| Literature DB >> 34812685 |
Abstract
The role of a teacher in the Faculty of Health Sciences involves teaching students, preparing lessons, and participating in other activities such as research projects and management processes. Professional participation is part of their involvement in daily occupations, which are taking place in teachers' socio-cultural context and are necessary for their well-being. Teachers' work performance can be enabled or constrained by their professional habits, including habits while using computers. We investigated awareness of and adherence to recommendations on ergonomics and preventive measures for back pain among the Faculty of Health Sciences employees. This study was aimed at investigating the relationship between the influence of their habits during computer use and back pain. An online questionnaire was sent to the teaching staff of the Faculty of Health Sciences (n = 115). 73% of the staff opened the online questionnaire, 43% fully completed the questionnaire. Data were processed using SPSS statistical program, version 20.0. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and factor analysis were calculated. Analysis of the results showed a significant statistical association between the professional habits and roles [daily computer use (r = .443, P < .01); position of different body parts during computer use [head (r = .669, P < .001), shoulder (r = .446, P < .01), legs and feet (r = .483, P < .01), screen inclination (r = .577, P < .01), adjusting chair settings (r = .608, P < .01), distance between eyes and screen (r = .766, P < .01)]; physical activities break at work [r = .758, P < .01], and back pain. Considering ergonomic principles when designing the work environment can have a major impact on employees' health and quality of work. As experts in the field of health sciences, faculty members are not sufficiently aware of the impact of an improperly designed work environment on employee health, which affects work habits.Entities:
Keywords: academic staff; and rules; ergonomics; health; professional habits; workplace design
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34812685 PMCID: PMC8640309 DOI: 10.1177/00469580211060256
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inquiry ISSN: 0046-9580 Impact factor: 1.730
Results of Pearson Correlation Analysis for Back Pain.
| Variables |
| Mean | SD | Pearson Correlation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | ||||
| A: Time spent daily on the computer | 50 | 3.7 | 1.1 | 1 | .617
| .560
| .443
|
| B: Physical activities break at work | 50 | 3.5 | 1.1 | .617
| 1 | .800
| .758
|
| C: Physical activity during leisure time | 50 | 2.7 | 1.1 | .560
| .800
| 1 | .574
|
| D: Back pain | 50 | 3.6 | 1.3 | .443
| .758
| .574
| 1 |
Legend: Variables A, B, D evaluated frequency on scale from 1 to 5, variable C evaluated frequency on scale from 1 to 6.
aCorrelation is significant at the level of .01.
Results of the Linear Regression Analysis for Back Pain.
| Variables | B* | Standard Error |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Time spent daily on the computer | 1.064 | .068 | .915 | .000 |
| B: Physical activities break at work | .756 | .086 | .786 | .000 |
| M: Age of employers | 2.820 | .525 | .612 | .000 |
| N: Years of services | 2.366 | .419 | .632 | .000 |
Legend: B*= non-standardized coefficient, β+ = standardized multiple regression coefficient.
Results of Pearson Correlation Analysis for Back Pain and the Position of the Different Parts of the Body When Working With Computers.
| Variables |
| Mean | SD | Pearson Correlation | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | ||||
| D: Back pain | 50 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 1 | .411
| .315
| .446
| .483
| .669
| .766
| .577
| .608
|
| E: Sitting position | 50 | 2.7 | 0.9 | .411
| 1 | .405
| .725
| .457
| .538
| .584
| .543
| .692
|
| F: Body position | 50 | 1.7 | 0.9 | .315
| .405
| 1 | .381
| .435
| .419
| .531
| .499
| .595
|
| G: Head position | 50 | 2.3 | 0.7 | .669
| .538
| ,419
| 1 | .561
| .451
| .852
| .778
| .577
|
| H: Shoulder position | 50 | 2.3 | 0.7 | .446
| .725
| .381
| .523
| 1 | .561
| .684
| .623
| .682
|
| I: Legs and feet position | 50 | 1.6 | 0.9 | .483
| .457
| .435
| .523
| .451
| 1 | .654
| .623
| .558
|
| J: Distance between eyes and screen | 50 | 1.9 | 0.4 | .766
| .584
| .531
| .654
| .654
| .852
| 1 | .839
| .662
|
| K: Screen inclination | 50 | 2.6 | 0.5 | .577
| .543
| .499
| .623
| .623
| .778
| .839
| 1 | .639
|
| L: Adjusting chair settings | 50 | 1.8 | 0.4 | .608
| .692
| .595
| .682
| .558
| .577
| .662
| .639
| 1 |
Legend: Variables evaluated frequency on the scale from 1 to 5.
aCorrelation is significant at the level of .05.
bCorrelation is significant at the level of .01.
Rotated Factor Matrix for Two Factors of Back Pain.
| Variables | Factor | |
|---|---|---|
| The way of sitting | Characteristics of furniture | |
| J: Distance between eyes and screen | .875 | .372 |
| K: Screen inclination | .856 | .338 |
| G: Head position | .837 | .275 |
| I: Legs and feet position | .640 | .370 |
| F: Body position | .536 | .370 |
| E: Sitting position | .269 | .878 |
| H: Shoulder position | .379 | .804 |
| L: Adjusting chair settings | .476 | .743 |