<![CDATA[Ergonomic workstation design is commonly expected to reduce physical exposure and support safer manufacturing work. This paper provides a reproducible descriptive analysis of supplied before-and-after ergonomic records from ten workstations and a separate paired body-map dataset from thirty respondents. The workstation file contains Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) scores, categorical labels, musculoskeletal complaint counts, and reported output in units per hour. The body-map file contains ten region-specific numerical scores per respondent. Because the files have no worker-to-workstation linkage, no intervention description, no observation dates, no body-map scale definition, and no incident or audit data, they are analyzed as separate descriptive layers. The sum of supplied workstation REBA scores decreases from 96 to 41, a 57.29% reduction, while the supplied complaint count decreases from 105 to 24, a 77.14% reduction. Reported workstation output rises from 193 to 224 units per hour, a 16.06% increase. In the body-map layer, the summed supplied scores decrease from 743 to 551 across 300 paired region observations; every respondent has a lower total after score. These numerical patterns do not establish measured fatigue reduction, an implemented redesign, injury prevention, or improved occupational-safety performance. The study instead supplies an auditable baseline: data validations, formulae, English-language tables, and four non-duplicative figures that distinguish workstation and respondent evidence. The results identify workstations and body regions for subsequent field observation. A future intervention study should document the redesign, link workers to stations, define each scale, measure exposures and outcomes across a specified time window, and evaluate safety indicators independently. This preserves the applied ergonomics value of the source data without overstating what the records can demonstrate]]>
Copyrights © 2023
