Literature DB >> 18075754

Ergonomic comparison of a chem/bio prototype firefighter ensemble and a standard ensemble.

Aitor Coca1, R Roberge, A Shepherd, J B Powell, J O Stull, W J Williams.   

Abstract

Firefighter turnout gear and equipment protect the wearer against external hazards but, unfortunately, restrict mobility. The aim of this study was to determine the ease of mobility and comfort while wearing a new prototype firefighter ensemble (PE) with additional chemical/biological hazard protection compared to a standard ensemble (SE) by measuring static and dynamic range of motion (ROM), job-related tasks, and comfort. Eight healthy adults (five males, three females), aged 20-40 years, participated in this study. The study consisted of two repeated phases, separated by five uses of the ensembles. Subjects randomly donned either the SE or PE in either dry or wet conditions on separate days. In each phase, five tests were carried out as follows: baseline (non-ensemble), SE-dry, SE-wet, PE-dry, and PE-wet. There was a significant reduction (P < 0.05) of wrist flexion for PE-dry condition compared to the same SE-dry condition. Donning the PE took 80 s longer than the SE in phase 1, this difference disappeared in phase 2. There was a significant decrease (P < 0.05) in post-test comfort wearing the PE compared to the SE. The data collected in this study suggest that, in spite of design features to enhance chemical/biological hazard protection, the PE design does not decrease the wearer's overall functional mobility compared to the SE. However, subjects seem to be more comfortable wearing the SE compared to the PE. These overall findings support the need for a comprehensive ergonomic evaluation of protective clothing systems to ascertain human factors issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18075754     DOI: 10.1007/s00421-007-0644-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol        ISSN: 1439-6319            Impact factor:   3.078


  5 in total

Review 1.  Review of research studies of ergonomic aspects of selected personal protective equipment.

Authors:  K Szczecińska; K Lezak
Journal:  Int J Occup Saf Ergon       Date:  2000

2.  A test battery related to ergonomics of protective clothing.

Authors:  George Havenith; Ronald Heus
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.661

3.  Restriction to movement in fire-fighter protective clothing: evaluation of alternative sleeves and liners.

Authors:  J Huck
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 3.661

4.  Protective clothing systems: A technique for evaluating restriction of wearer mobility.

Authors:  J Huck
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 3.661

Review 5.  Occupational health concerns of firefighting.

Authors:  T L Guidotti; V M Clough
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 21.981

  5 in total
  3 in total

1.  A Review of Mine Rescue Ensembles for Underground Coal Mining in the United States.

Authors:  F Selcen Kilinc; William D Monaghan; Jeffrey B Powell
Journal:  J Eng Fiber Fabr       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.573

2.  What do firefighters desire from the next generation of personal protective equipment? Outcomes from an international survey.

Authors:  Joo-Young Lee; Joonhee Park; Huiju Park; Aitor Coca; Jung-Hyun Kim; Nigel A S Taylor; Su-Young Son; Yutaka Tochihara
Journal:  Ind Health       Date:  2015-05-29       Impact factor: 2.179

Review 3.  A review of test methods for evaluating mobility of firefighters wearing personal protective equipment.

Authors:  Yutaka Tochihara; Joo-Young Lee; Su-Young Son
Journal:  Ind Health       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 2.179

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.