Office task effects on comfort and body dynamics in five dynamic office chairs

Groenesteijn, Liesbeth; Ellegast, Rolf; Keller, Kathrin; Krause, Frank; Berger, Helmut; Looze, M.P. de

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2011.06.007

Cited by 73 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it appears that backrests are not always used optimally during common occupational tasks (Vergara & Page, 2000b), and a recent review cast significant doubt on the strength of the relationship between sitting and parameters such as intradiscal pressure (Claus, Hides, Moseley, & Hodges, 2008). Furthermore, although much research has examined the effect of different types of backrest configurations Groenesteijn et al, 2012), there has been no systematic review on whether using chair backrests actually reduces LBP/LBD, or how they influence trunk muscle activation.…”

Section: Month Xxxx -Human Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Using a Chair Backrest or Reducing Seated Hip Flexion Influence Trunk Muscle Activity and Discomfort? A Systematic Review

Curran¹,

O’Sullivan

et al. 2015

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This paper systematically reviews the effect of chair backrests and reducing seated hip flexion on low back discomfort (LBD) and trunk muscle activation.Background: Prolonged sitting commonly exacerbates low back pain (LBP). Several modifications to seated posture and chair design have been recommended, including using chairs with backrests and chairs that reduce hip flexion.Method: Electronic databases were searched by two independent assessors. Part 1 of this review includes 26 studies comparing the effect of sitting with at least two different hip angles. In Part 2, seven studies that compared the effect of sitting with and without a backrest were eligible. Study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale.Results: Significant confounding variables and a relatively small number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with LBP complicates analysis of the results. There was moderate evidence that chair backrests reduce paraspinal muscle activation, and limited evidence that chair backrests reduce LBD. There was no evidence that chairs involving less hip flexion reduce LBP or LBD, or consistently alter trunk muscle activation. However, participants in several studies subjectively preferred the modified chairs involving less hip flexion. Conclusion:The limited evidence to support the use of chairs involving less seated hip flexion, or the effect of a backrest, is consistent with the limited evidence that other isolated chair design features can reduce LBP.Application: LBP management is likely to require consideration of several factors in addition to sitting position. Larger RCTs involving people with LBP are required.

show abstract

Section: Month Xxxx -Human Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Using a Chair Backrest or Reducing Seated Hip Flexion Influence Trunk Muscle Activity and Discomfort? A Systematic Review

Curran¹,

O’Sullivan

et al. 2015

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several questionnaires for recording seating comfort [20,21]. For this experiment, a selection of the questions applied by Groenesteijn et al [11] in a study on dynamic office chairs was used, because it had a similar research objective and it evaluates several constructs of seating comfort separately. The participants were requested to reply to the following statements on seat comfort, mobility, support and acceptance in a systematically varied order using 9-point Likert scales: analysis, the difference in discomfort prior to and after the experiment was calculated.…”

Section: Questionnairesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research shows positive effects of these kinds of chairs on muscle activity [10]. Groenesteijn et al [11] also found that such a swing-system chair is related to positive comfort evaluations in the context of posture-restricting computer tasks. Moreover, an office chair with an unstable seat pan resulted in significant lower heart rate as well as the maintenance of oxygen levels in the tissues surrounding the ischial tuberosities [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research on comfort in office work has suggested that allowing for body movement is beneficial when the task does not allow for non-sedentary activities [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. For instance, it seems necessary to enable frequent change between body postures provided that they are healthy and stable in order to improve seating comfort [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigating Car Passenger Well-Being Related to a Seat Imposing Continuous Posture Variation

Veen¹,

Orlinskiy²,

Franz³

et al. 2015

J Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static sitting when travelling by car is known to cause physical fatigue. It is generally encouraged to periodically engage in non-sedentary activities, but this is not possible when traveling by car. The present study aims to investigate the influence of moving the vehicle occupant's body passively. This posture variation is realized by continuously varying the seat configuration, i.e., the seat pan and backrest inclination. For the experiment, 21 participants sat twice on the same seat for 45 minutes: Once in a static and once in a dynamic configuration. The measurements obtained were the observation of body movements and questionnaires on perceived discomfort, seating comfort and experiential feelings. The results show that participants move significantly more in the static configuration and that they perceive more discomfort. The seat's comfort and support are evaluated significantly better in the dynamic configuration. The dynamic configuration results in participants feeling significantly more active, energetic, stimulated, pleasantly surprised, pleased, comfortable, accepting and calm. The static configuration results in the participants feeling marginally more tired and significantly more bored. Further research should investigate the effects in the context of driving on the road and an actual driving task. However, it can be concluded that the continuous movements of the seat have a beneficial effect on objective and subjective indicators of well-being.

show abstract

“…In comparison with ‘office work,’ which is performed in the angle range between 7° and 36°,31 treatment is increasingly conducted in a forced posture, particularly seen in the inclination of the head. Angle values in the area of the head and cervical spine differentiate significantly between treatment and office activities, indicating increasing muscular strain during treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motion analysis in the field of dentistry: a kinematic comparison of dentists and orthodontists

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo conduct a kinematic comparison of occupational posture in orthodontists and dentists in their workplace.DesignObservational study.SettingDentist surgeries and departments of orthodontics at university medical centres in Germany.ParticipantsA representative sample of 21 (10 female, 11 male) dentists (group G1) and 21 (13 female, 8 male) orthodontists (G2) with one male dropout in G2.Outcome measuresThe CUELA (computer-assisted acquisition and long-term analysis of musculoskeletal loads) system was used to analyse occupational posture. Parallel to the recording through the CUELA system, a software-supported analysis of the activities performed (I: treatment; II: office; III: other activities) was carried out. In line with ergonomic standards the measured body angles are categorised into neutral, moderate and awkward postures. Activities between the aforementioned groups are compared using the stratified van Elteren U test and the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney U test. All p values are subject to the Bonferroni–Holm correction. The level of significance is set at 5%.ResultsThe percentage of time spent on activities in categories I–II–III was as follows: dentists 41%–23%–36% and orthodontists 28%–37%–35%. The posture analysis of both groups showed, for all percentiles (P5–95), angle values primarily in the neutral or moderate range. However, depending on the activity performed, between 5% and 25% of working hours were spent in unfavourable postures, especially in the head-and-neck area. Orthodontists have a greater tendency than dentists to perform treatment activities with the head and torso in unfavourable positions. The statistically significant differences between the two groups with regard to the duration and the relevance of the activities performed confirm this assumption for all three categories (p<0.01, p<0.05).ConclusionsGenerally, both groups perform treatment activities in postures that are in the neutral or medium range; however, dentists had slightly more unfavourable postures during treatment for a greater share of their work day.

show abstract

Office task effects on comfort and body dynamics in five dynamic office chairs

Cited by 73 publications

References 13 publications

Does Using a Chair Backrest or Reducing Seated Hip Flexion Influence Trunk Muscle Activity and Discomfort? A Systematic Review

Does Using a Chair Backrest or Reducing Seated Hip Flexion Influence Trunk Muscle Activity and Discomfort? A Systematic Review

Investigating Car Passenger Well-Being Related to a Seat Imposing Continuous Posture Variation

Motion analysis in the field of dentistry: a kinematic comparison of dentists and orthodontists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About