Proving the cost benefits of ergonomics interventions

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are costly to businesses - they affect around 1 million people a year and are the most common occupational illness in the UK (HSE figures). However, what is less certain is how to tackle them.

Ergonomics uses scientific and evidence-based knowledge about people - their physical and psychological capabilities and limitations - to design workplaces and work activities so that individuals work better, are less likely to injure themselves or make errors.

Ideally, ergonomics principles need to be included in the design of a new workplace or a production process. But the likelihood is that companies seek the services of an ergonomist/human factors specialist after problems are experienced by the workforce. Even when a proposed ergonomics intervention to solve the problem makes sense, managers often have limited financial resources. They need to be able to persuade their financial controllers that investment in ergonomics interventions will be good for the company’s profitability.

However, a Health & Safety Executive Report published last autumn, Cost Benefit Studies that support tackling Musculoskeletal Disorders gives details of 21 case studies that quantify the costs of ergonomics interventions and the benefits gained through savings or increased productivity and quality of output.

The research was carried out on behalf of the HSE by ergonomics consultancy Hu-Tech Ergonomics. One of the report’s authors Hu-Tech director Andy Nicholson emphasized that the organisations who opened their doors to his research team found the exercise to be very worthwhile.

The case studies varied in complexity and magnitude and represented a range of industries. Most of the case studies involved interventions tackling manual handling and upper limb disorder issues but there were some dealing with lower limb disorders in the medical equipment manufacture and agricultural/horticulture sectors.

Many of the design or organisational solutions could be transferred to other industries and situations e.g. the ergonomics principles that led to changes to a packing line at a food processing factory could apply to a manual assembly line for other goods. Interventions took a variety of forms, from addressing the design of the task, the equipment, workstation and environment, to the organisational context in which the work was done.

Benefits were established by calculating the investment required to bring the intervention about and comparing that cost with the quantifiable benefits of the improved work system. Therefore, it was important to be able to compare the difference in conditions before the intervention and afterwards.

The research team considered changes to sickness absence levels attributed to MSDs, productivity rates, staff turnover and other variables which might apply such as reduced waste of materials and higher quality output.

Where necessary, assumptions were made about certain costs or benefits. Where estimates were made, they are identified as such in the cost benefit analysis. A Chartered Accountant supported the research team by interpreting financial data where necessary and ensuring that calculations were in accordance with good accounting practice.
“To our knowledge this is the first time that the research involving a significant number of case studies has been carried out to demonstrate the quantifiable benefit to organisations when they tackle MSDs in this way,” says Andy Nicholson.

Case studies on MSD solutions

One of the case studies related to the manufacture of medical devices. Workers were attaching ultra-fine sutures, used in ophthalmic surgery, to needles and 40% of them were experiencing shoulder and neck discomfort.

It was identified that the high ergonomics risk could be avoided if the ultra-fine attaching job was performed for only four hours per shift but this would reduce productivity levels, with ensuing costs. Modifications were made to the workstation to improve posture and a camera and small monitor were installed to allow the operator to check the location of the needle without adopting awkward neck postures.

Staff who had not been experienced in the task could now perform it with less training than before. An ergonomic assessment was undertaken of the revised workstation, which showed that operators could work safety for an additional two hours a day without being at significant risk of musculoskeletal pain or injury.

The cost of the modification to the workstations and for purchasing the cameras was £9350, the net intervention benefit was £18,900 and the payback period was 12 months.

Another case study showed how providing manual handling equipment paid for itself rapidly, based on avoiding an emerging pattern of injuries. Prior to the intervention, heavy containers were lifted manually into an ‘overpack’ for transporting offshore. Within the containers was a radioactive source used to look at the density of rock formations below the sea bed. The containers weighed 75kg, 45kg and 10kg, and were lifted into the larger overpack by a single operator. Space constraints meant that posture was poor and there was only room for one person to do the job.

A back injury had already occurred because of this job, and this resulted in six month’s absence for the injured operator. This was the second such injury in a matter of months. The injured personnel were specialists, and were in short supply. The company lost revenue and risked losing its reputation as a good employer.

It was not possible to make the source containers lighter or to change the dimensions of the overpack which would have improved the postures that could be adopted. Instead, a jib crane was fitted permanently to the top of the overpack (see photo) that would take the weight of the containers.

Assessing the risks and fitting jib cranes to all of the containers cost £14,875. The cost of the two incidents was around £45,000 – and more incidents of that type were foreseeable. Assuming that the jib cranes would be used for five years meant that the investment costs would be recouped within just three months.

Calum Smith, Hu-Tech Ergonomics