Mismatch between fixed classroom furniture and anthropometric measurements among university students: Relationships to ergonomic risk.

Work Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI:10.3233/wor-230590
Özde Depreli, Zehra Güçhan Topçu, Hayriye Tomaç
{"title":"Mismatch between fixed classroom furniture and anthropometric measurements among university students: Relationships to ergonomic risk.","authors":"Özde Depreli, Zehra Güçhan Topçu, Hayriye Tomaç","doi":"10.3233/wor-230590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nAppropriate arrangement of classroom ergonomics is necessary for maintaining health and improving academic performance, learning, and motivation.\n\n\nOBJECTIVE\nWe aimed to determine the anthropometric measurements and ergonomic risk levels of students during a handwriting activity on a fixed desk and chair and to analyze the mismatch and relationships between these factors.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThis study included 149 university students (female:73, male:76). Anthropometric measurements (lower and upper extremity length, shoulder height, elbow-rest height, hip-popliteal length, popliteal height, knee height, the distance between tragus and wall, and between acromion and wall) were done with a tape measure. The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) tool was conducted to determine the ergonomic risk level while students wrote a standard text on a fixed desk and chair as if they were taking notes in the classroom. The mismatch was evaluated between backrest height and sitting shoulder height, seat height, and popliteal height. The Pearson Chi-Square and the Spearman Correlation test were used for statistical analysis.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe median values of the participants' age, height, weight, and BMI were 22 years, 1.70 m, 68 kg, and 23.18 kg/cm2, respectively. Most students had inadequate ergonomic posture while writing on fixed furniture at the university (Median RULA grand score: 4). More mismatches for seat height (54.4%) were found in high ergonomic risk levels but mismatches for backrest height did not follow a similar result.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nMore investigation should be conducted with prospective studies including interventions like adjustable furniture.","PeriodicalId":506534,"journal":{"name":"Work","volume":"2 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/wor-230590","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Appropriate arrangement of classroom ergonomics is necessary for maintaining health and improving academic performance, learning, and motivation. OBJECTIVE We aimed to determine the anthropometric measurements and ergonomic risk levels of students during a handwriting activity on a fixed desk and chair and to analyze the mismatch and relationships between these factors. METHODS This study included 149 university students (female:73, male:76). Anthropometric measurements (lower and upper extremity length, shoulder height, elbow-rest height, hip-popliteal length, popliteal height, knee height, the distance between tragus and wall, and between acromion and wall) were done with a tape measure. The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) tool was conducted to determine the ergonomic risk level while students wrote a standard text on a fixed desk and chair as if they were taking notes in the classroom. The mismatch was evaluated between backrest height and sitting shoulder height, seat height, and popliteal height. The Pearson Chi-Square and the Spearman Correlation test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS The median values of the participants' age, height, weight, and BMI were 22 years, 1.70 m, 68 kg, and 23.18 kg/cm2, respectively. Most students had inadequate ergonomic posture while writing on fixed furniture at the university (Median RULA grand score: 4). More mismatches for seat height (54.4%) were found in high ergonomic risk levels but mismatches for backrest height did not follow a similar result. CONCLUSIONS More investigation should be conducted with prospective studies including interventions like adjustable furniture.
固定教室家具与大学生人体测量结果不匹配:与人体工程学风险的关系
背景教室人体工程学的适当安排对于保持健康和提高学习成绩、学习和学习动力是必要的。目的我们旨在确定学生在固定桌椅上进行手写活动时的人体测量数据和人体工程学风险水平,并分析这些因素之间的不匹配和关系。用卷尺测量了人体测量数据(下肢和上肢长度、肩高、肘托高度、髋腘长度、腘窝高度、膝高、耳廓与墙壁之间的距离以及肩峰与墙壁之间的距离)。当学生在固定桌椅上书写标准课文时,采用快速上肢评估(RULA)工具确定人体工程学风险水平,就像他们在课堂上做笔记一样。对靠背高度与坐姿肩高、座椅高度和腘绳肌高度之间的不匹配进行了评估。结果参与者的年龄、身高、体重和体重指数的中位值分别为 22 岁、1.70 米、68 千克和 23.18 千克/平方厘米。大多数学生在大学的固定家具上写字时的姿势不符合人体工程学(RULA总分中位数:4)。结论:应通过前瞻性研究进行更多调查,包括可调节家具等干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信