Volume 11, Issue 1 (3-2021)
J Health Saf Work 2021, 11(1): 55-71 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mazloumi A, Kazemi Z, AbedZadeh S, Rahimi Foroushani A. Design and fabrication of portable motion recorder: comparing lumbar kinematics in workers with and without low back pain in assembly line of a car manufacturing industry. J Health Saf Work 2021; 11 (1) :55-71
URL: http://jhsw.tums.ac.ir/article-1-6453-en.html
URL: http://jhsw.tums.ac.ir/article-1-6453-en.html
1- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , amazlomi@tums.ac.ir
2- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran / Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran / Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (1830 Views)
Introduction: Workers in car manufacturing industry are at risk of a high prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders, especially low back pain. Therefore, in the present study aimed to design and fabricate a portable device to evaluate the low back kinematics and to compare these variables in workers with and without low back pain (LBP) in assembly lines of an automotive industry.
Material and Methods: In the present research workers postures were assessed using OWAS direct observational method. Moreover, simultaneously, prevalence and intensity of low back pain were evaluated by Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (DMQ) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). After fabricating motion analysis device, a field study was conducted using the designed device among 16 volunteers to investigate low back kinematic variables in two groups of workers: LBP and non-LBP.
Results: The results showed that 62.1 percent of all working postures were high risk with corrective action levels of 3 and 4. On average, 86.1 percent of workers experienced LBP in the previous 12 months. Regarding comparison of kinematic variable in the two groups of LBP and non-LBP, workers without LBP had higher degree and duration (in second) of movements (forward flexion, lateral bending, extension, and twisting), as compared to those with LBP. However, only movement range of forward flexion in non-LBP group (mean: 64.29 and SD: 8.41), was significantly higher than those with LBP (mean: 58.97 and SD: 11.34).
Conclusion: The device can be used as an effective tool in the ergonomics studies in the field of back pain, due to its potential to record the kinematics of the trunk, as well as its lightweight and non-interference with the task. Device’s validity was acceptable based on the comparison of the results of this device with those obtained from inclinometer.
Material and Methods: In the present research workers postures were assessed using OWAS direct observational method. Moreover, simultaneously, prevalence and intensity of low back pain were evaluated by Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (DMQ) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). After fabricating motion analysis device, a field study was conducted using the designed device among 16 volunteers to investigate low back kinematic variables in two groups of workers: LBP and non-LBP.
Results: The results showed that 62.1 percent of all working postures were high risk with corrective action levels of 3 and 4. On average, 86.1 percent of workers experienced LBP in the previous 12 months. Regarding comparison of kinematic variable in the two groups of LBP and non-LBP, workers without LBP had higher degree and duration (in second) of movements (forward flexion, lateral bending, extension, and twisting), as compared to those with LBP. However, only movement range of forward flexion in non-LBP group (mean: 64.29 and SD: 8.41), was significantly higher than those with LBP (mean: 58.97 and SD: 11.34).
Conclusion: The device can be used as an effective tool in the ergonomics studies in the field of back pain, due to its potential to record the kinematics of the trunk, as well as its lightweight and non-interference with the task. Device’s validity was acceptable based on the comparison of the results of this device with those obtained from inclinometer.
Type of Study: Research |
Received: 2021/02/27 | Accepted: 2021/03/21 | Published: 2021/03/21
Received: 2021/02/27 | Accepted: 2021/03/21 | Published: 2021/03/21
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
