Comparison of ACGIH lifting threshold limit values to validated low back disorder lifting assessment methods outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Work-related low back pain (LBP) increases the workforce disability and healthcare costs. This study evaluated the LBD risk level associated with handling the ACGIH TLVs in lifting tasks corresponding to various horizontal and vertical zones. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the low-risk ACGIH TLV to risk outcomes from various validated lifting assessment methods, including the OSU LBD Risk Model, NIOSH Lifting Equation, and LiFFT. METHODS: Twenty-four subjects were recruited for this study to perform various lifting conditions. The various ergonomic assessment methods were then used to obtain the risk assessment outcomes. RESULTS: The selected assessment methods showed that the ACGIH-defined TLVs are associated with less than high-risk for LBD for all the assessed tasks. The findings showed a moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.477) among the various assessment methods risk outcomes. The highest correlation (ρ= 0.886) was observed between the NIOSH Lifting Equation and LiFFT methods risk assessment outcomes. CONCLUSION: The findings showed that ACGIH-defined TLVs possesses less than high-risk for LBD. The outcomes of the selected ergonomic assessment methods moderately agree to each other.

Accuracy of the SWAY Mobile Cognitive Assessment Application.

BACKGROUND: Mobile electronic devices have become integral tools in addressing the need for portable assessment of cognitive function following neurocognitive/motor injury. SWAY Medical, Inc., has employed mobile device motion-based technology in the SWAY Cognitive Assessment (SWAY CA) application to assess cognitive function. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether the SWAY CA application (reaction time, impulse control and inspective time) was able to reliably operate on different mobile devices and operating systems (iOS, Android). The study further sought to assess the validity of the SWAY CA application against the FDA approved ImPACT QT mobile device application. STUDY DESIGN: Original Research, observational study of validity. METHODS: 88 healthy, young adults, 18 to 48 years (mean= 22.09 ± sd=4.47 years) completed four, randomized and counter-balanced, reaction time tests (2- SWAY RT, 2- ImPACT QT) using different operating systems (iOS, Android) of 4 randomly assigned mobile devices. RESULTS: ANOVAs reported the SWAY CA application (reaction time, impulse control, inspection time) operated reliably with iPhone 6S, Samsung Galaxy S9, and iPad Pro 5 mobile devices (p > 0.05), respectively. Google Pixel 3 reliability with SWAY CA application remains undetermined. SWAY CA simple reaction motion measures were in agreement (r = -0.46 to 0.22, p ≤ 0.05) with several ImPACT QT reaction time measures. SWAY CA impulse control and inspection time measures are weakly correlated (r = -0.25 to -0.46, p ≤ 0.05) with five ImPACT QT reaction time measures. CONCLUSION: The motion-based SWAY CA mobile device application appears to reliably operate when being administered on different mobile devices and software operating systems. Furthermore, the SWAY CA application appears to be comparable to the ImPACT QT and serve as a valid tool for assessing reaction time measures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2b (observational study of validity).