|
| |
REVIEWING
STANDARDS FOR
VIBRATION TRAUMA |
International
rules take the lead
|
| By Thomas C. Jetzer, M.D., MPH, FACOEM
and Douglas D. Reynolds, Ph.D. 
|
| Employee health problems caused by vibration to the hands and arms appear to be a new
issue but has existed since the inception of power tools. Today, vibration is one of the
most well-documented ergonomic problems, with measurability similar to noise exposure.
Symptoms of vibration (called Hand/Arm Vibration Syndrome-HAVS) usually show up as a
combination of finger blanching, particularly in response to cold, and progressive finger
numbness. This was first defined by the Taylor-Pelmear Classification System (Table 1) and
later refined by the Stockholm Vibration Syndrome Classification System (Table 2). Unlike
noise exposure, it has been difficult to provide protection against vibration. Power
chainsaws, the first tools to draw attention to vibration-related trauma to the upper
extremity, have undergone design improvements. But percussion and other power tools have
lagged behind in reducing worker exposure to vibration. |
Table 1 Stage Assessment for Hand-arm Vibration
Syndrome(1) (Tayler-Pelmear
Classification System)
 |
Table 2 Stockholm (Revised) Hand-arm Vibration
Syndrome Classification System(1)
 |
Confusion with carpal tunnel
In the U.S., unlike countries in Europe and Asia, we have been slow to recognize vibration
trauma, and have usually confused it with carpal tunnel syndrome. Most state and federal
laws do not consider hand/arm vibration syndrome, or 'white finger disease,' to be a
specific entity. It certainly has not been widely recognized by the legal community, which
in litigation has usually lumped the malady under the category of carpal tunnel. It's only
in the past five to ten years that workers' comp suits have made vibration trauma a larger
issue in the U.S. Interestingly, growing awareness of the problem in this country emerged
often from product liability suits against the tool manufacturers. While there were
flurries of research into vibration trauma during the '70s, no specific conclusions were
drawn. NIOSH, however, did issue a Criteria Document that outlined the history of hand/arm
vibration syndrome problems.In 1986, the International Standards Organization (ISO),
which is comprised of member countries primarily from North America, Europe and Asia,
passed ISO Standard 5349. The same year, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
passed ANSI Standard S3.34. These standards specified procedures for measuring and
quantifying vibration transmitted to the hand, and recommended guidelines for assessment
and control. They implied that less vibration along with less time exposure would lead to
less likelihood of developing HAVS. Not surprisingly, this caused employers to address the
problem either by restricting the amount of time using the vibrating tool or switching to
tools that operated with less vibration.
Efforts to develop personal protective equipment as a solution to vibration have been
spotty. Initially, the emphasis was on protecting the hand from cold, i.e. wearing gloves.
Then a series of viscoelastic materials, basically Sorbothane and Viscolas, were used in
gloves to address vibration specifically. While these gloves did provide some protection
against impact and vibration in the high vibration frequencies, they provided little or no
protection in the lower and middle frequencies. Also, these gloves were so bulky and/or
stiff that they required extra grip exertion in order to control the tool. This is
ergonomically undesirable and can actually increase other hand problems, such as carpal
tunnel syndrome and tendonitis. This problem is especially true with lower quality gloves. |
Protection standards abroad
The European countries recognized quickly that the anti-vibration gloves on the market
really did not meet the criteria needed for protection. On that basis, in the early 1990s,
an ISO Committee working group developed ISO Standard 10819 that was adopted by all
participating countries. This standard defines the performance criteria for anti-vibration
gloves and puts rather stringent requirements in both mid- and high-frequency transmission
for certification as an anti-vibration glove. Essentially, the standard says that at the
mid frequencies, the glove cannot transmit more than 100 percent of the vibration, and at
high frequencies it cannot transmit more than 60 percent.At the time, the consensus was
that the standard would be difficult to meet, and people in the anti-vibration field
worried whether it would ever be possible to develop personal protective equipment that
could provide significant protection. The good news for the worker is that recent
technological developments have resulted in new glove designs that are meeting the
standard.
A point of interest-and one that may change the scope of concern in this country-is the
NIOSH document 97-141 on cumulative trauma and work exposure. Issued in July 1997, this
document essentially defined the relationship of various musculoskeletal injuries as they
relate to the workplace. It clearly states 'there is strong evidence' that the use of
vibrating tools causes hand/arm vibration syndrome.
Document 97-141 notes that vibration can also be a significant factor in developing
carpal tunnel syndrome. In fact, in the Ergonomic Guidelines for the Meat Packing
Industry, in 1991, OSHA 3123 defined vibration as a significant causative factor in upper
extremity accumulative trauma. However, NIOSH 97-141 goes much further with deeper
literature support. These findings are very important in that people in this country who
use vibrating tools may finally have support not only for the more rare 'white finger'
syndrome, but for the carpal tunnel syndrome with which the public is more familiar. There
does seem to be a rising awareness that vibration is a causative problem for compensable
injuries. |
Prepare now for new standards
It's estimated that in the U.S. between two and four million people are exposed to some
level of hand/arm vibration on the job.It is anticipated that a proposed new ANSI
ergonomic standard will address issues associated with hand-arm vibration in a more
comprehensive manner. The point is, we can expect public awareness of hand/arm vibration
syndrome to continue to grow here in the U.S. And American industry should prepare now to
meet future standards and awareness the way overseas companies have been trying to-via
decreased tool vibration or increased personal protection. |
| Thomas C. Jetzer, M.D., MPH, FACOEM of
Occupational Medicine Consultants, Ltd. is a member of the USA Technical Advisory Group to
ISO/TC108/SC4, Human exposure to mechanical vibration and shock. He can be reached at:
(612) 280-7771.Douglas D. Reynolds, Ph.D.,
is professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, and
chairman of the USA Technical Advisory Group to ISO/TC 108/SC4. He can be reached at:
(702) 895-3807. |
|