Min-Hee Kim1, Won-Gyu Yoo1. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, College of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Inje University, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study investigated temporal changes in trunk flexion angle and gluteal pressure during computer work with continuous sitting. [Subjects and Methods] This study involved 10 males subjects aged 21-29 years. During 30 min of data collection with a Tekscan system and a video camera, peak gluteal pressure and changes in trunk flexion angle were analyzed with the COMFOM at research 6.20 and Pro-Trainer 10.1 programs, respectively, at 10, 20, and 30 min. [Results] The result showed no significant change in gluteal pressure after 10, 20, or 30 min. However, changes in trunk flexion angle increased significantly after 10 min <20 min <30 min. [Conclusion] Trunk flexion is necessary for repositioning, unless one can maintain a posture for a long time without movement. Future research should analyze repositioning methods according to individual characteristics.
[Purpose] This study investigated temporal changes in trunk flexion angle and gluteal pressure during computer work with continuous sitting. [Subjects and Methods] This study involved 10 males subjects aged 21-29 years. During 30 min of data collection with a Tekscan system and a video camera, peak gluteal pressure and changes in trunk flexion angle were analyzed with the COMFOM at research 6.20 and Pro-Trainer 10.1 programs, respectively, at 10, 20, and 30 min. [Results] The result showed no significant change in gluteal pressure after 10, 20, or 30 min. However, changes in trunk flexion angle increased significantly after 10 min <20 min <30 min. [Conclusion] Trunk flexion is necessary for repositioning, unless one can maintain a posture for a long time without movement. Future research should analyze repositioning methods according to individual characteristics.
Prolonged sitting in combination with poor workstation ergonomics have been implicated in
the development of musculoskeletal problems during visual display terminal (VDT) work1). In a typical VDT work day, a fixed position
is maintained over a long period of time2).
Localized pressure at the skin surface is believed to cause blockage of capillary blood flow
and subsequent ischemic damage3). Localized
pressure is more easily relieved by repositioning or by pressure-relieving supports,
although with the latter, there is less freedom to move and the body weight is concentrated
in the ischial area3). Repositioning is a
key component of skin care, because repositioning can be pressure relieving or pressure
reducing. Thus, in this study, we investigated temporal changes in trunk flexion angle and
gluteal pressure during computer work with continuous sitting.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
This study was performed on 10 males subjects, aged 21–29 years (mean age=25.0 ± 4.8 years)
and whose height and weight were 174.2 ± 2.5 cm and 66.4 ± 4.3 kg, respectively. Subjects
with conditions that might affect trunk mobility, such as injury or neurological deficits in
the hip or lower extremities during the previous year, were excluded. The purpose and
methods of the study were explained to the participants before their inclusion in the study.
They provided informed consent according to the principles of the Declaration of
Helsinki.During 30 min of data collection with a Tekscan system and a video camera, peak gluteal
pressure and changes in trunk flexion angles were analyzed using the COMFOMat research 6.20
and Pro-Trainer 10.1 programs, respectively, at 10, 20, and 30 min. A single-blinded
recording method was used to ensure that results were not affected by the participant’s
intentional bias. The SPSS software (ver. 14.0; SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyze
significant differences in changes in trunk flexion angle and gluteal pressure during
continuous sitting. Statistically significant differences were assessed using a
repeated-measures one-way ANOVA, with the level of statistical significance set at
p<0.05.
RESULTS
There was no significant change in gluteal pressure after 10, 20, or 30 min (0.68 ± 0.28,
0.67 ± 0.27, and 0.67 ± 0.29 kg/cm2, respectively). However, changes in the trunk
flexion angle increased significantly after 10 min (2.5 ± 1.8°) <20 min (3.8 ± 2.4°)
<30 min (5.2 ± 2.6°).
DISCUSSION
Maintaining an upright sitting posture is an important factor for preventing and reducing
posture-related low-back pain, which is well recognized by the general public as well as
clinicians1). Theoretically, a
flexed-relaxed posture results in a higher load at the spine and lower muscle activation of
the trunk versus upright sitting, which may lead to excessive stress on passive structures,
such as ligaments and discs, and thus acts a risk factor for low-back pain1, 4).
However, according to research results, movement of the trunk is a major reason for
displacement of position. Natural bending and stretching of the trunk while in the sitting
position is necessary. With increased time working at a computer, the flexion angle of the
trunk does increase, but this does not change the average peak pressure on the buttocks
significantly. Continuous movement of the trunk causes repositioning and seems to prevent an
increase in pressure. Maintaining a motionless position for a long time may increase
pressure on the buttocks, even though the position is ‘ideal.’ Thus, a comfortable chair
with cushioning and a backrest carries the risk of increasing pressure on the buttocks,
because it can decrease movement of the trunk and induce a motionless position for a long
time4, 5). Unlike in patients, various backrests and cushions may increase the
pressure on the buttocks of a healthy adult; therefore, sitting away from a backrest is a
good position in that it allows movement of the trunk when changing position5). Many researchers have reported that bending
the trunk during work at a computer is disadvantageous1, 2). However, some trunk
flexion is necessary for repositioning, unless one can maintain a posture for a long time
without movement. Future research should analyze repositioning methods according to
individual characteristics.
Authors: Maurice T Driessen; Karin I Proper; Maurits W van Tulder; Johannes R Anema; Paulien M Bongers; Allard J van der Beek Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Michele Marcus; Fredric Gerr; Carolyn Monteilh; Daniel J Ortiz; Eileen Gentry; Susan Cohen; Alicia Edwards; Cindy Ensor; David Kleinbaum Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 2.214