Comparison of OWAS, RULA and REBA for assessing potential work-related musculoskeletal disorders

This study compared three representative observational methods for assessing musculoskeletal loadings: Ovako Working Posture Analysis System (OWAS), Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). The comparison was based on 209 cases of upper-body musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) diagnosed by medical doctors. The most awkward/stressful posture in each participant's tasks was assessed using these techniques. Postural loadings were rated more highly by the RULA than by the OWAS and REBA (p < 0.01). The chi-square test and logistic regression analysis showed that only RULA grand score and action level, and REBA action level were associated with MSD work-relatedness (p < 0.01, p < 0.05, and p < 0.05, respectively). The percentage concordant values of the logistic model for the RULA grand score and action level were 52.4% and 44.8%, respectively, while the percentage concordant value for the REBA action level was 22.1%. Therefore, the RULA may be the best system for estimating the postural loads and work-relatedness of MSDs. Relevance to industry: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are the leading cause of workplace disability in the developed countries. For preventing the disorders, quantification of musculoskeletal loads is required.