Thu, Mar 27, 2025
[Archive]
.png)
Volume 10, Issue 1 (2-2024)
jhehp 2024, 10(1): 57-62 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sobhani S, Tabanfar S, Safari Variani A, Varmazyar S. An Ergonomic Evaluation of the Office Workplace: Determining the Cut-off Point of Checklists for Workstation Layout and Computer Users’ Posture. jhehp 2024; 10 (1) :57-62
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-621-en.html
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-621-en.html
1- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Health, Qazvin University of Medical Science, Qazvin, Iran; Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
2- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Health, Qazvin University of medical sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
3- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Social Determinants Health Research Center and Research Institute for Prevention of Non-Communicable Diseases, Faculty of Health, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
2- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Health, Qazvin University of medical sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
3- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Social Determinants Health Research Center and Research Institute for Prevention of Non-Communicable Diseases, Faculty of Health, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
Abstract: (1499 Views)
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the ergonomics of the office workplace and determine the cut-off point of the workstation layout checklist (WSLC) and the work posture checklist (WPC) of computer users.
Methods: The descriptive-analytical was performed among 200 office staff willing to cooperate at the university. To collect data and evaluate workstations and the posture of employees, the WSLC and WPC were used, respectively. The ROC curve was used to determine the cut point of the final score of the checklists.
Results: The optimal cut-off point value for the WSLC was 14.5 (sensitivity = 91.2, specificity = 77.8, and area under the curve = 0.89). Similarly, the best cut-off point value for the WPC was identified as 8.5, with a sensitivity of 93.9, specificity of 71.8, and area under the curve of 0.88. The evaluation results showed that 25 % of the workstations and 32 % of the working postures of the employees were at an undesirable level.
Conclusion: Determining the cut-off point for valid WSLC and WPC plays a crucial role in evaluating the cost, facilitation, speed, and repetition associated with office workplaces, thereby categorizing them as either desirable or undesirable. A quarter of the workstations and a third of the working postures of the employees were evaluated as undesirable.
Methods: The descriptive-analytical was performed among 200 office staff willing to cooperate at the university. To collect data and evaluate workstations and the posture of employees, the WSLC and WPC were used, respectively. The ROC curve was used to determine the cut point of the final score of the checklists.
Results: The optimal cut-off point value for the WSLC was 14.5 (sensitivity = 91.2, specificity = 77.8, and area under the curve = 0.89). Similarly, the best cut-off point value for the WPC was identified as 8.5, with a sensitivity of 93.9, specificity of 71.8, and area under the curve of 0.88. The evaluation results showed that 25 % of the workstations and 32 % of the working postures of the employees were at an undesirable level.
Conclusion: Determining the cut-off point for valid WSLC and WPC plays a crucial role in evaluating the cost, facilitation, speed, and repetition associated with office workplaces, thereby categorizing them as either desirable or undesirable. A quarter of the workstations and a third of the working postures of the employees were evaluated as undesirable.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Occupational and Industrial Health
Received: 2023/12/30 | Accepted: 2024/02/2 | Published: 2024/02/7
Received: 2023/12/30 | Accepted: 2024/02/2 | Published: 2024/02/7
References
1. Mianehsaz E, Tabatabaei M, Kashani MM, Badi HZ, Rahimi H. Evaluating Musculoskeletal Disorders and Their Ergonomic Risk Factors among Office Workers of a Large Public Hospital in Iran. Int Arch Health Sci. 2022; 9(1): 35. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
2. Chinedu OO, Henry AT, Nene JJ, Okwudili JD. Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders among Office Workers in Higher Education Institutions: A Cross-Sectional Study. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2020; 30(5). [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
3. Choobineh A, Rahimifard H, Jahangiri M, Mahmoodkhani S. Musculoskeletal Injuries and Their Associated Risk Factors in Office Workplaces. Iran occup health. 2012; 8(4). [Google Scholar]
4. Kumar SR, Kumar CN. Design of Workstations for Computer Users: A Review. Iconic Res Eng J. 2017; 1(4): 24-34. [Google Scholar]
5. Shikdar AA, Al-Kindi MA. Office Ergonomics: Deficiencies in Computer Workstation Design. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2007; 13(2): 215-23. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
6. Singh S, Wadhwa J. Impact of Computer Workstation Design on Health of the Users. J Hum Ecol. 2006; 20(3): 165-70. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
7. Motamedzadeh M, Jalali M, Golmohammadi R, Faradmal J, Zakeri HR, Nasiri I. Ergonomic Risk Factors and Musculoskeletal Disorders in Bank Staff: An Interventional Follow-up Study in Iran. J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2021; 96(1): 1-10. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
8. Robertson MM, Ciriello VM, Garabet AM. Office Ergonomics Training and a Sit-stand Workstation: Effects on Musculoskeletal and Visual Symptoms and Performance of Office Workers. Appl Ergon. 2013; 44(1): 73-85. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
9. Sonne M, Villalta DL, Andrews DM. Development and Evaluation of an Office Ergonomic Risk Checklist: ROSA-rapid Office Strain Assessment. Appl Ergon. 2012; 43(1): 98-108. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
10. Ardahan M, Simsek H. Analyzing Musculoskeletal System Discomforts and Risk Factors in Computer-using Office Workers. Pak J Med Sci. 2016; 32(6): 1425. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
11. Rahnama R, Nikbakht R, Hosseini-Koukamari P. Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders among a Sample of Iranian Computer Users. Int J Musculoskelet Pain Prev. 2020; 5(3): 367-72. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
12. Rezaee-Hachesu V, Hokmabadi R. Ergonomic Evaluation of Computer Users by Rapid Office Strain Assessment (ROSA) Method and Its Relationship with the Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders. J Community Health Res. 2022; 8(2): 63-75. [Google Scholar]
13. Lindholm C, Stricklin D, Jaworska A, Koivistoinen A, Paile W, Arvidsson E, et al. Premature Chromosome Condensation (PCC) Assay for Dose Assessment in Mass Casualty Accidents. Radiat Res. 2010; 173(1): 71-8. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
14. Kibria M, Rafiquzzaman M. Ergonomic Computer Workstation Design for University Teachers in Bangladesh. Jordan J Mech Ind Eng. 2019; 13(2). [Google Scholar]
15. Marmaras N, Nathanael D. Workplace Design. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. 2021: 368-82. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
16. Workineh SA, Yamaura H. Multi-position Ergonomic Computer Workstation Design to Increase Comfort of Computer Work. Int J Ind Ergon. 2016; 53: 1-9. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
17. Navidi SF, Keramat Kar M, Jahan MG, Varmazyar S. Effects of Ergonomics Training and Corrective Exercises on Musculoskeletal Disorders among Office Computer Users at Qazvin Province Gas Company. J Occup Health Epidemiol. 2022; 11(3): 246-55. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
18. Pajoohnia M, Roveshti MM, Valipour F, Raei M. Ergonomic Assessment of Risk Factors for Musculoskeletal Disorders of the Administrative Staff in Military Center Using ROSA. Paramed Sci Mil Health. 2022; 16(4): 1-9. [Google Scholar]
19. Li G, Buckle P. Current Techniques for Assessing Physical Exposure to Work-related Musculoskeletal Risks, with Emphasis on Posture-based Methods. Ergon. 1999; 42(5): 674-95. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
20. Hignett S, McAtamney L. Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). Appl Ergon. 2000; 31(2): 201-5. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
21. McAtamney L, Corlett EN. RULA: A Survey Method for the Investigation of Work-related Upper Limb Disorders. Appl Ergon. 1993; 24(2): 91-9. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
22. Karhu O, Kansi P, Kuorinka I. Correcting Working Postures in Industry: A Practical Method for Analysis. Appl Ergon. 1977; 8(4): 199-201. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
23. Kee D, Karwowski W. LUBA: An Assessment Technique for Postural Loading on the Upper Body Based on Joint Motion Discomfort and Maximum Holding Time. Appl Ergon. 2001; 32(4): 357-66. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
24. Baker NA, Livengood H, Jacobs K. Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Computer Workstation Checklist. Work. 2013; 45(2): 213-21. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
25. Schreuer N, Myhill WN, Aratan-Bergman T, Samant D, Blanck P. Workplace Accommodations: Occupational Therapists as Mediators in the Interactive Process. Work. 2009; 34(2): 149-60. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
26. Shaw W, Hong QN, Pransky G, Loisel P. A Literature Review Describing the Role of Return-to-work Coordinators in Trial Programs and Interventions Designed to Prevent Workplace Disability. J Occup Rehabil. 2008; 18: 2-15. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
27. Sukadarin E, Deros B, Ghani J, Nawi N, Ismail A. Postural Assessment in Pen-and-paper-based Observational Methods and Their Associated Health Effects: A Review. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2016; 22(3): 389-98. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
28. Romadhoni DL, Ramadhani AN, Lidiana EH. Relationship of Work in Pandemic Era with Increased Risk of Musculosceletal Disorders that Lead to Change in Cervical Posture. J Epidemiol Public Health. 2021; 6(3): 347-54. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
29. Tabanfar S, Safari Variani A, Sobhani S, Varmazyar S. The Effect of Self-Management Exercises on Neck Pain and Head and Neck Angles among Iranian University Employees: An Interventional Study. J Occup Health Epidemiol. 2022; 11(2): 138-47. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
30. Woo E, White P, Lai C. Ergonomics Standards and Guidelines for Computer Workstation Design and the Impact on Users’ Health-a Review. Ergon. 2016; 59(3): 464-75. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
31. Ertekin E, Günaydın ÖE. Neck Pain in Rounded Shoulder Posture: Clinico‐Radiologic Correlation by Shear Wave Elastography. Int J Clin Pract. 2021; 75(8): e14240. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
32. Curran M, O’Sullivan L, O’Sullivan P, Dankaerts W, O’Sullivan K. Does Using a Chair Backrest or Reducing Seated Hip Flexion Influence Trunk Muscle Activity and Discomfort? A Systematic Review. Hum Factors. 2015; 57(7): 1115-48. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
33. Tanzila RA, Prameswarie T, Hartanti MD, Denaneer T. The Correlation between Position and Duration Use of Laptops with Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs). Mutiara Medika J Kedokt Kesehatan. 2021; 21(2): 9-15. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
34. Gerding T, Syck M, Daniel D, Naylor J, Kotowski SE, Gillespie GL, et al. An Assessment of Ergonomic Issues in the Home Offices of University Employees Sent Home Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Work. 2021; 68(4): 981-92. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
35. Mehrparvar AH, Heydari M, Mirmohammadi SJ, Mostaghaci M, Davari MH, Taheri M. Ergonomic Intervention, Workplace Exercises and Musculoskeletal Complaints: A Comparative Study. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014; 28: 69. [Google Scholar]
36. Shariat A, Tamrin SB, Arumugam M, Danaee M, Ramasamy R. Office Exercise Training to Reduce and Prevent the Occurrence of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Office Workers: A Hypothesis. Malays J Med Sci. 2016; 23(4): 54-8. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
37. Tersa-Miralles C, Bravo C, Bellon F, Pastells-Peiró R, Arnaldo ER, Rubí-Carnacea F. Effectiveness of Workplace Exercise Interventions in the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Disorders in Office Workers: A Systematic Review. BMJ Open. 2022; 12(1): e054288. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
38. Rafeemanesh E, Khooei A, Niroumand S, Shirzadeh T. A Study on Musculoskeletal Complaints and Working Postures in Pathology Specialists in Iran. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021; 22(1): 1-8. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
© 2024 The Author(s)
