3.1.1. Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing

Table 3 summarises the studies related to this category.



Crop and Animal Production, Hunting and Related Service Activities

The RULA method has been used for the ergonomic assessment of farm workers working on various crops or specific tasks.

In fruit crops, Thetkathuek et al. [38] applied it together with the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire and a tasks checklist. In total, 861 farm workers took part in Thailand. They showed that men with more than 10 years of experience had their necks most affected and women their lower backs. In blueberry harvesting, Kim et al. [36] used it in conjunction with the Borg CR10 scale, electromyography, the Cumulative Trauma Disorders (CTD) index and NIOSH (National Occupational Institute for Safety and Health). They concluded that the risk was reduced by carrying out the work with the help of machinery.

Three studies were carried out on oil palm harvesting. In two of them, other ergonomic tools were also used. In the first study, 109 workers were assessed, while three and seven were assessed in the other two. The results for all three showed that most workers were exposed to a very high level of risk when carrying out the tasks. Changes were required as a matter of urgency [46–48].

Three other studies were conducted into rice cultivation. Pal and Dhara [37] studied 166 workers in India. They also used other methods such as REBA (The Rapid Entire Body Assessment), OWAS (The Ovako Working Analysis System), etc. The results showed the frequent appearance of MSD, with the most affected areas being the lumbar, hip, wrist, shoulder and knee regions. In the other two studies, farm workers were assessed when using machinery during the tasks: in one case using threshing machines and in the other using a cultivator. For both, it was concluded that there was a high risk of MSD [44,49].

In olive cultivation, Pardo-Ferreira et al. [40] assessed farm workers performing pruning with a chainsaw. Other methods were also used, in particular REBA and OWAS. They determined that change was needed, as workers were exposed to ergonomic risks.

Another series of studies was conducted using the RULA method to assess different tasks. Jain et al. [39,41] carried out two studies focusing on manual tasks, also using a questionnaire. The first concluded the frequent development of musculoskeletal disorders in workers; this coincided with the second, which indicated a score (RULA) of 5 or above for 92% of the workers.

Vazquez-Cabrera [45] investigated farm workers during crop stringing. They simulated different ways to do it in a laboratory according to the height, crop weight and guides used. Among other findings, heights of 1.4 m were shown to be acceptable, with 1.2 and 1.6 m heights also being possible. Weights over 2 kg were found not to be suitable.

Finally, some authors set out specific objectives. Kong et al. [42] used RULA to assess Korean farm workers as they adopted 96 postures. The aim was to apply RULA along with the REBA, OWAS and ALLA (Agricultural Lower Limb Assessment) methods in order to compare the last one with the previous three, proving it to be the most correct. Di Gironimo et al. [50] set out to redesign and improve the ergonomics of an agricultural tractor's driver space. In addition to RULA, this was done using Catia V5 software (as well as other ergonomic tools) to design a 3D model. Some devices in the cab needed to be corrected to provide better ergonomics.
