ISAK Home

Vol. 4 Núm. 2 (2024): Volume 4, Issue 2, Year 2024

Articles

Relationship between Learning Environment Design and Musculoskeletal Disorders in Learners

  • Sylvia Adu,
  • George Adu,
  • Alfred Asante Boadi,
  • Kwaku Antwi
Sylvia Adu
Department of Forest Resources Technology, Faculty of Renewable Natural Resources, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
George Adu
Department of Interior Design and Materials Technology, Kumasi Technical University, Kumasi, Ghana
Alfred Asante Boadi
Department of Building Technology, Kumasi Technical University, Kumasi, Ghana
Kwaku Antwi
Department of Wood Science and Technology, Akenten Appiah-Menka University of Skills Training and Entrepreneurship Development, Kumasi, Ghana
PDF (English)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34256/ijk2425

Publicado 15-08-2024

Palabras clave

  • Medidas antropométricas,
  • Ergonomía en el aula,
  • Trastornos musculoesqueléticos,
  • Postura,
  • Estudiantes

Cómo citar

Adu, S., Adu, G., Boadi, A. A., & Antwi, K. (2024). Relationship between Learning Environment Design and Musculoskeletal Disorders in Learners. La Revista Internacional De Cineantropometría, 4(2), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.34256/ijk2425

Derechos de autor 2024 Sylvia Adu, George Adu, Alfred Asante Boadi, Kwaku Antwi

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.

Dimensions

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Resumen

Introducción: Los estudiantes pasan la mayor parte del día en la escuela sentados en sus muebles de aula que no son del tamaño adecuado para ellos. Esto puede resultar incómodo e incluso provocar dolor de espalda, calambres en las piernas y otros problemas. Métodos: El tamaño corporal de los estudiantes para una buena postura mientras están sentados incluye la altura poplítea al suelo, la altura del codo al asiento, el grosor del muslo, la altura sentada, la longitud de la nalga al poplítea, la longitud de la nalga a la rodilla, la anchura del codo al codo, el ancho del bitrocánter, la altura subescapular y la altura del hombro sentado, y una estatura de pie. De manera similar, se tomaron las dimensiones de la silla con mesa, como la altura del asiento, el borde superior del respaldo, el ancho del asiento, la profundidad del asiento, la longitud de la mesa, el ancho de la mesa, la altura de la mesa, la altura del respaldo y el reposapiés que se utilizan actualmente en el aula. El estudio comparó los datos antropométricos de los estudiantes con los datos de las dimensiones del mobiliario para obtener una coincidencia o desajuste entre ellos con la ayuda de ecuaciones de desajuste estándar. Resultados: El estudio informó que las medidas corporales medias de los hombres son mayores que las de las mujeres, excepto por el ancho del bitrocánter. El ancho del asiento, la profundidad del asiento, la altura del respaldo y el borde superior del respaldo mostraron altos porcentajes de desajuste entre los estudiantes cuando utilizaban sillas. La longitud de la mesa reportó altos porcentajes de desajuste entre los estudiantes. Conclusión: El uso de las dimensiones corporales de los usuarios para el diseño de muebles reducirá los trastornos musculoesqueléticos y mejorará la posición sentada de los usuarios. Las dimensiones recomendadas en el diseño de muebles se ajustarán ergonómicamente a las medidas antropométricas de los estudiantes.

PDF (English)

Citas

  1. Afzan, Z.Z., Hadi, S.A., Shamsul, B.T., Zailina, H., Nada, I., & Rahmah, A.S. (2012). Mismatch between school furniture and anthropometric measures among primary school children in Mersing, Johor, Malaysia. In 2012 Southeast Asian Network of Ergonomics Societies Conference (SEANES), IEEE, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEANES.2012.6299557
  2. Agha, S.R. (2010). School furniture matches students' anthropometry in the Gaza Strip. Ergonomics, 53(3): 344-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130903398366
  3. Alrashdan, A., Alsudairi, L., & Alqaddoumi, A. (2014). Anthropometry of Saudi Arabian female college students. In Proceedings of the 2014 industrial and systems engineering research conference, 4075-4083.
  4. Al-Saleh, K.S., Ramadan, M.Z., Al-Ashaikh, R.A. (2013). Ergonomically adjustable school furniture for male students. Educational Research and Reviews, 8 (13): 943. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR11.141
  5. Altaboli A., Belkhear M., Bosenina A., Elfsei N. (2015). Anthropometric evaluation of the design of the classroom desk for the fourth and fifth grades of Benghazi primary schools. Procedia Manufacturing, 3:5655 – 5662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.778
  6. Arezes, P.M., Baptista, J.S., Barroso, M.P., Carneiro, P., Cordeiro, P., Costa, N., Melo, R.B., Miguel, A.S., Perestrelo, G. (2015). Occupational safety and hygiene, CRC Press, London, UK.
  7. Assiri, A., Mahfouz, A.A., Awadalla, N.J., Abouelyazid, A.Y., Shalaby, M., Abogamal, A., Alsabaani, A., Riaz, F. (2019). Classroom furniture mismatch and back pain among adolescent school-children in Abha City, Southwestern Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(8): 1395. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081395
  8. Balague, F., Troussier, B., Salminen, J.J. (1999). Non-specific low back pain in children and adolescents: risk factors. European Spine Journal, 8: 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s005860050201
  9. Bernard, B.P., Becker, C.E. (1988). Environmental lead exposure and the kidney. Journal of Toxicology: Clinical Toxicology, 26(1-2): 1 – 34. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563658808995395
  10. Castellucci, H.I., Arezes, P.M., Molenbroek, J.F. (2015). Analysis of the most relevant anthropometric dimensions for school furniture selection based on a study with students from one Chilean region. Applied Ergonomics, 46: 201 – 211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.08.005
  11. Castellucci, H.I., Arezes, P.M., Molenbroek, J.F., de Bruin, R., Viviani, C. (2017). The influence of school furniture on students’ performance and physical responses: results of a systematic review. Ergonomics, 60(1): 93-110. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2016.1170889
  12. Castellucci, H.I., Arezes, P.M., Viviani, C.A. (2010). A mismatch between classroom furniture and anthropometric measures in Chilean schools. Applied Ergonomics, 41(4): 563-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.12.001
  13. Chung, J.W., Wong, T.K. (2007). Anthropometric evaluation for primary school furniture design. Ergonomics, 50(3): 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130600842328
  14. Chung, Y.C., Hung, C.T., Li, S.F., Lee, H.M., Wang, S.G., Chang, S.C., Pai, L.W., Huang, C.N., Yang, J.H. (2013). Risk of musculoskeletal disorder among Taiwanese nurses cohort: a nationwide population-based study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 14: 1 – 6. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/14/144
  15. Cochran, W.G. (1977). Sampling techniques. John Wiley & Sons.
  16. Dianat, I., Karimi, M.A., Hashemi, A.A., Bahrampour, S. (2013). Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Applied Ergonomics, 2013 44(1): 101 – 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.05.004
  17. Eguiguren, M.L., Ackerman, K.E. (2018). The Female Athlete Triad. In The Young Female Athlete. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21632-4_5
  18. Evans, W.A., Courtney, A.J., Fok, K.F. (1988). The design of school furniture for Hong Kong school children: An anthropometric case study. Applied Ergonomics, 19(2): 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(88)90005-1
  19. Foster, H., Tucker, L. (2018). Musculoskeletal disorders in children and adolescents. ABC of Rheumatology, 14:103.
  20. Garcia-Acosta G., Lange-Morales K. (2007). Definition of sizes for the design of school furniture for Bogotá schools based on anthropometric criteria. Ergonomics, 50(10): 1626-1642. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587541
  21. Gouvali, M.K., Boudolos, K. (2006). Match between school furniture dimensions and children’s anthropometry. Applied Ergonomics, 37(6): 765–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2005.11.009
  22. Grimes, P., Legg, S. (2004). Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in school students as a risk factor for adult MSD: a review of the multiple factors affecting posture, comfort, and health in classroom environments. Journal of the Human-Environment System, 7(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1618/jhes.7.1
  23. Jfm, M., Ymt, K.R., Cj, S. (2003). Revision of the design of a standard for the dimensions of school furniture. Ergonomics, 46(7): 681 – 694. https://doi.org/10.1080/0014013031000085635
  24. Kahya, E. (2018). Evaluation of the classroom furniture for university students. Eskisehir Osmangazi University Journal of Engineering and Architecture, 26(1): 20-29. https://doi.org/10.31796/ogummf.330136
  25. Khaspuri, G.C., Sau, S.K., Dhara, P.C. (2007). Anthropometric consideration for designing classroom furniture in rural schools. Journal of Human Ecology, 22(3): 235-244. https://doi.org/10.31901/24566608.2007/22.03.09
  26. Koirala, R., Nepal, A. (2022). A literature review on ergonomics, ergonomics practices, and employee performance. Management, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.3126/qjmss.v4i2.50322
  27. Lee, Y. (2019). Anthropometric Design and Ergonomic Posture Assessment based on Intelligent Algorithms for Seated Work (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National University Graduate School, Seoul.
  28. Linton, S.J., Hellsing, A.L., Halme, T., Akerstedt, K. (1994). The effects of ergonomically designed school furniture on pupils' attitudes, symptoms and behaviour. Applied Ergonomics, 25 (5): 299 – 304. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(94)90044-2
  29. Meeusen, R., Duclos M., Foster C., Fry A., Gleeson M., Nieman D., Raglin J., Rietjens G., Steinacker, J., Urhausen, A. (2013). Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the overtraining syndrome: Joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science (ECSS) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM). European Journal of Sport Science, 13(1): 1 –24. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2012.730061
  30. Moelenbroek, J., Ramaekers, Y. (1996). Anthropometric design of a size system for school furniture. Contemporary Ergonomics, 130-135.
  31. Mohd Azuan K., Zailina H., Shamsul BM., Nurul Asyiqin MA., Mohd Azhar MN., Syazwan Aizat I. (2010). Neck, upper back and lower back pain and associated risk factors among primary school children. Journal of Appled Science, 10 (5): 431 – 435. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2010.431.435
  32. Oyewole, S.A., Haight, J.M., Freivalds, A. (2010). The ergonomic design of classroom furniture/computer workstation for first graders in the elementary school. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(4): 437-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.02.002
  33. Panagiotopoulou, G., Christoulas, K., Papanckolaou, A., Mandroukas, K. (2004). Classroom furniture dimensions and anthropometric measures in primary school. Applied Ergonomics, 35 (2): 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2003.11.002
  34. Parcells, C., Stommel, M., Hubbard, R.P. (1999). Mismatch of classroom furniture and student body dimensions: empirical findings and health implications. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24 (4): 265-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(98)00113-X
  35. Parvez, M.S., Parvin, F., Shahriar, M.M., Kibria, G. (2018). Design of ergonomically fit classroom furniture for primary schools of Bangladesh. Journal of Engineering, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3543610
  36. Parvez, M.S., Rahman, A., Tasnim, N. (2019). Ergonomic mismatch between students anthropometry and university classroom furniture. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 20 (5): 603-631. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2019.1617909
  37. Pérez-Gosende P. (2017). Anthropometry-based approach for side-mounted desktop chair design
  38. evaluation for university students in Ecuador. In 2017 IEEE Second Ecuador Technical Chapters Meeting (ETCM), IEEE, Ecuador. https://doi.org/10.1109/ETCM.2017.8247516
  39. Pheasant, S., Haslegrave, C.M. (2018). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 352. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315375212
  40. Pierce, S.M., Heiman, A.J., Ricci, J.A. (2023). Evaluating the current state of ergonomics education offered to students in US medical students. The American Surgeon, 89(5): 1798-806. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348211063555
  41. Roebuck Jr JA. (1997). Indian Anthropometric Dimensions for Ergonomic Design Practice By
  42. Debkumar Chakrabarti 1997, 161 pages, Rs 1500.00 (approx. US $35.34) Paldi, Ahmedabad, India: National Institute of Design ISBN 81-86199-15-0. Ergonomics in Design, 7(2): 37. https://doi.org/10.1177/106480469900700210
  43. Saarni L., Nygard CH., Kaukiainen A., Rimpelä A. (2007). Are the desks and chairs at school appropriate? Ergonomics, 50(10): 1561 – 1570. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701587368
  44. Salvendy, G., Karwowski W. (2021). Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. John Wiley & Sons.
  45. Schmoker, M. (2018). Focus: Elevating the essentials to radically improve student learning. Alexandria, Virginia, ASCD, USA.
  46. Shah, R.M., Bhuiyan, M.A., Debnath, R., Iqbal, M., Shamsuzzoha, A. (2013). Ergonomics issues in furniture design: a case of a tabloid chair. InProc. of the 23rd International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM 2013), 91-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00557-7_8
  47. Shariati, M.A., Naderi, A. (2016). The relationship between chair dimensions and musculoskeletal disorders among female students in one academic branch. Journal of Occupational Health and Epidemiology, 5(2): 63-71. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.johe.5.2.63
  48. Shernoff, D.J., Sannella, A.J., Schorr, R.Y., Sanchez-Wall, L., Ruzek, E.A., Sinha, S., Bressler, D.M. (2017). Separate worlds: The influence of seating location on student engagement, classroom experience, and performance in the large university lecture hall. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 49: 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.12.002
  49. Taifa, I.W., Desai, D.A. (2017). Anthropometric measurements for ergonomic design of students’ furniture in India. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 20 (1): 232-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2016.08.004
  50. Thariq, M.M., Munasinghe, H.P., Abeysekara JD. (2010). Designing chairs with mounted desktops for university students: Ergonomics and comfort. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(1): 8-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2009.10.003
  51. Trevelyan, F.C., Legg, S.J. (2011). Risk factors associated with back pain in New Zealand school children. Ergonomics, 54(3): 257-262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2010.547608
  52. Uyal, B.N., Umar, M.U. (2022). The effect of classroom environment on students' academic performance and musculoskeletal discomfort. Industrial Engineering, 33(2): 385-401. https://doi.org/10.46465/endustrimuhendisligi.1067573
  53. Ziefle, M. (2003). Sitting posture, postural discomfort, and visual performance: a critical view on the interdependence of cognitive and anthropometric factors in the VDU workplace. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 9(4): 503-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2003.11076586