本研究的目的在於擴充既有的簡易式人因工程檢核表，以提高適用比例。因工作所引起的肌肉骨骼傷害（Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorder，簡稱WMSD）是一項很嚴重的勞工安全衛生問題。為了消除或降低肌肉骨骼傷害，初期的作法是由人因工程專家進行工作現場人因工程改善的輔導，然而人因工程專家的人力有限，無法提供足夠的輔導能量進行全面化的改善，於是遂有簡易式人因工程檢核表(簡易檢核表)的產生。簡易檢核表以繪圖來呈現比較直覺簡單的危害情境及其改善方案，讓勞工可以看圖識意，自主的逐一比對檢核表中各個危害情境，認知與辨識其工作方法或工作場所的危害因子，並加以改善。基於簡易的要求，既有的簡易檢核表只含有26個危害情境，適用比例只有60%。如今重複姓肌肉骨骼傷害防止法案(職安法6.2.1)已經通過，有必要全面施行工作現場的人因工程改善，因此本研究嘗試擴充這個簡易檢核表，期望將適用比例提高至75%。
研究方法包含收集危害情境與歸類危害情境。危害情境的來源有二：一是我們過去所輔導的1014個改善案例、二是國外人因工程指引中的危害情境。歸類危害情境要經過三個階段：初級分類、精細分類、與選擇典型。初級分類是將這些危害情境的主要危害因子依不良工作姿勢、過度施力、高重複動作、振動與組織壓迫等5個危害因子加以初級分類。精細分類是依據人因工程學原理將五個危害因子再加以精細分類，例如不良工作姿勢可以在詳細細分為上身前屈、頭頸後仰、蹲跪等等的危害情境。選擇典型是將精細分類後的許多危害情境中選擇1個（或2個）典型常見的情境。
擴充後的簡易檢核表總共有71個危害情境，適用比例達到88%。檢核表中姿勢不良佔21個危害情境、過度施力20個危害情境、高重複動作17個危害情境、振動衝擊9個危害情境、與組織壓迫4個危害情境。以這個檢核表來套用一個人因工程改善案例集，凡157個改善案例，其適用比例達88%，適用比例明顯提高。以這樣的適用比例相當有助於勞工自主化人因工程改善的推動。

The purpose of this study is to expand the existing easy-to-follow ergonomics checklist aiming at raising its proper rate。Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) is a serious industrial safety and health problem. To eliminating and reducing WMSDs，the early approach was to call ergonomics experts to improve the work methods and workplaces in the field for those at risk. But, because the amount of the experts is limited and therefore cannot fulfill the need of all-inclusive practice for industry, as a consequence, ease-to-follow ergonomics checklists (easy checklists) appeared。Easy checklists is a collection of drawings which depict the hazardous work scenarios and its improvement ideas, so as to enable the workers to recognize and identify the risks embedded in its work and workplaces and its improvements with the easy-to-understand drawings。Because of the prerequisite of easiness, the exixting easy checklist contains only 26 hazardous scenarios， therefore its proper rate is approximately 60%。 Now, the Act of Repetitive work musculoskeletal disorders prevention (OHSAct 6.2.1) has passed，all-inclusive practice of ergonomics improvement is needed，therefore, the purposed of this study is to expand the existing easy checklist， hoping its proper rate can be raised to 75%。
The study method consists of the collecting of hazardous scenarios and the categorizing of hazardous scenarios. The sources of hazardous scenarios were the 1014 improvement cases in the past 5 years in Taiwan, and the cases presented in some foreign ergonomics guidelines。The categorizing of hazardous scenarios consists of 3 stages: initial categorizing, advance categorizing, and selecting typical model. Initial categorizing was to sort all scenarios into 5 categories: namely awkward working posture, force over exertion, repetitive movement, vibration, and tissue compression. Advance categorizing was to further divided each categories into finer sub-divisions, e.g. awkward working posture was sub-divided into trunk flexion, neck extension and squat and stoop and etc. based on ergonomics principle. The selecting typical model was to select 1 or 2 typical scenarios out of a few proper ones from each sub-division.
The expanded easy checklist consists of 71 hazardous scenarios, and the proper rate is raised to 88%。The checklist consists of 21 awkward working posture, 20 force over exertion, 17 repetitive motion, 9 vibration, and 4 tissue compression scenarios. A test of this checklist on 157 improved cases of a previous study resulted in a proper rate of 88%. With such a high rate of easy checklist, it is very helpful in guiding the worker to conduct self-implementation of ergonomic improvement.

[1] Liang Hui-Wen, Labor investigate yearly report, A brief of WMSDs, Industrial safety scientific and technological quarterly, Council Of Labor Affairs Executive Yuan Taiwan 2003, Vol.50, pp.2-6.
[2] Eurogip, Musculoskeletal disorders in Europe-Definitions and statistics, 2007.
[3] W. Monroe Keyserling, Sheryl S. Ulin, 2004, Case Studies of Ergonomic Interventions in Automotive Parts Distribution Operations, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, vol.14, no.4,pp.307-326
[4] Nonfatal Occupational Injuries And Illnesses Requiring Days Away From Work, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2002~2006.
[5] Machi Suka, Katsumi Yoshida, “Musculoskeletal pain in Japan：Prevalence and interference with daily activities”, Japan College of Rheumatology and Springer-Verlag Tokyo, 2005, pp.41-47.
[6] Japan International Center for Occupational Safety and Health, 2005.
Available at: http://www.jniosh.go.jp/icpro/jicosh-old/english/index.html.
[7] Thiehoff R, “Economic Significance Of Work Disability Caused By Musculoskeletal Disorders,” Applied Ergonomics, 2002, vol.10, no.31, pp. 949-956.
[8] Picavet HSJ, “Musculoskeletal Pain In The Netherlands : Prevalences, Consequences And Risk Groups,” Schouten JSAG, 2003,vol.102, no.1, pp. 167-178.
[9] GGuo HR, Chang YC, Yeh WY, Chen CW, Guo YL, “Prevalence Of Musculoskeletal Disorder Among Workers In Taiwan: A Nationwide Study,” J Occup Health, 2004,vol.46, pp. 26-36.
[10] Karjalainen A, Niederlaender E. Occupational Diseases in Europe in 2001. Statistics in focus 2004,pp.1-8.
[11] Chen Y, Turner S, Hussey L, Agius R. A study of work-related musculoskeletal case reports to The Health and Occupation Reporting network (THOR) from 2002 to 2003. Occupational Medicine 2005, Vol.55,pp.268-274.
[12] The United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive National Statistics. The health and Safety executive Statistics,2010.
[13] OSHA, Ergonomics: The Study of Work, U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 2000.
[14] Easy Ergonomics：A Practical Approach for Improving the Workplace, Cal/OSHA Consultation Service, California Department of Industrial Relations,1999.
[15] Niklas Krause et al., “Physical Workload Ergonomic Problems and Incidence of Low Back Injury: A 7.5-Year Prospective Study of San Francisco Transit Operators”, American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2004, vol.46, pp.570-585.
[16] Washington State Department Of Labor And Industries, SAFETY BULLETIN 00-6：Ergonomics Rule, 2000.Retrieved From Http://Www.Pmanet.Org/?Cmd=Main.Content&Id_Content=961783998
[17] Thomas E. Bernard, Washington State WISHA Screening Tool (Modified) Version 2.0 , Washington State Department Of Labor And Industries, 2010.
[18] J Torma-Krajewski, LJ Steiner, R Burgess-Limerick, Ergonomics Processes: Implementation Guide and Tools for the Mining Industry, NIOSH, 2009.
[19] 勞工保險統計年報，民國94年、95年，行政院勞工委員會勞工保險局。
[20] 勞工保險統計月報，民國96年、97年，行政院勞工委員會勞工保險局。
[21] 游志雲，勞動環境人因工程提升計畫，勞工安全衛生研究所，2011。
[22] 勞動部職業安全衛生法，2011，取自：http://laws.mol.gov.tw/Chi/FLAW/FLAWDAT01.asp?lsid=FL015013
[23] 陳志勇、陳協慶，上肢重複性傷害危險因子現場監測技術開發，勞工安全衛生研究所，2002。
[24] 沈庭瑜，事業單位自主化人因工程改善，清華大學碩士論文，2011。
[25] 游志雲，簡易人因工作場所改善技術手冊，2011。
[26] 潘儀聰、游志雲，人因工程現場工作評估及改善流程標準化研究，勞工安全衛生研究所，2010。
[27] 鄭凱銓，簡易式人因工程檢核表之擴充研究，清華大學碩士論文，2014。