[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]
The Orège method proposes the originality to be based on a confrontation between the evaluation of a specialist and that of the operator. It allows a good involvement and understanding.


OREGE is the acronym for “Tool for tracking and evaluating gestures“. Its objective is to identify the MSD risks of the upper limbs as well as right and left linked:

  • to extreme joint positions.
  • to efforts.
  • At the motion frequencies.

In view of the fact that the method proposes a “ subjective ” assessment, it is necessary for the facilitator to have a good knowledge of ergonomics.

The method

  1. identify the work cycle you wish to analyze: the choice will preferably be made on a process that is known as ” risky “. It is relevant to ask the staff their opinions on which process to study as a priority.
  2. Prepare the recording : This will be done on several non-consecutive work cycles. This point is important because it allows to take into account the risks of production. It is necessary to plan the surveys, ensuring the presence and availability of staff during the operations. It is stated that the duration of the reading is 1 to 2 hours.
  3. Proceed with the recording: Each reading is done in 3 sequences. The data from each of the 3 sub-categories must be clearly distinct from each other, in the following order: efforts, joint positions and repeatability.
  4. Diagnose: The Assessor and evaluator must review the situation, agree on an assessment, and then take the necessary actions in the event of identified risk situations.

1-Assessment of efforts

By definition, an effort is the contraction of a muscle or a group of muscles. The evaluation of these goes through 3 steps detailed below.

1.1 Looking for efforts

The first is to look for indices of effort: anything that might at some point or another require muscle contraction. Here is a list of stress1 indices:

  • Mass of objects and tools: all objects, even small, that the operator can be taken to use during his work. The permissible limit for these objects is less than 2kg. Beyond that, we will be in the case of a charge port.
  • the type of grasping: the ” standard ” Socket is the full-hand socket via a handle adapted to the situation. Any other situation will be considered more soliciting.
  • Pressure: The pressure exerted or exerted on the hand will also be avoided. Typical example of using the hand as a ” hammer “.
  • Vibration: Any element that generates vibrations will be considered an overloading factor.
  • Temperature: The working temperature should be around 20 °c. Especially hot or cold temperatures will be considered as more soliciting.
  • Gloves: Their use is considered an additional stress because our movements are less free.
  • Torque effect: The use of a tool whose start-up or use generates a torque is considered a potentially hyper-soliciting factor.

1.2 Self-assessment

Once all situations require a specific effort listed, the operator will self-evaluate the effort level using a preset scale (see Excel document).

1.3 Confrontation

The last step is to confront the opinions of the operator and that of the facilitator of the approach. On the basis of exchange, they must arrive at this ” agree ” on an assessment of the efforts.

2-Evaluation of joint positions

One goes successively and on several cycles to evaluate the joint positions:

  • of the neck
  • of the shoulders
  • Wrists
  • Elbows

The principle is based on a 3-level evaluation of each of the positions of these joints. For each of the joints, we will define the positions according to 3 zones (see Excel document):

  • Comfort Zone: Green
  • Area not recommended: in Orange
  • Area to avoid: red

If the posture is held for several minutes, one extra point will be added.

3-Evaluation of the frequency

The evaluation of the frequency is based on the same principle as for the efforts. We will start with a self-assessment, then we will confront the evaluation of the operator with that of the moderator.

For the evaluation, repeatability is taken over 1 minute for cycles below the minute and for the whole cycle duration for longer cycles.

3.1 Self-assessment

There also the operator will position on a free ladder, the feeling that he has of the repeatability of the movements. The challenge is to let it be done to better realize later on the final evaluation.

3.2 Confrontation

The final evaluation is done through a confrontation between the operator’s feelings and the moderator’s assessment based on a preset grid2.


Once the field data is collected, the moderator will proceed with the final evaluation. It takes place in 2 times:

  1. Synthesize the data on a table. This table is based on the most risky situations and therefore the greatest scores. Not on anaverage.
  2. Agree on a final evaluation with the person doing the operations and choose together the actions of improvements.


1-I. Kuorinka, L. Forcier (1995) – Wmsd: Repetitive work injuries

2 – W. A. Latko (1997) – Development and evaluation of an observational method for assessing resmallness in hand tasks

ACOME (1998) – Ergonomics of hand tools: problematic and state of the art

INRS (2000) – Method for the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb and simple tools.


Share This