Influence of design of dentist's chairs on body posture for dentists with different working experience.
Dentists
Musculoskeletal problems
Posture analysis
dentist’s chair design
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 May 2021
19 May 2021
Historique:
received:
25
01
2021
accepted:
04
05
2021
entrez:
20
5
2021
pubmed:
21
5
2021
medline:
22
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are a common health problem among dentists. Dental treatment is mainly performed in a sitting position. The aim of the study was to quantify the effect of different ergonomic chairs on the sitting position. In addition, it was tested if the sitting position of experienced workers is different from a non-dental group. A total of 59 (28 m/31f) subjects, divided into two dentist groups according to their work experience (students and dentists (9 m/11f) < 10 years, dentists (9 m/10f) ≥ 10 years) and a control group (10 m/10f) were measured. A three-dimensional back scanner captured the bare back of all subjects sitting on six dentist's chairs of different design. Initially, inter-group comparisons per chair, firstly in the habitual and secondly in the working postures, were carried out. Furthermore, inter-chair comparison was conducted for the habitual as well as for the working postures of all subjects and for each group. Finally, a comparison between the habitual sitting posture and the working posture for each respective chair (intra-chair comparison) was conducted (for all subjects and for each group). In addition, a subjective assessment of each chair was made. For the statistical analysis, non-parametric tests were conducted and the level of significance was set at 5%. When comparing the three subject groups, all chairs caused a more pronounced spinal kyphosis in experienced dentists. In both conditions (habitual and working postures), a symmetrical sitting position was assumed on each chair. The inter-chair comparisons showed no differences regarding the ergonomic design of the chairs. The significances found in the inter-chair comparisons were all within the measurementerror and could, therefore, be classified as clinically irrelevant. The intra-chair comparison (habitual sitting position vs. working sitting position) illustrated position-related changes in the sagittal, but not in the transverse, plane. These changes were only position-related (forward leaned working posture) and were not influenced by the ergonomic sitting design of the respective chair. There are no differences between the groups in the subjective assessment of each chair. Regardless of the group or the dental experience, the ergonomic design of the dentist's chair had only a marginal influence on the upper body posture in both the habitual and working sitting postures. Consequently, the focus of the dentist's chair, in order to minimize MSD, should concentrate on adopting a symmetrical sitting posture rather than on its ergonomic design.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are a common health problem among dentists. Dental treatment is mainly performed in a sitting position. The aim of the study was to quantify the effect of different ergonomic chairs on the sitting position. In addition, it was tested if the sitting position of experienced workers is different from a non-dental group.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 59 (28 m/31f) subjects, divided into two dentist groups according to their work experience (students and dentists (9 m/11f) < 10 years, dentists (9 m/10f) ≥ 10 years) and a control group (10 m/10f) were measured. A three-dimensional back scanner captured the bare back of all subjects sitting on six dentist's chairs of different design. Initially, inter-group comparisons per chair, firstly in the habitual and secondly in the working postures, were carried out. Furthermore, inter-chair comparison was conducted for the habitual as well as for the working postures of all subjects and for each group. Finally, a comparison between the habitual sitting posture and the working posture for each respective chair (intra-chair comparison) was conducted (for all subjects and for each group). In addition, a subjective assessment of each chair was made. For the statistical analysis, non-parametric tests were conducted and the level of significance was set at 5%.
RESULTS
RESULTS
When comparing the three subject groups, all chairs caused a more pronounced spinal kyphosis in experienced dentists. In both conditions (habitual and working postures), a symmetrical sitting position was assumed on each chair. The inter-chair comparisons showed no differences regarding the ergonomic design of the chairs. The significances found in the inter-chair comparisons were all within the measurementerror and could, therefore, be classified as clinically irrelevant. The intra-chair comparison (habitual sitting position vs. working sitting position) illustrated position-related changes in the sagittal, but not in the transverse, plane. These changes were only position-related (forward leaned working posture) and were not influenced by the ergonomic sitting design of the respective chair. There are no differences between the groups in the subjective assessment of each chair.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Regardless of the group or the dental experience, the ergonomic design of the dentist's chair had only a marginal influence on the upper body posture in both the habitual and working sitting postures. Consequently, the focus of the dentist's chair, in order to minimize MSD, should concentrate on adopting a symmetrical sitting posture rather than on its ergonomic design.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34011319
doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04334-1
pii: 10.1186/s12891-021-04334-1
pmc: PMC8136039
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
462Références
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014 Dec;14(Suppl 1):51-8
pubmed: 26199492
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010 Nov 01;15(6):e906-11
pubmed: 20526248
J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 Oct;134(10):1344-50
pubmed: 14620013
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2004 Jun 09;5:16
pubmed: 15189564
Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2013 Aug;26(4):615-20
pubmed: 24142742
J Occup Med Toxicol. 2017 Mar 1;12:5
pubmed: 28265296
Int J Occup Environ Med. 2012 Apr;3(2):76-83
pubmed: 23022854
J Orofac Orthop. 2018 Nov;79(6):389-402
pubmed: 30187081
Int J Dent Hyg. 2009 Aug;7(3):159-65
pubmed: 19659711
Scoliosis. 2014 Dec 12;9(1):22
pubmed: 25520745
Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(2):295-307
pubmed: 24934426
Aust Dent J. 1997 Aug;42(4):240-6
pubmed: 9316311
Appl Ergon. 2012 Mar;43(2):296-307
pubmed: 21714953
Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2016 Mar-Apr;144(3-4):181-7
pubmed: 27483563
Scand J Work Environ Health. 1990 Apr;16(2):129-34
pubmed: 2353196
Sci Rep. 2020 Mar 2;10(1):3823
pubmed: 32123228
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1980 May;134(5):979-83
pubmed: 6768276
J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Apr;27(4):1107-12
pubmed: 25995567
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2018 Nov;27(11):1521-1528
pubmed: 30048053
J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 Dec;134(12):1604-12
pubmed: 14719757
Stomatologija. 2007;9(1):10-20
pubmed: 17449973
Orthopade. 2000 Jun;29(6):480-9
pubmed: 10929328
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 11;13(12):e0208758
pubmed: 30533063
J Biomech. 1985;18(6):467-74
pubmed: 4030803
Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2013;56(4):150-6
pubmed: 24693796
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 5;8(8):e022236
pubmed: 30082360
Eur Spine J. 2014 Jul;23(7):1449-56
pubmed: 24435982
J Calif Dent Assoc. 2002 Feb;30(2):139-48
pubmed: 11881959
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 18;13(12):e0208628
pubmed: 30562387
J Biomech. 1987;20(10):961-70
pubmed: 3693377
Work. 2010;35(4):419-29
pubmed: 20448321
Ind Health. 2007 Oct;45(5):611-21
pubmed: 18057804
J Orthop Sci. 2012 Nov;17(6):682-6
pubmed: 22915074
Orthopade. 2015 Nov;44(11):845-51
pubmed: 26415606
J Med Assoc Thai. 2010 Jun;93(6):714-21
pubmed: 20572377
J Environ Public Health. 2015;2015:517346
pubmed: 26064141
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Sep 4;147(5):330-8
pubmed: 17785488
BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 19;4(12):e006451
pubmed: 25526795
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2015 May-Jun;5(3):199-204
pubmed: 26236679
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Jul 5;18(1):291
pubmed: 28679450
Clin Interv Aging. 2017 Feb 20;12:413-420
pubmed: 28260870
PeerJ. 2018 Jan 15;6:e4154
pubmed: 29362689
Man Ther. 2010 Dec;15(6):557-61
pubmed: 20638321
J Occup Health. 2006 May;48(3):192-7
pubmed: 16788280
Work. 2007;29(3):189-203
pubmed: 17942990
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Jun 15;35(14):1353-8
pubmed: 20505568
Eur Spine J. 2013 Jun;22(6):1354-61
pubmed: 23479027
Work. 2000;15(3):153-158
pubmed: 12441484
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2002 Mar;23(3):261-6, 268, 270 passim; quiz 274
pubmed: 12785139
Appl Ergon. 2016 Sep;56:220-6
pubmed: 26975788
Br Dent J. 2007 Nov 24;203(10):601-5
pubmed: 18037853
Int Dent J. 2007 Feb;57(1):45-54
pubmed: 17378349
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Oct 18;17(1):427
pubmed: 27756271
J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2015;28(4):755-9
pubmed: 25547232