J Heinrich1, B M Blatter, P M Bongers. 1. TNO Work and Employment, Polarisavenue 151, PO Box 718, 2130 AS Hoofddorp, Netherlands. j.heinrich@arbeid.tno.nl
Abstract
AIM: To compare two different methods for assessment of postural load and duration of computer use in office workers. METHODS: The study population existed of 87 computer workers. Questionnaire data about exposure were compared with exposures measured by a standardised or objective method. Measuring true exposure to postural load consisted of an observation of the workstation design and posture by a trained observer. A software program was used to record individual computer use. RESULTS: Comparing the answers for each item of postural load, six of eleven items showed low agreement (kappa <0.20). For six items the sensitivity was below 50%, while for eight items the specificity was 80% or higher. Computer workers were unable to identify risk factors in their workplace and work posture. On average, computer workers overestimated their total computer use by 1.6 hours. The agreement among employees who reported a maximum of three hours of computer use per day was higher than the agreement among employees with a high duration of computer use. CONCLUSIONS: Self-report by means of this questionnaire is not a very reliable method to measure postural load and duration of computer use. This study emphasises that the challenge to develop quick and inexpensive techniques for assessing exposure to postural load and duration of computer use is still open.
AIM: To compare two different methods for assessment of postural load and duration of computer use in office workers. METHODS: The study population existed of 87 computer workers. Questionnaire data about exposure were compared with exposures measured by a standardised or objective method. Measuring true exposure to postural load consisted of an observation of the workstation design and posture by a trained observer. A software program was used to record individual computer use. RESULTS: Comparing the answers for each item of postural load, six of eleven items showed low agreement (kappa <0.20). For six items the sensitivity was below 50%, while for eight items the specificity was 80% or higher. Computer workers were unable to identify risk factors in their workplace and work posture. On average, computer workers overestimated their total computer use by 1.6 hours. The agreement among employees who reported a maximum of three hours of computer use per day was higher than the agreement among employees with a high duration of computer use. CONCLUSIONS: Self-report by means of this questionnaire is not a very reliable method to measure postural load and duration of computer use. This study emphasises that the challenge to develop quick and inexpensive techniques for assessing exposure to postural load and duration of computer use is still open.
Authors: Dana Dane; Michael Feuerstein; Grant D Huang; Lennart Dimberg; Danielle Ali; Andrew Lincoln Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: E Viikari-Juntura; S Rauas; R Martikainen; E Kuosma; H Riihimäki; E P Takala; K Saarenmaa Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 5.024
Authors: Katharina Wick; Oliver Faude; Susanne Schwager; Lukas Zahner; Lars Donath Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Pierre-R Somville; An Van Nieuwenhuyse; Laurence Seidel; Raphaël Masschelein; Guido Moens; Philippe Mairiaux Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2005-12-31 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: S IJmker; M A Huysmans; B M Blatter; A J van der Beek; W van Mechelen; P M Bongers Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2006-11-09 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Ewa Wigaeus Tornqvist; Mats Hagberg; Maud Hagman; Eva Hansson Risberg; Allan Toomingas Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2009-02-10 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Sigurd Mikkelsen; Christina Funch Lassen; Imogen Vilstrup; Ann Isabel Kryger; Lars Peter Andreas Brandt; Jane Frølund Thomsen; Mette Gerster; Søren Grimstrup; Johan Hviid Andersen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Philippe Kiss; Marc De Meester; André Kruse; Brigitte Chavée; Lutgart Braeckman Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2011-05-10 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Sigurd Mikkelsen; Imogen Vilstrup; Christina Funch Lassen; Ann Isabel Kryger; Jane Frølund Thomsen; Johan Hviid Andersen Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Erwin M Speklé; Marco J M Hoozemans; Birgitte M Blatter; Judith Heinrich; Allard J van der Beek; Dirk L Knol; Paulien M Bongers; Jaap H van Dieën Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 2.362