Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Shelagh O'Sullivan
We are introducing PDAs into a process area which previously had no computers at all.
Does anyone have any advice or experience on assessing these?
Thanks in advance.
Shelagh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kieran J Duignan
I'd strongly advise you not to underestimate the risks of musculo-skeletal problems, aka 'cumulative trauma' to the forearms, wrists and hands of people using PDAs frequently.
It's both easier and a lot less expensive to prevent such injuries.
So, do two things
1. train PDA users to conduct their own ergonomic assesment of risks arising from regular use of these tools;
2. provide them with an ergonomic checklist on symptoms and on preventative actions, to complete and return to you monthly.
If you can follow the Guidance accompanying 2002 version of the HSE regulations on using DSE safely, you can find a legal definition of 'user' there. The Guidance also provides useful and well-researched information about managing the risks.
If you can't follow this Guidance, simplest to pay a safety ergonomist (i.e. one who's a Registered Member of The Ergonomics Society) to provide the training and design the checklists with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barrie Etter
Shelagh
PDA's are short duration use equipment. Unless they are expected to have war and peace written on them there should be no problem. Speaking as a user and having written a short story on one, if they are to be used for document writing then use of a dedicated keyboard is a necessity, not a stylus as I did. The only risk problem is subjective to the model to be used and whether there is a back light for the screen? Also what is the expected usage period? What is the PDA to be used for?
Barrie Etter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kieran J Duignan
In relation to Barrie's observations, PDAs may well be designed as 'short duration' equipment.
That doesn't mean they are universally or even commonly used appropriately; after all, vehicles are driven without due regard for safety by thousands of drivers daily.
Risk assessment, as prescribed by the DSE Regs, indicate that foreseeable risks of extended use should be evaluated and controlled appropriately. Users have a legal right to be trained in appropriate use and to have the safety level of their use monitored regularly.
Those who suffer severe RSI injuries will be in a position to claim hefty personal injury damages from employers who neglected to safeguard them; the brief history of damages in the UK and USA for RSI injuries are a warning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Without knowing the process and the tasks, we can't really answwer; however there must be perceived benefits/efficiencies in introducing this new technology?
Have the workforce been consulted? Are you going to conduct trials, is the software suitable etc, are there flamamble atmospheres?
Personally, I find these small hand-helds a realpain. The scren is just too small and close scrutiny of it can distract from hazards going on arouind you. I favour the new 'tablets' which are comparable in size with a clipboard. Pricey, but have all the same functions as a laptop and adaptable to 'wireless' technology.
Sorry for any typos, but this "new and improved" site has put a side menu over my message as I type or try to edit it!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Frank Hallett
Good evening all.
There have been several [sometimes very high-profile] cases of employees suing the employer for injuries received whilst using employer provided DSE.
Not very long after the original version of L26 [DSE Regs] was published an emminent legal bod identified that the time-related criteria offered in the Guidance for determining whether someone was a DSE User or not was too simplistic and that issues such as the need to input high volumes of data accurately against severe time constraints should also figure highly in any such calculation.
On the same line, the original Guidance clearly identifies that portable equipment need not be considered. This has now been overtaken by a recent [last couple of years] HSE Research Report that identified that portable equipment users were clearly at, at least, the same level of risk as fixed equipment users. Sorry, can't locate the Report number at the moment.
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kieran J Duignan
The root problem here is that the employer is dealing with two areas of cutting edge development.
What is plain to see is how the technology is new and designs continue to evolve.
What is not so obvious is that the science of occupational biomechanics is also at a relatively early stage, as you can check for yourself if you read the state of the art manual (third edition, 1999) written by Donald Chaffin and his colleagues.
So, if an employee is injured, s/he or whoever supports his/her claim can reasonably look for an ergonomist or physiologist as an expert witness familiar with the latest scientific research published by Chaffin and his peers. To cut to the chase, they indicate that present understanding of relevant biomechanics warrants a lot of care because of the degree of potential harm to a naive user.
As the pain arising from some RSI injuries is excruciating, the mildest and most reasonable of employees is apt to become dedicated to a sustained campaign to ensure maximum compensation from an employer who has exposed him/her to uncontrolled risks whiche were foreseeable but neglected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.