Refine
Document Type
- Article (27)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (28)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (28)
Keywords
- MSD (4)
- Musculoskeletal diseases (4)
- prevalence (4)
- Postural control (3)
- dental profession (3)
- dentist (3)
- ergonomics (3)
- inertial motion capture (3)
- musculoskeletal disorders (3)
- Behandlungsposition (2)
Institute
Background: The aim of this pilot study was to analyze postures during the work of neurologists with respect to their occupational activities.
Methods: A total data material of 64.8 h (3885.74 min) of nine (three m/six f) neurologists (assistant physicians) was collected. Kinematic data were collected using the CUELA system (electro-goniometry). In addition, the occupational tasks performed on-site were subject to a detailed objective activity analysis. All activities were assigned to the categories "Office activities" (I), "Measures on patients" (II) and "Other activities" (III). The angle values of each body region (evaluation parameters) were evaluated according to ergonomic ISO standards.
Results: Only 3.4% of the working hours were spent with (II), while 50.8% of time was spent with (I) and 45.8% with (III). All tasks of category (II) revealed an increased ergonomic risk to the head, neck, trunk and back areas. During category (I) especially neck and back movements in the sagittal plane showed higher ergonomic risk levels.
Conclusion: Despite frequently performed awkward body positions in (II), the ergonomic risk is considered as rather low, since the percentage time share totaled only 3.4%. As a result, "Office activities" have been detected as high predictor to cause stress load on the musculoskeletal system in the daily work of neurologists.
Background: In general, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) in dentistry is high, and dental assistants (DA) are even more affected than dentists (D). Furthermore, differentiations between the fields of dental specialization (e.g., general dentistry, endodontology, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or orthodontics) are rare. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk of the aforementioned four fields of dental specialization for D and DA on the one hand, and to compare the ergonomic risk of D and DA within each individual field of dental specialization. Methods: In total, 60 dentists (33 male/27 female) and 60 dental assistants (11 male/49 female) volunteered in this study. The sample was composed of 15 dentists and 15 dental assistants from each of the dental field, in order to represent the fields of dental specialization. In a laboratory setting, all tasks were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The kinematic data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Results: The results revealed significantly reduced ergonomic risks in endodontology and orthodontics compared to oral and maxillofacial surgery and general dentistry in DAs, while orthodontics showed a significantly reduced ergonomic risk compared to general dentistry in Ds. Further differences between the fields of dental specialization were found in the right wrist, right lower arm, and left lower arm in DAs and in the neck, right wrist, right lower arm, and left wrist in Ds. The differences between Ds and DAs within a specialist discipline were rather small. Discussion: Independent of whether one works as a D or DA, the percentage of time spent working in higher risk scores is reduced in endodontologists, and especially in orthodontics, compared to general dentists or oral and maxillofacial surgeons. In order to counteract the development of WMSD, early intervention should be made. Consequently, ergonomic training or strength training is recommended.
Traditional ergonomic risk assessment tools such as the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) are often not sensitive enough to evaluate well-optimized work routines. An implementation of kinematic data captured by inertial sensors is applied to compare two work routines in dentistry. The surgical dental treatment was performed in two different conditions, which were recorded by means of inertial sensors (Xsens MVN Link). For this purpose, 15 (12 males/3 females) oral and maxillofacial surgeons took part in the study. Data were post processed with costume written MATLAB® routines, including a full implementation of RULA (slightly adjusted to dentistry). For an in-depth comparison, five newly introduced levels of complexity of the RULA analysis were applied, i.e., from lowest complexity to highest: (1) RULA score, (2) relative RULA score distribution, (3) RULA steps score, (4) relative RULA steps score occurrence, and (5) relative angle distribution. With increasing complexity, the number of variables times (the number of resolvable units per variable) increased. In our example, only significant differences between the treatment concepts were observed at levels that are more complex: the relative RULA step score occurrence and the relative angle distribution (level 4 + 5). With the presented approach, an objective and detailed ergonomic analysis is possible. The data-driven approach adds significant additional context to the RULA score evaluation. The presented method captures data, evaluates the full task cycle, and allows different levels of analysis. These points are a clear benefit to a standard, manual assessment of one main body position during a working task.
Triathletes often experience incoordination at the start of a transition run (TR); this is possibly reflected by altered joint kinematics. In this study, the first 20 steps of a run after a warm-up run (WR) and TR (following a 90 min cycling session) of 16 elite, male, long-distance triathletes (31.3 ± 5.4 years old) were compared. Measurements were executed on the competition course of the Ironman Frankfurt in Germany. Pacing and slipstream were provided by a cyclist in front of the runner. Kinematic data of the trunk and leg joints, step length, and step rate were obtained using the MVN Link inertial motion capture system by Xsens. Statistical parametric mapping was used to compare the active leg (AL) and passive leg (PL) phases of the WR and TR. In the TR, more spinal extension (~0.5–1°; p = 0.001) and rotation (~0.2–0.5°; p = 0.001–0.004), increases in hip flexion (~3°; ~65% AL−~55% PL; p = 0.001–0.004), internal hip rotation (~2.5°; AL + ~0–30% PL; p = 0.001–0.024), more knee adduction (~1°; ~80–95% AL; p = 0.001), and complex altered knee flexion patterns (~2–4°; AL + PL; p = 0.001–0.01) occurred. Complex kinematic differences between a WR and a TR were detected. This contributes to a better understanding of the incoordination in transition running.
Die vorliegende Übersicht zum Biomarker „Lipoprotein(a) – Lp(a)“ wird im Rahmen der Serie Diagnostika des Zentralblatts für Arbeitsmedizin, Arbeitsschutz und Ergonomie publiziert, die sich mit dem immer häufigeren Gebrauch der Bestimmung von spezifischen Markern bei sog. Manager-Vorsorgen und Check-up-Untersuchungen beschäftigt. Lipoprotein(a), Lp(a), eignet sich grundsätzlich nicht für solche Vorsorgen, sondern ist ein Marker zur Risikoabschätzung der peripheren arteriellen Verschlusskrankheit. Hier zeigt dieser eine hohe Sensitivität und Spezifität, wobei der Marker aber auf keinen Fall als Screeningparameter zur Frühdiagnostik eingesetzt werden sollte.
Muskelskeletterkrankungen (MSE) sind die Hauptursache für Arbeitsunfähigkeit bei Büroangestellten in Deutschland. Die Produktionsausfallkosten für MSE beliefen sich im Jahre 2017 auf 17,2 Milliarden Euro. Neben haltungsbezogenen Risikofaktoren wie die statische Körperhaltung am Büroarbeitsplatz, konnten zunehmend psychische Stressoren wie Termin- und Leistungsdruck als Risikofaktoren identifiziert werden. Arbeitgeber versuchen mittels verhaltens- und verhältnispräventiven Maßnahmen im Rahmen der (BGF) am Arbeitsplatz zur Prävention beizutragen. Insbesondere Bewegungsprogramme führen nachweislich zu einer Verringerung von MSE und Stress sowie zu einer Verbesserung der Lebensqualität. Vielversprechend sind untere andrem auch Dehninterventionen wie die wenigen bislang veröffentlichten Studien zeigen. Das „five-Business“ Dehnprogramm, dass an einem Gerät durchgeführt wird, wurde speziell für die Anwendung im Büro konzipiert und beinhaltet fünf einfache Übungen für den Rumpf. Ziel dieser Studie war es daher, die Auswirkungen des "five-Business" Trainingsprogramms für Büroangestellte auf MSE, die Lebensqualität und die Beweglichkeit zu untersuchen.
Im Rahmen der hier vorgestellten Promotionsarbeit wurde zunächst eine konkrete Methode entwickelt (Publikation 1) und anschließend der Effekt dieses Dehntrainings auf die Lebensqualität untersucht (Publikation 2). Insgesamt nahmen 313 Büroangestellte (173m/137f) mit einem Durchschnittsalter von 43,37 ± 11,24 (SD) Jahren, einer Körpergröße von 175,37 ± 9,35 cm und einem Gewicht von 75,76 ± 15,23 kg sowie einem durchschnittlichen BMI von 24,5 ± 3,81 kg/m2 freiwillig an dieser Interventionskontrollstudie teil. Die 158 Teilnehmenden der Interventionsgruppe absolvierten das Dehntraining zweimal wöchentlich für etwa zehn Minuten über eine Dauer von 12 Wochen. Die Kontrollgruppe hingegen sollte ihrem gewöhnlichen Alltag weiter nachgehen. Der Short-Form-36 Fragebogen (SF-36) wurde verwendet, um die Effekte der Intervention zu Beginn und nach 12 Wochen auf die gesundheitsbezogene Lebensqualität zu evaluieren. Nach 12 Wochen Dehntraining traten signifikante Verbesserungen in den Bereichen mentaler Summenscore (p=0,008), körperliche Funktionsfähigkeit (p<0,001), körperliche Schmerzen (p=0,01), Vitalität (p=0,025), Rolleneinschränkungen aufgrund körperlicher Probleme (p=0,018) und psychische Gesundheit (p=0,012) auf. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass das Dehntraining nicht nur physische Gesundheitsparameter beeinflusst, sondern ebenfalls positive Effekte bei psychischen Gesundheitsparametern hervorruft. Das Dehntraining ermöglicht demnach sowohl auf physischer als auch auf psychischer Ebene eine Entspannung. Daher deuten die Ergebnisse insgesamt darauf hin, dass ein 12-wöchiges Dehnprogramm geeignet ist, die gesundheitsbezogene Lebensqualität von Büroangestellten zu verbessern. Es kann geschlussfolgert werden, dass ein solches Dehnprogramm als präventive und rehabilitative Maßnahme in der betrieblichen Gesundheitsförderung geeignet sein kann, um aktuelle Herausforderungen des zunehmenden Wettbewerbs und steigenden Produktivitätsanforderungen am Arbeitsplatz entgegenzuwirken.
Background: The aim of this pilot study was to analyze the work of neurologists regarding static posture (> 4 s) and to identify awkward postures. Methods: A total of 9 neurologists (assistant physicians; 3 male, 6 female) participated in this study. Kinematic data were collected using the computer-assisted acquisition and long-term analysis of musculoskeletal loads (CUELA; IFA, Sankt Augustin, Germany) system. Daily work (“office work,” “measures on patients,” and “other activities”) was analyzed with a computer-based task analysis. Results: During ”measures on patients,” more than 80% of the total percentage of non-neutral posture was assumed with a flexed position of the head and entire back, both during “blood collection” (4.7% of the time) and while “placing intravenous catheters” (8.3% of the time). In contrast, long static postures (> 30 s) in the head and neck area, including the thoracic spine, were adopted during “office work.” Despite the increased total percentage of non-neutral attitudes during measures on patients, the time share of 3.4% of the total working time is so small that the risk for developing musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) is negligible. In contrast, office work, which comprises 50.8% of the total working time and longer static postures, has a potential risk for the development of MSD. Conclusion: The present study is the first kinematic pilot analysis in the field of in-patient neurological assistants. Non-neutral as well as static postures in everyday work could be identified. Potential MSD can be reduced by optimizing the working height and by taking regular breaks to loosen the musculoskeletal system.
Dieser Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit Arbeitsabläufen und physischen Risikofaktoren von Zahnärzt/innen (ZA) und Zahnmedizinischen Fachangestellten (ZFA), die zu gesundheitlichen Schäden des Muskel-Skelett-Systems führen. Dabei soll besonders auf das Arbeitsfeld „Patientenmund“ sowie die Arbeitsbelastung und deren Auswirkung auf die Gesundheit eingegangen werden. Ferner werden die optimale Sitzhaltung und physische Anforderungen statischer und repetitiver Behandlungspositionen sowie -haltungen von ZA und ZFA diskutiert.
The aim of this study was to investigate gender-specific influences of different symmetric and asymmetric occlusion conditions on postural control during standing and walking. The study involved 59 healthy adult volunteers (41 f/19 m) aged between 22 and 53 years (30.2 ± 6.3 years). Postural control measurements were carried out using a pressure plate by measuring plantar pressure distribution during standing and walking test conditions. Seven different occlusion conditions were tested. Prior to a MANOVA model analysis, the relationship between the two test conditions were checked using a factor analysis with a varying number of factors (between 2 and 10). The plantar pressure distributions during walking and standing are independent test conditions. The coefficient of variance across all variables between the conditions and genders was not significant: t(46) = 1.51 (p = 0.13). No statement can be made whether, or not, the influence of gender is greater than the influence of the conditions. Healthy male and female test subjects did not show any difference between seven occlusion conditions on the plantar pressure distribution while standing or walking. No differences between the genders were found for any of the investigated variables. In contrast to custom-made occlusion splints, simple cotton rolls appear not to influence the neuromuscular system in a systematic manner.
Background; Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are a common health problem among dentists. Dental treatment is mainly performed in a sitting position. The aim of the study was to quantify the effect of different ergonomic chairs on the sitting position. In addition, it was tested if the sitting position of experienced workers is different from a non-dental group.
Methods; A total of 59 (28 m/31f) subjects, divided into two dentist groups according to their work experience (students and dentists (9 m/11f) < 10 years, dentists (9 m/10f) ≥ 10 years) and a control group (10 m/10f) were measured. A three-dimensional back scanner captured the bare back of all subjects sitting on six dentist’s chairs of different design. Initially, inter-group comparisons per chair, firstly in the habitual and secondly in the working postures, were carried out. Furthermore, inter-chair comparison was conducted for the habitual as well as for the working postures of all subjects and for each group. Finally, a comparison between the habitual sitting posture and the working posture for each respective chair (intra-chair comparison) was conducted (for all subjects and for each group). In addition, a subjective assessment of each chair was made.
For the statistical analysis, non-parametric tests were conducted and the level of significance was set at 5%.
Results: When comparing the three subject groups, all chairs caused a more pronounced spinal kyphosis in experienced dentists. In both conditions (habitual and working postures), a symmetrical sitting position was assumed on each chair.
The inter-chair comparisons showed no differences regarding the ergonomic design of the chairs. The significances found in the inter-chair comparisons were all within the measurementerror and could, therefore, be classified as clinically irrelevant.
The intra-chair comparison (habitual sitting position vs. working sitting position) illustrated position-related changes in the sagittal, but not in the transverse, plane. These changes were only position-related (forward leaned working posture) and were not influenced by the ergonomic sitting design of the respective chair. There are no differences between the groups in the subjective assessment of each chair.
Conclusions; Regardless of the group or the dental experience, the ergonomic design of the dentist’s chair had only a marginal influence on the upper body posture in both the habitual and working sitting postures. Consequently, the focus of the dentist’s chair, in order to minimize MSD, should concentrate on adopting a symmetrical sitting posture rather than on its ergonomic design.