Risk assessments using the Strain Index and the TLV for HAL, Part I: Task and multi-task job exposure classifications.

Background: The Strain Index (SI) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value for Hand Activity Level (TLV for HAL) use different constituent variables to quantify task physical exposures. Similarly, time-weighted-average (TWA), Peak, and Typical exposure techniques to quantify physical exposure from multi-task jobs make different assumptions about each task's contribution to the whole job exposure. Thus, task and job physical exposure classifications differ depending upon which model and technique are used for quantification. This study examines exposure classification agreement, disagreement, correlation, and magnitude of classification differences between these models and techniques. Methods: Data from 710 multi-task job workers performing 3,647 tasks were analyzed using the SI and TLV for HAL models, as well as with the TWA, Typical and Peak job exposure techniques. Physical exposures were classified as low, medium, and high using each model's recommended, or a priori limits. Exposure classification agreement and disagreement between models (SI, TLV for HAL) and between job exposure techniques (TWA, Typical, Peak) were described and analyzed. Results: Regardless of technique, the SI classified more tasks as high exposure than the TLV for HAL, and the TLV for HAL classified more tasks as low exposure. The models agreed on 48.5% of task classifications (kappa = 0.28) with 15.5% of disagreement between low and high exposure categories. Between-technique (i.e., TWA, Typical, Peak) agreement ranged from 61-93% (kappa: 0.16-0.92) depending on whether the SI or TLV for HAL was used. Conclusions: There was disagreement between the SI and TLV for HAL and between the TWA, Typical and Peak techniques. Disagreement creates uncertainty for job design, job analysis, risk assessments, and developing interventions. Task exposure classifications from the SI and TLV for HAL might complement each other. However, TWA, Typical, and Peak job exposure techniques all have limitations. Part II of this article examines whether the observed differences between these models and techniques produce different exposure-response relationships for predicting prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome.