Postural and Muscular Responses While Viewing Different Heights of Screen

• Autorzy: Lee T. H. , Liu T. Y.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study aimed to examine the effects of visual display terminal (VDT) viewing angle on human postural angle and muscular activity. The participants’ neck, thoracic bending, and trunk inclination angles; and the activity of sternocleidomastoid, trapezius, splenius capitis, and erector spinae at 5 viewing angles (+400, +200, 00, –200, and –400) of a VDT screen were collected for 1 min. This study showed that neck and thoracic bending angles increased with viewing angle, while viewing angle did not significantly affect trunk inclination angle. In addition, the activity of trapezius and erector spinae increased when viewing a higher or lower VDT screen height compared with viewing a horizontal VDT screen height; however, the activity of splenius capitis decreased with viewing angle.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

visual display terminal; posture; viewing angle

PL

pozycja przy pracy; kąt widzenia; ekran; praca przy komputerze

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2013
• Tom: Vol. 19, No. 2
• Strony: 251--258
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Lee T. H.

• Department of Management and Information Technology, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Tainan, Taiwan

autor

Liu T. Y.

• Department of Management and Information Technology, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Tainan, Taiwan

Bibliografia

• 1.Gerr F, Marcus M, Monteilh C. Epidemiology of musculoskeletal disorders among computer users: lesson learned from the role of posture and keyboard use. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2004;14(1):25-31.
• 2.Szeto GPY, Straker LM, O'Sullivan PB. A comparison of symptomatic and asymptomatic office workers performing monotonous keyboard work – l: neck and shoulder muscle recruitment patterns. Man Ther. 2005;10:270-80.
• 3.Village J, Rempel D, Teschke K. Musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity associated with computer work: a systematic review. Occupational Ergonomics. 2005;5(4):205-18.
• 4.Shikdar AA, Al-Kindi MA. Office ergonomics: deficiencies in computer workstation design. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2007;13(2):215-23. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/21992.
• 5.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. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/12381.
• 6.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. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/12380.
• 7.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. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/12382.
• 8.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. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/12383.
• 9.Hellan M, Horgen G, Kvikstad TM, Garthus T, Aaras A. Will musculoskeletal, visual and psychosocial stress change for visual display unit (VDU) operators when moving from a single-occupancy office to an office landscape? International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2008;14(3):259-74. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/27070.
• 10.Horgen G, Aaras A, Dainoff MJ, Konarska M, Thoresen M, Cohen BGF, et al. A cross-country comparison of short- and long-term effects of an ergonomic intervention on musculoskeletal discomfort, eyestrain and psychosocial stress in VDT operators: selected aspects of the international project. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2005;11(1):77-92. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.ciop.pl/12384.
• 11.Villanueva MB, Sotoyama M, Jonai H, Takeuchi Y, Saito S. Adjustments of posture and viewing parameters of the eye to changes in the screen height of the visual display terminal. Ergonomics. 1996;39(7):933-45.
• 12.Psihogios JP, Sommerich CM, Mirka GA, Moon SD. A field evaluation of monitor placement effects in VDT users. Appl Ergon. 2001;32(4):313-25.
• 13.Sommerch CM, Joines SMB, Psihogios JP. Effects of computer monitor viewing angle and related factors on strain, performance, and preference outcomes. Hum Factors. 2001;43(1):39-55.
• 14.Bergqvist UO, Knave BG. Eye discomfort and work with visual display terminals. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1994;20(1):27-33.
• 15.Sotoyama M, Jonai H, Saito S, Villanueva MB. Analysis of ocular surface area for comfortable VDT workstation layout. Ergonomics. 1996;39(6):877-84.
• 16.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.
• 17.Grieco A, Molteni G, Piccoli B, Perris R. Field study in newspaper printing: a systematic approach to VDU operator strain. In: Grandjean E, Vigliani E, editors. Ergonomics aspects of visual display terminals. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1982. p. 185-94.
• 18.de Wall M, van Riel MPJM, 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.
• 19.Heuer H, Bruwer M, Romer T, Kroger H, Knapp H. Preferred vertical gaze direction and observation distance. Ergonomics. 1991;34(3):379-92.
• 20.Hsiao H, Keyserling WM. Evaluating posture behavior during seated tasks. Int J Ind Ergon. 1991;8(4):313-34.
• 21.Bauer W, Wittig T. Influence of screen and copy holder positions on head posture, muscle activity and user judgment. Appl Ergon. 1998;29(3):185-92.
• 22.Straker L, Mekhora K. An evaluation of visual display unit placement by electromyography, posture, discomfort and preference. Int J Ind Ergon. 2000;26(3):389-98.
• 23.Szeto GPY, Sham KSW. The effects of angled positions of computer display screen on muscle activities of the neck-shoulder stabilizers. Int J Ind Ergon. 2008;38(1):9-17.
• 24.Mirka GA, Marras WS. Toward a more accurate description of the EMG/force relationship of the erector spinae muscles. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA, USA: Human Factors Society; 1991. p. 728-32.
• 25.Jampel RS, Shi DX. The primary position of the eyes, the resetting saccade, and the transverse visual head plane. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992;33(8):2501-10.
• 26.Burgess-Limerick R, Plooy A, Mon-Williams M. The effect of vertical visual target location on head and neck posture. In: Hanson MA, editor. Contemporary ergonomics. London: Taylor & Francis; 1998. p. 123-7.
• 27.Burgess-Limerick R, Mon-Williams M, Coppard VL. Visual display height. Human Factors. 2000;42:140-50. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from: http://www.iovs.org/content/33/8/2501.long.
• 28.Kroemer KHE, Kroemer HB, Kroemer-Elbert, KE. Ergonomics: how to design for ease and efficiency. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall; 1994.
• 29.Ankrum DR, Nemeth KJ. Posture, comfort, and monitor placement. Ergonomics in Design. 1995;3(2):7-9.