Next Article in Journal
Discrimination of the Cognitive Function of Community Subjects Using the Arterial Pulse Spectrum and Machine-Learning Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
W-Band Photonic Receiver for Compact Cloud Radars
Previous Article in Special Issue
Applicability of Physiological Monitoring Systems within Occupational Groups: A Systematic Review
Article

A RULA-Based Comparison of the Ergonomic Risk of Typical Working Procedures for Dentists and Dental Assistants of General Dentistry, Endodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Orthodontics

1
Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Institute of Occupational Medicine, Goethe-University, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany
2
Department of Dental Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, Goethe-University, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany
3
Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg, Department of Orthodontics, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany
4
Principles of Prevention and Rehabilitation Department (GPR), Institute for Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 20095 Hamburg, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Academic Editors: Ignacio Pavón García, Juan Manuel López and Nélson Costa
Sensors 2022, 22(3), 805; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030805
Received: 16 December 2021 / Revised: 11 January 2022 / Accepted: 14 January 2022 / Published: 21 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wearable Technology for Occupational Risk Assessment and Prevention)
Background: In general, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) in dentistry is high, and dental assistants (DA) are even more affected than dentists (D). Furthermore, differentiations between the fields of dental specialization (e.g., general dentistry, endodontology, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or orthodontics) are rare. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk of the aforementioned four fields of dental specialization for D and DA on the one hand, and to compare the ergonomic risk of D and DA within each individual field of dental specialization. Methods: In total, 60 dentists (33 male/27 female) and 60 dental assistants (11 male/49 female) volunteered in this study. The sample was composed of 15 dentists and 15 dental assistants from each of the dental field, in order to represent the fields of dental specialization. In a laboratory setting, all tasks were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The kinematic data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Results: The results revealed significantly reduced ergonomic risks in endodontology and orthodontics compared to oral and maxillofacial surgery and general dentistry in DAs, while orthodontics showed a significantly reduced ergonomic risk compared to general dentistry in Ds. Further differences between the fields of dental specialization were found in the right wrist, right lower arm, and left lower arm in DAs and in the neck, right wrist, right lower arm, and left wrist in Ds. The differences between Ds and DAs within a specialist discipline were rather small. Discussion: Independent of whether one works as a D or DA, the percentage of time spent working in higher risk scores is reduced in endodontologists, and especially in orthodontics, compared to general dentists or oral and maxillofacial surgeons. In order to counteract the development of WMSD, early intervention should be made. Consequently, ergonomic training or strength training is recommended. View Full-Text
Keywords: ergonomics; kinematic analysis; musculoskeletal disorders; risk assessment; inertial motion capture; inertial sensors ergonomics; kinematic analysis; musculoskeletal disorders; risk assessment; inertial motion capture; inertial sensors
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Holzgreve, F.; Fraeulin, L.; Betz, W.; Erbe, C.; Wanke, E.M.; Brüggmann, D.; Nienhaus, A.; Groneberg, D.A.; Maurer-Grubinger, C.; Ohlendorf, D. A RULA-Based Comparison of the Ergonomic Risk of Typical Working Procedures for Dentists and Dental Assistants of General Dentistry, Endodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Orthodontics. Sensors 2022, 22, 805. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030805

AMA Style

Holzgreve F, Fraeulin L, Betz W, Erbe C, Wanke EM, Brüggmann D, Nienhaus A, Groneberg DA, Maurer-Grubinger C, Ohlendorf D. A RULA-Based Comparison of the Ergonomic Risk of Typical Working Procedures for Dentists and Dental Assistants of General Dentistry, Endodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Orthodontics. Sensors. 2022; 22(3):805. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030805

Chicago/Turabian Style

Holzgreve, Fabian, Laura Fraeulin, Werner Betz, Christina Erbe, Eileen M. Wanke, Dörthe Brüggmann, Albert Nienhaus, David A. Groneberg, Christian Maurer-Grubinger, and Daniela Ohlendorf. 2022. "A RULA-Based Comparison of the Ergonomic Risk of Typical Working Procedures for Dentists and Dental Assistants of General Dentistry, Endodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Orthodontics" Sensors 22, no. 3: 805. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030805

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop