Real-time vibrotactile feedback system for reducing trunk flexion exposure during construction tasks

Wearables offer a promising solution for simultaneous posture monitoring and/or corrective feedback. The main objective was to identify, synthesise, and characterise the wearables used in the workplace to monitor and postural feedback to workers. The PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. Studies were included between 1 January 2000 and 22 March 2023 in Spanish, French, English, and Portuguese without geographical restriction. The databases selected for the research were PubMed®, Web of Science®, Scopus®, and Google Scholar®. Qualitative studies, theses, reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded. Twelve studies were included, involving a total of 304 workers, mostly health professionals (n = 8). The remaining studies covered workers in the industry (n = 2), in the construction (n = 1), and welders (n = 1). For assessment purposes, most studies used one (n = 5) or two sensors (n = 5) characterised as accelerometers (n = 7), sixaxial (n = 2) or nonaxialinertial measurement units (n = 3). The most common source of feedback was the sensor itself (n = 6) or smartphones (n = 4). Haptic feedback was the most prevalent (n = 6), followed by auditory (n = 5) and visual (n = 3). Most studies employed prototype wearables emphasising kinematic variables of human movement. Healthcare professionals were the primary focus of the study along with haptic feedback that proved to be the most common and effective method for correcting posture during work activities.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wearables for Monitoring and Postural Feedback in the Work Context: A Scoping Review

Figueira,

Silva,

Costa

et al. 2024

“…The preliminary tests of this study indicated that vibrations delivered to the left and right sides of the waist and the lower back were occasionally challenging to perceive, even with the waist belt. Several other studies have demonstrated that vibrations provided on the sternum, shoulders, and upper back [ 29 , 33 , 39 , 62 ] can be reliably perceived. Consequently, six locations (i.e., sternum, left/right waist, left/right shoulder, and upper back) were considered as candidate locations to receive vibrotactile signals on the SV system.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vibrotactile Alerting to Prevent Accidents in Highway Construction Work Zones: An Exploratory Study

Yang

Roofigari‐Esfahan

2023

Self Cite

Struck-by accidents are the leading cause of injuries in highway construction work zones. Despite numerous safety interventions, injury rates remain high. As workers’ exposure to traffic is sometimes unavoidable, providing warnings can be an effective way to prevent imminent threats. Such warnings should consider work zone conditions that can hinder the timely perception of alerts, e.g., poor visibility and high noise level. This study proposes a vibrotactile system integrated into workers’ conventional personal protective equipment (PPE), i.e., safety vests. Three experiments were conducted to assess the feasibility of using vibrotactile signals to warn workers in highway environments, the perception and performance of vibrotactile signals at different body locations, and the usability of various warning strategies. The results revealed vibrotactile signals had a 43.6% faster reaction time than audio signals, and the perceived intensity and urgency levels on the sternum, shoulders, and upper back were significantly higher than the waist. Among different notification strategies used, providing a moving direction imposed significantly lower mental workloads and higher usability scores than providing a hazard direction. Further research should be conducted to reveal factors that affect alerting strategy preference towards a customizable system to elicit higher usability among users.

“…Lim et al [75] Evaluating the effectiveness of vibration feedback to reduce sagittal trunk flexion angles in construction work tasks by providing vibrotactile feedback and compare the effectiveness of two feedback locations.…”

Section: Cs No Cgmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This limits the generalizability of the findings to broader work populations performing regular work-related tasks. Notably, some potentially relevant studies were not included in the review (e.g., Doss et al [ 74 ] and Lind et al [ 71 ]) and since then, several additional studies have been published (e.g., Lim et al [ 75 ], Langenskiöld et al [ 76 ], and Lind et al [ 77 ]). Lind et al [ 45 ] reviewed the literature on wearable motion capture instruments and systems, exploring their potential applications for preventing WMSDs and proposing a taxonomy for classifying augmented feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Rapid Review on the Effectiveness and Use of Wearable Biofeedback Motion Capture Systems in Ergonomics to Mitigate Adverse Postures and Movements of the Upper Body

Lind

2024

Work-related diseases and disorders remain a significant global health concern, necessitating multifaceted measures for mitigation. One potential measure is work technique training utilizing augmented feedback through wearable motion capture systems. However, there exists a research gap regarding its current effectiveness in both real work environments and controlled settings, as well as its ability to reduce postural exposure and retention effects over short, medium, and long durations. A rapid review was conducted, utilizing two databases and three previous literature reviews to identify relevant studies published within the last twenty years, including recent literature up to the end of 2023. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 14 were of high or moderate quality. These studies were summarized descriptively, and the strength of evidence was assessed. Among the included studies, six were rated as high quality, while eight were considered moderate quality. Notably, the reporting of participation rates, blinding of assessors, and a-priori power calculations were infrequently performed. Four studies were conducted in real work environments, while ten were conducted in controlled settings. Vibration feedback was the most common feedback type utilized (n = 9), followed by auditory (n = 7) and visual feedback (n = 1). All studies employed corrective feedback initiated by the system. In controlled environments, evidence regarding the effectiveness of augmented feedback from wearable motion capture systems to reduce postural exposure ranged from strong evidence to no evidence, depending on the time elapsed after feedback administration. Conversely, for studies conducted in real work environments, the evidence ranged from very limited evidence to no evidence. Future reach needs are identified and discussed.