Office Ergonomics: Deficiencies in Computer Workstation Design

• Autorzy: Shikdar A. A. , Al-Kindi M. A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The objective of this research was to study and identify ergonomic deficiencies in computer workstation design in typical offices. Physical measurements and a questionnaire were used to study 40 workstations. Major ergonomic deficiencies were found in physical design and layout of the workstations, employee postures, work practices, and training. The consequences in terms of user health and other problems were significant. Forty-five percent of the employees used nonadjustable chairs, 48% of computers faced windows, 90% of the employees used computers more than 4 hrs/day, 45% of the employees adopted bent and unsupported back postures, and 20% used office tables for computers. Major problems reported were eyestrain (58%), shoulder pain (45%), back pain (43%), arm pain (35%), wrist pain (30%), and neck pain (30%). These results indicated serious ergonomic deficiencies in office computer workstation design, layout, and usage. Strategies to reduce or eliminate ergonomic deficiencies in computer workstation design were suggested.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

computer workstation; ergonomic deficiencies; work posture; work practices; health; problems; employee satisfaction

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: Vol. 13, No. 2
• Strony: 215--223
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 21 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Shikdar A. A.

• Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman

autor

Al-Kindi M. A.

• Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman

Bibliografia

• 1.Salvendy G, editor. Handbook of industrial engineering: technology and operations management. 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley Interscience; 2001.
• 2.Eason KD. Ergonomic perspectives on advances in human–computer interaction. Ergonomics. 1991;34(6):721–41.
• 3.Lu H, Aghazadeh A. Risk factors and their interactions in VDT workstation systems. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 40th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA, USA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society; 1996. p. 637–41.
• 4.Wall MDE, Riel MP, Van JM, Aghina JCFM, Burdorf A, Snijders CJ. Improving the sitting posture of CAD/CAM workers by increasing VDU monitor working height. Ergonomics. 1992;35(4):427–36.
• 5.Springer TJ. VDT workstations: a comparative evaluation of alternative. Appl Ergon. 1982;13:211–2.
• 6.Jaschinski W, Heuer H, Kylian, H. Preferred position of visual displays relative to the eyes: a field study of visual strain and individual differences. Ergonomics. 1998;41(7):1034–49.
• 7.Sotoyama M, Jonai H, Saito S. Analysis of ocular surface area for comfortable VDT workstation layout. Ergonomics. 1996;39(6):877–84.
• 8.Saito S, Sotoyama M, Suzuki T, Saito Sh, Taptagaporn S. Vertical gaze direction and eye movement analysis for a comfortable VDT workstation design. In: Luczak H, Çakir AE, Çakir G, editors. Work with display units. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 1992. p. 110–4.
• 9.Neuffer MB, Schulze LJH, Chen J. Body part discomfort reported by legal secretaries and word processors before and after implementation of mandatory typing break. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA, USA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society; 1997; p. 624–8.
• 10.Nelson NA, Silverstein BA. Workplace changes associated with a reduction in musculoskeletal symptoms in office workers. Hum Factors. 1998;40(2):337–50.
• 11.Bergqvist U. Visual display terminal work—a perspective on long–term changes and discomforts. Int J Ind Ergon. 1995;16:201–9.
• 12.Matius AC, Salvendy G, Kuczek, T. Previctive models of carpal tunnel syndrome causation among VDT operators. Ergonomics. 1998;41(2):213–26.
• 13.Chung MK, Choi K. Ergonomic analysis of musculoskeletal discomforts among conversational VDT operators. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 1997;33(3–4):521–4.
• 14.Sanders MS, McCormick EJ. Human factors in engineering and design. 7th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw Hill International Editions; 1993.
• 15.Ivergard T. Handbook of control room design and ergonomics. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1989.
• 16.Lewis RJ, Fogleman M, Deeb J, Crandall E, Agopsowicz, D. Effectiveness of a VDT ergonomics training program. Int J Ind Ergon. 2001;27:119–131.
• 17.Dainoff MJ, Aaras A, Horgen G, Konarska M, Larsen S, Thoresen M, et al. The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT entry work: organization and methodology of the international study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):9–23.
• 18.Aaras A, Horgen G, Ro O, Loken E, Mathiasen G, Bjorset HH, et al. The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT entry work: the Norwegian part of the international study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):25–47.
• 19.Dainoff MJ, Cohen BGF, Dainoff MH. The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT entry work: the United States part of the international study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):49–63.
• 20.Konarska M, Wolska A, Widerszal-Bazyl M, Bugajska J, Roman-Liu D, Aaras A. The effect of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT entry work: the Polish part of the international study. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):65–76.
• 21.Horgen G, Aaras A, Dainoff MJ, Konarska M, Thoresen M, Cohen BGF, et al. A cross-country comparison of short-term and long-term effects of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal, psychosocial and visual strain of VDT operators: selected aspects of the international project. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):77–92.