A Tale of Two Sexes
Women have a higher risk of some musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) than men, even when both genders engage in the same tasks. Women report pain, discomfort and other MSD symptoms in the neck and upper limbs twice as often as men do while men are more likely to experience lower-back injuries, according to Dr. Julie Côté, associate professor and chair of the Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education at McGill University in Montreal.
“Sex and gender are complicated,” says Dr. Côté, who defines sex as a biological state, while gender refers to socially constructed roles, behaviour and activities that a given society considers appropriate for men and women. “Sex and gender have their own operational definitions, but there is significant interaction between them, with aspects of biology influencing psychosocial roles and attitudes and vice-versa,” she says. “That is why we have come to use the expression ‘sex/gender differences’ — to recognize the integration of these influences.”
Sex and gender differences go beyond physical strength to include differences in the types of muscle fibre. Women have a higher proportion of Type 1 muscle fibres which give them higher endurance, but can also result in women performing tasks for longer durations. The repetitive and invariable nature of tasks that women are more likely to perform, coupled with the fact that they compensate for their weaker strength by engaging muscles at levels close to maximum capacity, could be reasons for the heightened risk of muscle overload and injury among women, Dr. Côté explains.
Marnie Downey, a Canadian certified professional ergonomist and president of ERGO Inc. in Innisfil, Ontario, thinks gender plays a role in workplace MSD risk because of physiological and biomechanical differences between males and females.
Shona Anderson, a Canadian certified professional ergonomist and president of Anderson Ergonomics Consulting Inc. in Calgary, agrees. For example, the size of a tool may not fit a woman’s hand as well as it would a man’s, while the grip strength required of a female worker to wield a tool may be greater, thereby hiking the risk of sprains and strains. The height of a production line can also affect male and female workers differently. “Those kinds of things can definitely impact workplace MSDs,” Anderson says.
Differences in how men and women move is another factor behind the higher rates of neck and shoulder injury among women who tend to have lower motor variability, while men make more minute adjustments when repeating a motion than women do. “Low variability has been shown to be a predictor of injury development,” Dr. Côté adds.
Other gender differences include how men and women respond to fatigue, perceive pain, adapt to physiological stress and hold different job assignments and social roles outside of work. “The question we need to ask may not be, ‘Are men and women different?’ but ‘How much so?’” Dr. Côté asked. “This question is all the more pertinent when considering making workplace adaptations to prevent work-related MSDs.”
Mars versus Venus
Studies dating back to the late ‘90s have explored the complex interactions between gender and MSD exposure. Karen Messing, Ph.D., professor of ergonomics at the University of Quebec in Montreal, is the co-author of a 2009 paper comparing two strategies analyzing a single dataset for the relationships between risk factors and MSDs in a population-based sample with a wide range of exposures.
The 1998 Québec Health and Social Survey, which polled 11,735 respondents in paid work, reported “significant” musculoskeletal pain in 11 body regions during the previous 12 months and a range of personal, physical and psychosocial risk factors. Five studies concerning risk factors for four musculoskeletal outcomes were carried out based on these data. Each study included analyses with multiple logistic regression (MLR) performed separately for women, men and the total study population. The results from these gender-stratified and unstratified analyses were then compared.
In the unstratified MLR models, gender was significantly associated with musculoskeletal pain in the neck and lower extremities, but not with lower-back pain. The gender-stratified MLR models identified significant associations between each specific musculoskeletal outcome and a variety of personal characteristics and physical and psychosocial workplace exposures for each gender. Most of the associations, if present for one gender, were also found in the total population. But several risk factors present for only one gender could be detected only in a stratified analysis, whereas the unstratified analysis added little information.
“Stratifying analyses by gender is necessary if a full range of associations between exposures and MSD is to be detected and understood,” the study concludes.
As more women are involved in manual material handling, factoring sex and gender differences into research studies will yield a better understanding of injury mechanism. “For many reasons, it would be a mistake to ignore sex and gender in our research designs,” Dr. Côté argues.
Anderson has observed an encouraging trend: companies are increasingly taking physical differences into account when designing workplaces. “I am seeing a lot more adjustability built into all sorts of things, including corporations buying extra small to large sizes of gloves, different-sized handles of tools, height-adjustable desks,” she notes.
While factoring gender differences into workplace ergonomic solutions entails more costs, Anderson says the prices for adjustability have come down dramatically with ergonomic advances and increasing demand for adjustability. The challenge, rather, is time pressure, which can result in employees taking shortcuts instead of taking the time to use devices that minimize physical exertion and injury risk.
Gender difference is not something that Marnie thinks about upfront. “I always look at trying to make the job safer for everybody.” For workplaces like foundries, which are male-dominated, she points out that employers need to ensure they put in as many ergonomic accommodations as they can without creating undue hardship for themselves. “But at the same time, they do have the right to say if you are not able to do the essential duties of the job, whether you are male or female, then maybe the job is not for you.”
Gender differences are only part of the picture for Anderson, who points to the increasing diversity of the workforce. She cites the differences in physique between an Asian worker and someone from the Nordic region as an example. “The difference in size is dramatic between those two people, so it is not just sex and gender,” Anderson argues. “I think workplaces need to focus on striking a balance between all of the people that work in that organization and having adjustability built in for those people.”
Jean Lian is the editor of OHS Canada.
Print this page