## 4 Discussion  
The present research has thoroughly investigated the risk factors associated with movement asymmetry in the workplace and developed an observational technique to assess movement ergonomics. This exploration holds particular significance in environments dominated by repetitive and unbalanced physical activities, such as manufacturing or assembly-line work, thereby accentuating its relevance to health promotion and preventative strategies in occupational health. The analysis of joint angular displacements between machining workstation employees (MWEs) and assembly workstation employees (AWEs) yields profound insights into the ergonomic dynamics of these two occupational groups. The data underscored a significant divergence in the range of motion (ROM) employed by the two groups, with MWE demonstrating approximately double the ROM of their AWE counterparts. This disparity, transcending nearly all evaluated measures, underscores a fundamental ergonomic variance potentially attributable to the distinct nature of tasks performed within each workstation type. The observation that statistically significant differences in ROM were present in almost all measures, barring shoulder and elbow flexion-extension movements, invites a nuanced interpretation. This suggests that while certain joint movements are universally constrained or facilitated by workplace ergonomics, others are distinctly influenced by the specific demands of the workstation. The symmetry in movement patterns observed in the MWE group, albeit with a slight right-side inclination, contrasts sharply with the pronounced asymmetry evident in the AWE group's shoulder and elbow movements. This distinction could reflect the repetitive, unidimensional tasks typical of assembly lines, often predisposing workers to asymmetrical posture adoption due to repetitive task performance. From a broader perspective, our findings resonate with existing literature that identifies movement asymmetry as a significant ergonomic risk factor, predisposing workers to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Similarly to our research, [PERSON] et al. [46] provided a quantitative analysis of the intensity and symmetry of upper limb use in healthcare workers, utilising wrist-worn accelerometers to assess the ergonomic risks associated with MSDs. The research highlights the importance of understanding repeititiveness and movement asymmetries in the workplace, emphasising the need for accurate, ergonomic risk assessments for healthcare workers. The findings from [PERSON] et al. align with the observed differences in joint angular displacements observed in MWEs and AWEs, which were studied in our study. While our research focuses on the industrial sector, [PERSON] et al. extend the discussion to healthcare settings, reinforcing that movement asymmetry is pervasive \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **The Mean Value of** \\ **the Sample** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Mean Value of** \\ **Well-Being (Norms)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Mean Value of the** \\ **III-Health Population** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **No (\%) of the** \\ **Highest Results** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \hline General GHQ & 18 & 26.1 & 41.2 & 9 (21.5) \\ Somatic complaints & 9.92 & 7.8 & 10.2 & 31 (73.8) \\ Anxiety and insomnia & 5.3 & 7.3 & 10.8 & 17 (40.5) \\ Social dysfunction & 7 & 7.9 & 10.9 & 15 (35.7) \\ Depression & 1 & 3.1 & 9.3 & 3 (7.1) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Comparison of well-being results with scoring for average well-being and ill-health population according to norms for GHQ 28.  
across different professional domains. The pronounced asymmetry observed in AWE could, therefore, signify a higher ergonomic risk compared to the more symmetrical movement patterns of MWEs.