Refine
Document Type
- Article (19)
Has Fulltext
- yes (19)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (19)
Keywords
- ergonomics (4)
- inertial motion capture (4)
- Healthy adults (2)
- Musculoskeletal system (2)
- RULA (2)
- inertial motion units (2)
- kinematic analysis (2)
- musculoskeletal disorders (2)
- Anatomy (1)
- Back scan (1)
Institute
Background: The aim is to investigate to what extent the different oral protections compared to the habitual occlusion affect the upper body posture in statics and during taekwondo-specific movement.
Methods: 12 Taekwondoka (5 f/7 m) of German national team were measured by using a 3d back scanner and an ultrasonic distance measuring (upright stand, taekwondo attack and defense movement, two taekwondo specific combinations) in habitual occlusion, with a custom-made and ready-made mouth protection
Results: There are no significant changes in the upper body posture (p ≥ 0.05). Depending on the dynamic measurements, different significant reactions of the spinal position were found while wearing the custom made mouthguard or the ready-made mouthguard according to the conducted movement.
Conclusion: The measured changes in dynamic movements are not clinical relevant. Based on the positive responses from the participants, the custom-made mouth protection can be recommended combined with an individual analysis.
Background: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are common among dental professionals. The most common areas affected are the trunk, neck, shoulders and wrists. Current evidence suggests that the causes of MSD can be found in the physical demands of the profession. Posture and movement during treatment is influenced by the arrangement of the treatment concept (patient chair, equipment and cabinets). It has not been investigated whether the ergonomic risk differs between the treatment concepts.
Methods: To evaluate the prevalence of MSD in dental professionals, 1000 responses will be collected from a nationwide (Germany) online questionnaire (mod. Nordic Questionnaire and mod. Meyer questionnaire). In order to assess the ergonomic risk of the treatment techniques used in the four treatment concepts, 3D movement analyses are carried out with inertial sensors. For this purpose, 20 teams of dentists and dental assistants from four dental fields of specializations (generalists, orthodontists, endodontists and oral surgeons) and a student control group will be recruited. Each team will execute field specific standardized treatments at a dummy head. Measurements are carried out in each of the four treatment concepts. The data will be analyzed using the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) which will be modified for the evaluation of objective data.
Conclusions: On the basis of these investigations, a substantial gain of knowledge regarding work-related MSD in the field of dentistry and its potential biomechanical causes is possible. For the first time, objective and differentiated comparisons between the four treatment concepts are possible for different fields of dental specialization. Up to now, statically held positions of the trunk and proximal upper extremities, but also the repetitive movements of the hands have been considered a risk for MSD. Since both are included in the RULA, dental activities can be assessed in a detailed but also global manner with regard to ergonomic risks.
Comparative values are essential for the classification of orthopedic abnormalities and the assessment of a necessary therapy. At present, reference values for the upper body posture for healthy, male adults exist for the age groups of 18–35, 31–40 and 41–50 years. However, corresponding data on the decade of 51 to 60 year-old healthy men are still lacking. 23 parameters of the upper body posture were analyzed in 102 healthy male participants aged 51–60 (55.36 ± 2.78) years. The average height was 180.76 ± 7.81 cm with a weight of 88.22 ± 14.57 kg. The calculated BMI was 26.96 ± 3.92 kg/m2. In the habitual, upright position, the bare upper body was scanned three-dimensionally using video raster stereography. Mean or median values, confidence intervals, tolerance ranges and group comparisons, as well as correlations of BMI and physical activity, were calculated for all parameters. The spinal column parameters exhibited a good exploration of the frontal plane in the habitual standing position. In the sagittal plane, a slight, ventral inclination of the trunk with an increased kyphosis angle of the thoracic spine and increased thoracic bending angle was observed. The parameters of the pelvis showed a pronounced symmetry with deviations from the 0° axis within the measurement error margin of 1 mm/1°. The scapula height together with the scapula angles of the right and left side described a slightly elevated position of the left shoulder compared to the right side. The upper body posture is influenced by parameters of age, height, weight and BMI. Primarily there are significant correlations to measurements of trunk lengths D (age: p ≤ 0.02, rho = -0.23; height: p ≤ 0.001, rho = 0.58; weight: p ≤ 0.001, rho = 0.33), trunk lengths S (age: p ≤ 0.01, rho = -0.27; height: p ≤ 0.001, rho = 0.58; weight: p ≤ 0.001, rho = 0.32), pelvic distance (height: p ≤ 0.01, rho = 0.26; weight: p ≤ 0.001, rho = 0.32; BMI: p ≤ 0.03, rho = 0.22) and scapula distance (weight: p ≤ 0.001, rho = .32; BMI: p ≤ 0.01, rho = 0.27), but also to sagittal parameters of trunk decline (weight: p ≤ 0.001, rho = -0.29; BMI: p ≤ 0.01, rho = -0.24), thoracic bending angle (height: p ≤ 0.01, rho = 0.27) and kyphosis angle (BMI: p ≤ 0.03, rho = 0.21). The upper body posture of healthy men between the ages of 51 and 60 years was axially almost aligned and balanced. With the findings of this investigation and the reference values obtained, suitable comparative values for use in clinical practice and for further scientific studies with the same experimental set-up have been established.
Background: In order to determine possible pathological deviations in body weight distribution and body sway, it is helpful to have reference values for comparison: gender and age are two main influencing factors. For this reason, it was the aim of the present study to present reference values for women between 51 and 60 years of age.
Methods: For this study, 101 subjectively healthy female Germans aged between 51 and 60 years (55.16 ± 2.89 years) volunteered and were required to stand in a habitual posture on a pressure measuring platform.
Results: The average BMI of this age group was 25.02 ± 4.55 kg/m². The left and right foot showed an almost evenly balanced load distribution with a median load of 52.33% on the left foot [tolerance interval (TR) 38.00%/68.03%; confidence interval (CI) 51.00%/53.33%] and 47.67% on the right foot [TR 31.97%/62.00%; CI 46.67%/49.00%]. The measured median load of the forefoot was 33.33% [TR 21.37%/54.60%; CI 30.67%/36.00%] and that of the rear foot was 66.67% [TR 45.50%/78.63%; CI 64.00%/69.33%]. The median body sway in the frontal plane was 11 mm [TR 5.70 mm/26.30 mm; CI 10.00 mm/11.67 mm] and that of the sagittal plane was 16 mm [TR 7.37 mm/34.32 mm; CI 14.67 mm/18.67 mm]. The median ellipse area was 1.17 cm² [TR 0.29 cm²/4.96 cm²; CI 0.98 cm²/1.35 cm²], the median ellipse width was 0.91 cm [TR 0.42 cm/1.9 cm; CI 0.84 cm/1.02 cm] and its height was 0.40 cm [TR 0.22 cm/0.89 cm; CI 0.38 cm/0.43 cm].
Conclusions: The left-to-right ratio is almost balanced. The load distribution of the forefoot to the rear foot is approximately 1:2. The median body sway values for the frontal and sagittal planes (11 and 16 mm, respectively) agree with other values. The values for the height, body weight and the BMI are comparable to the values of average German women at this age; therefore, the measured values show a presentable cross section of women in the 51–60 age group in Germany. The present data can be used as a basis for women aged 51–60 years and can support the detection of possible dysfunctions as well as injury prevention in the parameters of postural control.
Standard values of the upper body posture in healthy adults with special regard to age, sex and BMI
(2023)
In order to classify and analyze the parameters of upper body posture in clinical or physiotherapeutic settings, a baseline in the form of standard values with special regard to age, sex and BMI is required. Thus, subjectively healthy men and women aged 21–60 years were measured in this project. The postural parameters of 800 symptom-free male (n = 397) and female (n = 407) volunteers aged 21–60 years (Ø♀: 39.7 ± 11.6, Ø ♂: 40.7 ± 11.5 y) were studied. The mean height of the men was 1.8 ± 0.07 m, with a mean body weight of 84.8 ± 13.1 kg and an average BMI of 26.0 ± 3.534 kg/m2. In contrast, the mean height of the women was 1.67 ± 0.06 m, with a mean body weight of 66.5 ± 12.7 kg and an average BMI of 23.9 ± 4.6 kg/m2. By means of video rasterstereography, a 3-dimensional scan of the upper back surface was measured when in a habitual standing position. The means or medians, confidence intervals, tolerance ranges, the minimum, 2.5, 25, 50, 75, 97.5 percentiles and the maximum, plus the kurtosis and skewness of the distribution, were calculated for all parameters. Additionally, ANOVA and a factor analyses (sex, BMI, age) were conducted. In both sexes across all age groups, balanced, symmetrical upper body statics were evident. Most strikingly, the females showed greater thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis angles (kyphosis: Ø ♀ 56°, Ø♂ 51°; lordosis: Ø ♀ 49°, Ø♂ 32°) and lumbar bending angles (Ø ♀ 14°, Ø♂ 11°) than the males. The distance between the scapulae was more pronounced in men. These parameters also show an increase with age and BMI, respectively. Pelvic parameters were independent of age and sex. The upper body postures of women and men between the ages of 21 and 60 years were found to be almost symmetrical and axis-conforming with a positive correlation for BMI or age. Consequently, the present body posture parameters allow for comparisons with other studies, as well as for the evaluation of clinical (interim) diagnostics and applications.
Background: The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) is used for the risk assessment of workplace-related activities. Thus far, the paper and pen method (RULA-PP) has been predominantly used for this purpose. In the present study, this method was compared with an RULA evaluation based on kinematic data using inertial measurement units (RULA-IMU). The aim of this study was, on the one hand, to work out the differences between these two measurement methods and, on the other, to make recommendations for the future use of the respective method on the basis of the available findings. Methods: For this purpose, 130 (dentists + dental assistants, paired as teams) subjects from the dental profession were photographed in an initial situation of dental treatment and simultaneously recorded with the IMU system (Xsens). In order to compare both methods statistically, the median value of the difference of both methods, the weighted Cohen’s Kappa, and the agreement chart (mosaic plot) were applied. Results: In Arm and Wrist Analysis—area A—here were differences in risk scores; here, the median difference was 1, and the agreement in the weighted Cohen’s kappa test also remained between 0.07 and 0.16 (no agreement to poor agreement). In area B—Neck, Trunk, and Leg Analysis—the median difference was 0, with at least one poor agreement in the Cohen’s Kappa test of 0.23–0.39. The final score has a median of 0 and a Cohen’s Kappa value of 0.21–0.28. In the mosaic plot, it can be seen that RULA-IMU had a higher discriminatory power overall and more often reached a value of 7 than RULA-PP. Conclusion: The results indicate a systematic difference between the methods. Thus, in the RULA risk assessment, RULA-IMU is mostly one assessment point above RULA-PP. Therefore, future study results of RULA by RULA-IMU can be compared with literature results obtained by RULA-PP to further improve the risk assessment of musculoskeletal diseases.
Musculoskeletal disorders of the trunk and neck are common among cleaners. Vacuum cleaning is a demanding activity. The aim of this study was to present the movement profile of the trunk and neck during habitual vacuuming. The data were collected from 31 subjects (21f./10 m) using a 3D motion analysis system (Xsens). 10 cycles were analysed in vacuuming PVC and carpet floors with 8 vacuum cleaners. The joint angles and velocities were represented statistically descriptive. When vacuuming, the trunk is held in a forwardly inclined position by a flexion in the hip and rotated from this position. In the joint angles and velocities of the spine, the rotation proved to be dominant. A relatively large amount of movement took place in the cervical spine and also in the lumbar spine. The shown movement profile is rather a comfort area of vacuuming which may serve as a reference for ergonomics in vacuuming.
Background: Vacuum cleaning, which is associated with musculoskeletal complaints, is frequently carried out in private households and by professional cleaners. The aim of this pilot study was to quantify the movements during habitual vacuuming and to characterize the movement profile with regard to its variability. Methods: The data were collected from 31 subjects (21 f/10 m) using a 3D motion analysis system (XSens). Eight vacuum cleaners were used to vacuum polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and carpet floors. In 15 joints of the right upper extremity, the trunk and the lower extremities, Principal Component Analysis was used to determine the predominantly varying joints during vacuuming. Results: The movements of the trunk and the lower extremities were relatively constant and, therefore, had less influence. The shoulder, elbow and wrist joints were identified as joints that can be decisive for the movement profile and that can be influenced. These joints were represented in the course of the vacuuming cycle by the mean movement with its standard deviation. Conclusion: In summary, the generalization of a movement profile is possible for the trunk and the lower extremities due to the relative homogeneity. In future it will be necessary to identify factors influencing variability in order to draw conclusions about movement ergonomics.
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.
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.