP was used to determine the weight of the criteria, and in the second stage, the PB-WASPAS method was used to rank the OWAS, RULA and REBA alternatives. Study results showed that REBA (0.66) is the most appropriate observation method for emergency health services. Output results are listed as RULA (0.59) and OWAS (0.55). A real case study was conducted at Istanbul Provincial Ambulance Service stations with the best alternative obtained from the proposed hybrid model. The REBA Action Level achieved for the analyzed tasks; D1: 4 (100%), D2: 4 (89.6%), D3: 4 (96.6%), D4: 4 (100%), D5: 4 (100%) were calculated. The risk level of these work postures is 'Very High' and the action level is in the 'Immediate Action Required' category. As a result of the questionnaire regarding the musculoskeletal system complaints of ASH workers, it was seen that the complaints were concentrated in the waist, back, neck and shoulder regions.
Açıklama
Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Ana Bilim Dalı
Anahtar Kelimeler
Endüstri ve Endüstri Mühendisliği, Industrial and Industrial Engineering, Halk Sağlığı
