BPESP as an ergonomic decision-making tool: hybrid assessment, engineering controls, and prospective economic analysis in a manual packaging workstation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v4i.534Palavras-chave:
ergonomics; occupational safety; artificial intelligence; productivity; risk preventionResumo
Introduction. Ergonomic assessment has preventive value when its findings are translated into technically justified, documented, and economically assessable control decisions. Objective. To analyze the application of the Business Plan Ergonomic Safety Program in a manual packaging workstation in the manufacturing sector, from quantitative risk identification to the implementation of engineering controls and their ex ante economic assessment, and to identify its preventive, productivity-related, and legal implications. An applied, technical-documentary case study was conducted. The baseline assessment combined task inspection, Rapid Entire Body Assessment, the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation, biomechanical modeling, and artificial intelligence-assisted postural analysis. Post-implementation follow-up was descriptive. The economic analysis used an adapted break-even approach, while the legal analysis examined the preventive duty, evidence of due diligence, and applicable social protection mechanisms. Results. The original task involved lifting 65-pound boxes 1,040 times per shift, representing an accumulated load of approximately 31.2 metric tons. The assessment identified high ergonomic risk and supported mechanization through conveyors, vacuum-assisted handling, and mechanized palletizing. The documented capital investment was USD 130,045; the break-even analysis indicated that this investment was equivalent to the average direct cost of approximately 4.06 occupational strain claims based on the reference used. Conclusion. BPESP can integrate ergonomic assessment, engineering, follow-up, and economic decision-making while also generating traceability relevant to preventive due diligence, although the absence of a quantitative post-intervention reassessment limits estimation of residual risk.
Downloads
Referências
Bazaluk, O., Tsopa, V., Cheberiachko, S., Deryugin, O., Radchuk, D., Borovytskyi, O., & Lozynskyi, V. (2023). Ergonomic risk management process for safety and health at work. Frontiers in Public Health, 11, 1253141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1253141
Camargo Salinas, M. A., Miranda Arandia, N. Y., & Suárez Pérez, J. F. (2024). Estado del arte en evaluación de métodos de detección automatizada de riesgo ergonómico en entornos de trabajo industrial [State of the art in the evaluation of automated ergonomic risk detection methods in industrial work environments]. Gestión de la Seguridad y la Salud en el Trabajo, 6(2), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.15765/jzdrd646
Chatzis, T., Konstantinidis, D., & Dimitropoulos, K. (2022). Automatic ergonomic risk assessment using a variational deep network architecture. Sensors, 22(16), 6051. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22166051
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. § 801(b)(2).
Danylak, S., Walsh, L. J., & Zafar, S. (2024). Measuring ergonomic interventions and prevention programs for reducing musculoskeletal injury risk in the dental workforce: A systematic review. Journal of Dental Education, 88(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13403
El-Helaly, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence and occupational health and safety, benefits and drawbacks. La Medicina del Lavoro, 115(2), e2024014. https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v115i2.15835
Fisher, E., Flynn, M. A., Pratap, P., & Vietas, J. A. (2023). Occupational safety and health equity impacts of artificial intelligence: A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(13), 6221. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20136221
Franklin, M., Graybeal, P., & Cooper, D. (2019). Principles of accounting, volume 2: Managerial accounting. OpenStax, Rice University. https://openstax.org/details/books/principles-managerial-accounting
Hignett, S., & McAtamney, L. (2000). Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Applied Ergonomics, 31(2), 201–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(99)00039-3
Hulshof, C. T. J., Pega, F., Neupane, S., Colosio, C., Daams, J. G., Kc, P., Kuijer, P. P. F. M., Mandic-Rajcevic, S., Masci, F., van der Molen, H. F., Nygård, C. H., Oakman, J., Proper, K. I., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. (2021). The effect of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors on osteoarthritis of hip or knee and selected other musculoskeletal diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. Environment International, 150, 106349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106349
Larez, F., & Maribao, Y. (2025a). Integration of artificial intelligence and traditional methods for ergonomic risk assessment. e-Revista Multidisciplinaria del Saber, 3, e-RMS07102025. https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v3i.287
Larez, F., & Maribao, Y. (2025b). BPESP as a tool for ergonomic management: Technical and legal evidence in industrial environments. e-Revista Multidisciplinaria del Saber, 3, e-RMS05112025. https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v3i.291
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (1997). Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors: A critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back (DHHS [NIOSH] Publication No. 97-141). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nygaard, N. B., Thomsen, G. F., Rasmussen, J., Skadhauge, L. R., & Gram, B. (2022). Ergonomic and individual risk factors for musculoskeletal pain in the ageing workforce. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 1975. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14386-0
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1).
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2001). Ergonomics program: Final rule; removal. Federal Register, 66, 20403. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/federalregister/2001-04-23
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2007, April 11). Ergonomic Hazard Alert Letter Follow-up Policy (OSHA Directive CPL 02-00-144). U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/cpl-02-00-144
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2020, April 14). Field operations manual (OSHA Directive CPL 02-00-164). U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/cpl-02-00-164
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). Estimated costs of occupational injuries and illnesses and estimated impact on a company’s profitability worksheet (Safety Pays). U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved July 02, 2026, from https://www.osha.gov/safetypays/estimator-text
Secretary of Labor v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc., OSHRC Docket No. 89-0265 (1997). https://www.oshrc.gov/wp-content/uploads/89-0265.pdf
Scataglini, S., Fontinovo, E., Khafaga, N., Khan, M. U., Khan, M. F., & Truijen, S. (2025). A systematic review of the accuracy, validity, and reliability of markerless versus marker camera-based 3D motion capture for industrial ergonomic risk analysis. Sensors, 25(17), 5513. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25175513
Social Security Administration. (2024). Annual Statistical Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program, 2024: Beneficiaries who have filed for workers’ compensation or public disability benefits. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2024/sect02.html
Texas Labor Code §§ 406.002, 406.033. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/SDocs/LABORCODE.pdf
Waters, T. R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., & Fine, L. J. (1993). Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics, 36(7), 749–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139308967940
Yunus, M. N. H., Jaafar, M. H., Mohamed, A. S. A., Azraai, N. Z., & Hossain, M. S. (2021). Implementation of kinetic and kinematic variables in ergonomic risk assessment using motion capture simulation: A review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8342. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168342
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2026 Felipe Larez, Yéssika Maribao

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Las publicaciones en acceso abierto de e-RMS están protegidas por derechos reservados y se rigen por la Licencia Pública Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Se permite el uso no comercial de este material, con atribuciones al autor. No se permiten derivados de esta versión.






