Ergonomic Comparison of Four Dental Workplace Concepts Using Inertial Motion Capture for Dentists and Dental Assistants

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ergonomic Comparison of Four Dental Workplace Concepts Using Inertial Motion Capture for Dentists and Dental Assistants

AU - Ohlendorf, Daniela

AU - Fraeulin, Laura

AU - Haenel, Jasmin

AU - Betz, Werner

AU - Erbe, Christina

AU - Holzgreve, Fabian

AU - Wanke, Eileen M

AU - Brueggmann, Doerthe

AU - Nienhaus, Albert

AU - Maurer-Grubinger, Christian

AU - Groneberg, David A

PY - 2021/10/5

Y1 - 2021/10/5

N2 - When the inventory is arranged in a dental practice, a distinction can be made between four different dental workplace concepts (DWCs). Since the prevalence of musculoskeletal diseases in dental professionals is very high, preventive solution need to be investigated. As the conventionally used DWCs have, to date, never been studied in terms of their ergonomics, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk when working at the four different DWCs. In total, 75 dentists (37 m/38 f) and 75 dental assistants (16 m/59 f) volunteered to take part in this study. Standardized cooperative working procedures were carried out in a laboratory setting and kinematic data were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Comparisons between the DWCs and between the dentists and dental assistants were calculated. In all four DWCs, both dentists and dental assistants spent 95-97% of their working time in the worst possible RULA score. In the trunk, DWCs 1 and 2 were slightly favorable for both dentists and dental assistants, while for the neck, DWC 4 showed a lower risk score for dentists. The ergonomic risk was extremely high in all four DWCs, while only slight advantages for distinct body parts were found. The working posture seemed to be determined by the task itself rather than by the different inventory arrangements.

AB - When the inventory is arranged in a dental practice, a distinction can be made between four different dental workplace concepts (DWCs). Since the prevalence of musculoskeletal diseases in dental professionals is very high, preventive solution need to be investigated. As the conventionally used DWCs have, to date, never been studied in terms of their ergonomics, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk when working at the four different DWCs. In total, 75 dentists (37 m/38 f) and 75 dental assistants (16 m/59 f) volunteered to take part in this study. Standardized cooperative working procedures were carried out in a laboratory setting and kinematic data were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Comparisons between the DWCs and between the dentists and dental assistants were calculated. In all four DWCs, both dentists and dental assistants spent 95-97% of their working time in the worst possible RULA score. In the trunk, DWCs 1 and 2 were slightly favorable for both dentists and dental assistants, while for the neck, DWC 4 showed a lower risk score for dentists. The ergonomic risk was extremely high in all four DWCs, while only slight advantages for distinct body parts were found. The working posture seemed to be determined by the task itself rather than by the different inventory arrangements.

KW - Dental Assistants

KW - Dentists

KW - Ergonomics

KW - Humans

KW - Musculoskeletal Diseases/epidemiology

KW - Occupational Diseases/epidemiology

KW - Workplace

U2 - 10.3390/ijerph181910453

DO - 10.3390/ijerph181910453

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34639753

VL - 18

JO - INT J ENV RES PUB HE

JF - INT J ENV RES PUB HE

SN - 1660-4601

IS - 19

M1 - 10453

ER -