A Research on The Suitability of Desk Ergonomy of a Foundation University for Anthropometric Measurements of Students and its Impact on Their Life Quality

Abstract

Purpose: Sitting for a long time is considered to be one of the most important disease risks. Therefore, individual-specific arrangements in the early period can prevent these diseases. This study was aimed to assess the suitability of school desk and chair for Turkish population with current anthropometric measurements and find out the impact of this on the same participants’ life quality.Method: The students of the School of Health Science N=153 made up the sample for this study. 14 different anthropometric measurements were taken from the participants and they were required to fill in the WHOQOL-Bref Life Quality Scale for the last month in the study.Result: Statistically no significant difference was determined in regards of general and sub-parameters of life quality points such as physical and environmental points between sample female n=81 and male n=72 population p>0.05 . Some fit and unfit measurements for desk dimensions were determined when anthropometric measurements of desk dimensions were analyzed minimally and maximally 5–95% in terms of gender.Conclusion: In this study musculoskeletal disorders owing to the long term use of ergonomically unsuitable desks by determining fit and unfit measurements in desk dimensions and the effect of this on life quality are explained. Also norm values for new furniture designs were determined by calculating anthropometric measurements that must be updated termly for the continuously changing population

Keywords

• Ergonomy,life quality,anthropometry

References

1. Keegan J. Alterations of the lumbar curve related to posture and seating. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1953;35:589–603. [CrossRef]
2. Fiell, C. Modern Chairs, 1st ed. Kèoln: Benedikt Taschen; 1993.
3. Lueder R, Rice V. Physical development in children and adolescents and age related risks. New York: Taylor and Francis Group; 2008.
4. Bradtmiller, B. Measurer’s Handbook: US Army Anthropometric Survey (ANSUR). United States: 1988.
5. Başıbüyük GÖ, Acar S, Doğan M. Antropometrik ölçümlerin polis adaylarının silah atış performansları üstünde etkisi. Hitit Üniv Sos Bil Enst Derg 2017;757–774. [CrossRef]
6. Özdener N, Yoldaşcan E, Zorba H, Akbaba M. Biri türk, biri çin malı iki bilgisayar masasının ergonomik uygunluğu üzerine bir araştırma. Türk Tabip Bir Mes Sağlık Güv Derg 2007;26–30.
7. Şişman EE, Gültürk P. Examination of Tekirdağ city center outdoor design elements in terms of anthropometry. İnönü Univ J Art Design 2016;6:1–12. [CrossRef]
8. Kurban H, Kaygın B, Tankut AN. Mobilya tasarımında antropometrik ölçü ve ergonomik analizlerin kullanımı. İnönü Üniv Sanat Tasarım Derg 2016;6:313–320.

9. Burgess-Limerick R, Plooy A, Fraser K, Ankrum DR. The influence of computer monitor height on head and neck posture. Int J Indust Ergon 1999;23:171–179. [CrossRef]
10. Önder H, Gül M, Ergüldürenler G. Eğitim ortamında ergonomi kullanılması ve örnek ideal sınıf çalışması. Süleyman Demirel Üniv Sos Bil Enst Derg 2013;41–55.
11. Akın G, Gültekin T, Bektaş Y, Önal S, Tuncel E. Üniversite öğrencileri için sıra tasarımı. Ankara Üniv Dil Tarih-Coğr Fak Derg 2014;54:269– 286. Erişim: http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/26/1953/20441.pdf
12. Feathers D, Paquet L, Drury C. Measurement consistency and three- dimensional electromechanical anthropometry. Int J Indust Ergon 33 2004;181–190. [CrossRef]
13. Eser E, Fidaner H, Fidaner C, Eser SY, Elbi H, Göker E. Measure of quality of life WHOQOL-100 and WHOQOL-Bref 3P Derg 1999;7:5–13. Erişim: https://www.researchgate.net/ profile/Erhan_Eser3/publication/285059766_Psychometric_ p ro p e r t i e s _ o f _ t h e _ W H O Q O L - 1 0 0 _ a n d _ W H O Q O L - B R E F / links/57aaf92e08ae3765c3b6f1a0/Psychometric-properties-of-the- WHOQOL-100-and-WHOQOL-BREF.pdf
14. Gouvali MK, Boudolos K. Match between school furniture 18. Castellucci HI, Arezes PM, Viviani CA. Mismatch between classroom dimensions and children’s anthropometry. Appl Ergon 2006;37:765– 773. [CrossRef]
15. Bendix T, Krohn L, Jessen F, Aarås A. Trunk posture and trapezius muscle load while working in standing, supported-standing, and sitting positions. Spine 1985;10:433–439. [CrossRef]
16. Agha SR. School furniture match to students’ anthropometry in the Gaza strip. Ergonomics 2010;53:344–354. [CrossRef]
17. Panagiotopoulou G, Christoulas K, Papanckolaou A, Mandroukas K. Classroom furniture dimensions and anthropometric measures in primary school. Appl Ergon 2004;35:121–128. [CrossRef] furniture and anthropometric measures in Chilean schools. Appl Ergon 2010;41:563–568. [CrossRef]
18. Saarni L, Nygard CH, Kaukiainen A, Rimpela A. Are the desks and chairs at school appropriate? Ergonomics 2007;50:1561–1570. [CrossRef]
19. Tunay M, Melemez K. An analysis of biomechanical andanthropometric, parameters an classroom furniture desing. African J Biotechnol 2008;7:1081–1086.