Designing reasonable accommodation of the workplace: a new methodology based on risk assessment

References

• Bolchini R, Mazzonis G, Noris G. MATCH – Incontro tra domanda e offerta di lavoro per persone disabili. Professionalità 2000;56:37–43.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Justice. A guide to Disability Rights Laws. [Internet]. 2005. Electronic Citation. http://www.ada.gov
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, General Assembly. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol. New York: United Nations; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Shaller EH. Reasonable Accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act – What does it mean? Employee Relat Law J 1991;16(Spring):431–451.
   Google Scholar
• Zolna J, Sanford J, Sabata D, Goldthwaite J. Review of accommodation strategies in the workplace for persons with mobility and dexterity impairments: application to criteria for universal design. Technol Disabil 2007;19:189–198.
   Google Scholar
• Maher CG. A systematic review of workplace interventions to prevent low back pain. Aust J Physiother 2000;46:259–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcatamney L, Nigel Corlett E. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Appl Ergon 1993;24:91–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myette L. Depression in the Workplace. Still a growing concern. Canadian Health Connections 2006;32–34.
   Google Scholar
• Ortolani G. Quanto ci costano i danni da lavoro? DATI INAIL December 2007. Vol. 12, N. 46 Internet www.inail.it. 2007;12:46.
   Google Scholar
• Occhipinti E, Colombini D. Updating reference values and predictive models of the OCRA method in the risk assessment of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs. Ergonomics 2007;50:1727–1739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIOSH, Center for Diseases Control and Prevention. Musculo-skeletal Disorders and Workplace Factors: a critical review of Epidemiologic Evidence for wmsds of the neck, Upper extremity and Low Back. Washington: US Department of Health and Human Services; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Battevi N, Menoni O, Ricci MG, Cairoli S. MAPO index for risk assessment of patient manual handling in hospital wards: a validation study. Ergonomics 2006;49:671–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snook SH, Ciriello VM. The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics 1991;4:1197–1213.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. ICF – International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Ustun TB, Chatterji SJ, Birkenbach J, Kostanjsek N. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF): a new tool for understanding disability and health. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:565–571.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO 11226:2000 Ergonomics – Evaluation of static working postures; ISO 11228-1:2007 Ergonomics – Manual handling – Part 1: Lifting and carrying; ISO 11228-2:2007 Ergonomics – Manual handling – Part 2: pushing and pulling; SO 1228-3:2007 Ergonomics – Manual handling – Part 3: handling of low loads at high frequency. [Internet]. ISO. 2008. Electronic Citation. http://www.iso.org
   Google Scholar
• EN 1005-2:2003 Safety of machinery. Human physical performance. Manual handling of machinery and component parts of machinery; EN 1005-4:2007 Safety of machinery – Human physical performance – Part 4: evaluation of working postures and movements in relation to machinery. EN 1005-5:2007 Safety of machinery – Human physical performance – Part 5: risk assessment for repetitive handling at high frequency. [Internet]. The European Comittee for Standardization. 2008. Electronic Citation. http://www.cen.eu
   Google Scholar
• Italian Law Dlgs 81/2008 Section III. [Internet]. 2008. Electronic Citation. http://www.lavoro.gov.it. Last accessed December, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Italian Law Dlgs 81/2008 Section VII. [Internet]. 2008. Electronic citation. http://www.lavero.gov
   Google Scholar
• Madeleine P, Farina D, Merletti R, Arendt-Nielsen L. Upper trapezius muscle mechanomyographic and electromyographic activity in humans during low force fatiguing and non-fatiguing contractions. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002;87:327–336.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pransky GS, Shaw WS, Franche RL, Clarke A. Disability prevention and communication among workers, physicians, employers, and insurers – current models and opportunities for improvement. Disabil Rehabil 2004;26:625–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer MJ. Assistive Technology: matching device and consumer for successful rehabilitation. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Wessel R, Persson J, Lorentsen O, Andrich R, Ferrario M, Oortwijn W, Van Beekum T, Brodin H, De Witte L. IPPA: individually Prioritized Problem Assessment. Technol Disabil 2004;14:141–145.
   Google Scholar
• Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. The Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): an overview and recent progress. Technol Disabil 2004;14:101–105.
   Google Scholar
• ISO/CD 16840-1 173/SC1/WG 11 Wheelchair seating – part 01 – Terms and Definitions – (proposed change) Definitions of Body and Seat Measures; [Internet]. 2008. Electronic Citation. http://www.iso.org. Last accessed December, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• UNI, UNI EN 1335-1: Office work chair dimensions – Determination of dimensions; [Internet]. 2008. Electronic Citation. www.uni.com/it/. Last accessed December, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• UNI, UNI-EN 1335-2: Office Work Chair – Safety requirements; [Internet]. 2008. Electronic Citation. http://www.uni. com/it/. Last accessed December, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Scherer MJ, Craddock G. Matching Person & Technology (MPT) assessment process. Technol Disabil 2004;14:125–131.
   Google Scholar
• Hermens HJ, Freriks B. Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2000;10:361–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar