Comparison of LEBA and RULA Based on Postural Load Criteria and Epidemiological Data on Musculoskeletal Disorders

Abstract

Various observational methods have been developed and applied in industrial settings with the aim of preventing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). This study aimed to compare the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), a representative observational method, and the Loading on the Entire Body Assessment (LEBA), a newly developed tool for assessing postural loads and their association with MSDs. The two methods were compared in various categories, including general characteristics, risk levels, postural load criteria, association with MSDs, influencing factors, and inter- and intra-rater reliabilities based on relevant previous studies. The results showed that compared to the RULA, the LEBA was better at evaluating various factors affecting postural loads and assessing musculoskeletal loadings, was better correlated with various postural load criteria, could predict the association with MSDs more accurately, and had higher inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. Based on these comparisons, it seems that the LEBA may be better than the RULA for estimating postural stress and predicting the association with MSDs.