Volume 13, Issue 4 (3-2026)
J Environ Health Eng 2026, 13(4): 475-493 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Nazari M, Sobhan Ardakani S. Investigating the relationship between compliance with ergonomic principles, job fatigue, and employee efficiency in the Kermanshah Stone Crusher Mine. J Environ Health Eng 2026; 13 (4) :475-493
URL: http://jehe.abzums.ac.ir/article-1-1152-en.html
URL: http://jehe.abzums.ac.ir/article-1-1152-en.html
1- M.Sc. in Health, Safety & Environment, Department of the Environment, Ha.C., Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran
2- Ph.D. in Environmental Science, Professor in Environmental Science, Department of the Environment, Ha.C., Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran ,s_sobhan@iau.ac.ir
2- Ph.D. in Environmental Science, Professor in Environmental Science, Department of the Environment, Ha.C., Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran ,
Abstract: (24 Views)
Background: The working environment in mines is one of the most dangerous of its kind, which has negative effects on the physical and mental health of workers due to excessive physical workload. Working in such environments is often associated with occupational fatigue, musculoskeletal disorders, and reduced productivity. Therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the relationship between compliance with ergonomic principles, job fatigue, and employee efficiency in the Kermanshah Stone Crusher Mine in 2025.
Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study, data were collected using standardized questionnaires on ergonomics, occupational fatigue, and productivity. To analyze the data, Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis, and structural equation modeling (SEM) were utilized. Also, data analyses were carried out using SPSS version 26 and AMOS Graphics version 24.
Results: Based on the results obtained, a significant negative correlation was found betweenadherence to ergonomic principles and occupational fatigue (r = -0.423, p < 0.05), as well as asignificant positive correlation between ergonomics and employee efficiency (r = 0.386, p < 0.05). Furthermore, occupational fatigue was significantly associated with decreased productivity (r=-0.512, p<0.05).The results of the regression analysis also showed that 37.7% of the variance in employee efficiency was influenced by variables related to ergonomic compliance and occupational fatigue. Additionally, structural equation modeling revealed that occupational fatigue plays a mediating role in the relationship between ergonomics and productivity. Ultimately, while confirming all proposed hypotheses, the study highlighted that improving working conditions through the implementation of ergonomic principles can significantly reduce occupational fatigue and increase employee efficiency.
Conclusion: The results of the study showed that improving working conditions through the implementation of ergonomic principles significantly reduced job fatigue and increased employee efficiency, which in turn recommends efforts to improve the work environment from the perspective of worker occupational safety and health as a basis for management decisions in the extractive industries.
Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study, data were collected using standardized questionnaires on ergonomics, occupational fatigue, and productivity. To analyze the data, Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis, and structural equation modeling (SEM) were utilized. Also, data analyses were carried out using SPSS version 26 and AMOS Graphics version 24.
Results: Based on the results obtained, a significant negative correlation was found betweenadherence to ergonomic principles and occupational fatigue (r = -0.423, p < 0.05), as well as asignificant positive correlation between ergonomics and employee efficiency (r = 0.386, p < 0.05). Furthermore, occupational fatigue was significantly associated with decreased productivity (r=-0.512, p<0.05).The results of the regression analysis also showed that 37.7% of the variance in employee efficiency was influenced by variables related to ergonomic compliance and occupational fatigue. Additionally, structural equation modeling revealed that occupational fatigue plays a mediating role in the relationship between ergonomics and productivity. Ultimately, while confirming all proposed hypotheses, the study highlighted that improving working conditions through the implementation of ergonomic principles can significantly reduce occupational fatigue and increase employee efficiency.
Conclusion: The results of the study showed that improving working conditions through the implementation of ergonomic principles significantly reduced job fatigue and increased employee efficiency, which in turn recommends efforts to improve the work environment from the perspective of worker occupational safety and health as a basis for management decisions in the extractive industries.
Keywords: Ergonomics, Employee efficiency, Occupational Fatigue, Structural Equation Modeling, Kermanshah Stone Crusher Mine
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2026/02/5 | Accepted: 2026/03/1 | Published: 2026/03/18
Received: 2026/02/5 | Accepted: 2026/03/1 | Published: 2026/03/18
References
1. Dul J, Weerdmeester B. Ergonomics for Beginners: A Quick Reference Guide (3rd ed.). CRC Press. 2008;142 p. [DOI:10.1201/9781420077520]
2. Helander M. A Guide to Human Factors and Ergonomics (2nd ed.). CRC Press. 2006;400 p. [DOI:10.1201/b12385]
3. Prokopenko J. Productivity: A Reference Book for Managers. International Labour Organization (ILO). 1987.
4. Bridger RS. Introduction to Human Factors and Ergonomics (4th ed.). CRC Press. 2017;770 p.
5. Folkard S, Tucker P. Working time society consensus paper: Understanding the impact of shift work on health. Applied Ergonomics. 2003;34(3):271-80.
6. Hasle P. Work environment and productivity: A review of the literature. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2014;39(1):1-12.
7. Jaffar N, Abdul-Tharim, AH, Mohd-Kamar, IF, Lop NS. A Literature review of ergonomics risk factors in construction industry. Procedia Engineering. 2011;20:89-97. [DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.142]
8. Robertson J, Jayne C, Oakman J. Work-related musculoskeletal and mental health disorders: Are workplace policies and practices based on contemporary evidence? Safety Science. 2021;138: 105098. [DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105098]
9. Patterson M, Warr P, West MA. Organizational climate and company productivity: The role of employee affect and employee level. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004; 77(2):193-216. [DOI:10.1348/096317904774202144]
10. Varianou-Mikellidou C, Boustras G, Nicolaidou O, Dimopoulos C, Anyfantis I, Messios P. Work-related factors and individual characteristics affecting work ability of different age groups. Safety Science. 2020;128:104755. [DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104755]
11. Firescu V, Filip D. Human factors and ergonomics in sustainable manufacturing systems: A pathway to enhanced performance and wellbeing. Machines. 2025;13(7):595. [DOI:10.3390/machines13070595]
12. Yağcı M, Yıldızlar O, Yıldırım M. Reduction of work-related musculoskeletal risk factors following ergonomics training and exercise practices in a mechanised underground copper mine. WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation. 2025; 80(3):1265-77. [DOI:10.1177/10519815241289781]
13. Boksem MAS, Tops M. Mental fatigue: Costs and benefits. Brain Research Reviews. 2008;59(1): 125-39. [DOI:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.07.001]
14. Mohammadfam I, Kamalinia M, Momeni M, Golmohammadi R, Hamidi Y, Soltanian A. Evaluation of the quality of occupational health and safety management systems based on key performance indicators in certified organizations. Safety and Health at Work. 2017;8(2):156-61. [DOI:10.1016/j.shaw.2016.09.001]
15. Mahdavi N, Tapak L, Darvishi E, Doosti-Irani A, Shafiee Motlagh A. Unraveling the interplay between mental workload, occupational fatigue, physiological responses and cognitive performance in office workers. Scientific Reports. 2024;14:17866. [DOI:10.1038/s41598-024-68889-4]
16. Chen Y, Li X. Cost analysis of occupational fatigue in industrial settings. Journal of Occupational Health Economics. 2022;10(3):112-20.
17. Li Y, Chen X. Challenges in measuring productivity in harsh working environments. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023;20(4):3456.
18. Haji L, Karimi H, Valizadeh N. The effect of ergonomics on the occupational burnout, stress, and productivity of agricultural expert (The case of Kerman Province). Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research. 2022;53(2):431-46 (In Persian).
19. Hassani, SA, Mobaraki H, Moghadamifard Z. The importance of ergonomics in increasing productivity and improving the performance of employees of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education. Tibbi-i-kar. 2013;4(4):92-101 (In Persian).
20. Dashti R. The effect of ergonomics on employee productivity and job satisfaction (Case study: Tehran Crisis Prevention and Management Organization). The Second International Conference on Management and Economics in the 21st Century. 2016; 8 p.
21. Bagnara S, Marti P. Human work in call centres: A challenge for cognitive ergonomics. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2001;2(3):223-37. [DOI:10.1080/14639220110104943]
22. Sohrabi MS, Babamiri M. Effectiveness of an ergonomics training program on musculoskeletal disorders, job stress, quality of work-life and productivity in office workers: a quasi-randomized control trial study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2022;8(3):1664-71. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2021.1918930]
23. Chinedu OO, Henry AT, Nene JJ, Okwudili JD. Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders among Office Workers in Higher Education Institutions: A Cross-Sectional Study. Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences. 2020;30(5):715-24. [DOI:10.4314/ejhs.v30i5.10]
24. McAtamney L, Corlett EN. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Applied Ergonomics. 1993;24(2):91-9. [DOI:10.1016/0003-6870(93)90080-S]
25. Vercoulen JHMM, Swanick CMA, Fennis JFM, Galama JMD, Van Der Meer JWM, Bleijenber G. Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-20). American Psychological Association. 1994; 21 p. [DOI:10.1037/t11003-000]
26. Schaufeli W, Bakker A. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Preliminary Manual). Occupational Health Psychology Unit. Utrecht University. 2004; 60 p.
27. Pazouki M, Salehi M. Investigating the relationship between ergonomics in the workplace and work-related stress. National Conference on Modern Research in Iran and the World in Psychology, Educational Sciences and Social Studies. 2017; 10 p (In Persian).
28. Macfarlane GJ, Angelo SD, Ntani G, Walker-Bone K. Impact of fatigue on work productivity and health-related job loss. Occupational Medicine. 2024;74(6):423-9. [DOI:10.1093/occmed/kqae056]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
