Search Results (4)

Adequate reference procedures for obtaining the reference zero-angle position are important for precise and accurate posture measurements, but few studies have systematically investigated these. A limited number of previous studies suggest differences in accuracy between procedures, with some causing an underestimation of the true arm elevation angle when sensors are taped to the skin. The reliability of commonly used reference procedures for the measurement of the trunk posture is also not well explored, and alternative procedures may improve precision. Based on this identified gap, this study evaluated the test–retest reliability of the N-position (I-pose), i.e., the standard procedure for recording trunk postures, and compared it with two new alternative procedures. Additionally, the accuracy of the N-position for measuring arm elevation angles was compared with one alternative procedure. A total of 40 participants (22 women and 18 men) aged 26–70 years performed the reference procedures in a laboratory setting. Postures were recorded using a smart workwear system equipped with two inertial measurement units (IMUs) embedded in pockets within the workwear. For the trunk posture, the N-position showed a slight lack of test–retest reliability, while one of the alternative procedures demonstrated better test–retest reliability. For the arm posture, the N-position, which does not include lateral trunk inclination, resulted in a substantial underestimation of the arm elevation angle of approximately 15°, which is a novel finding. In contrast, the posture involving trunk inclination closely matched the targeted reference, with a difference of less than 2°. This study underscores the importance of selecting appropriate reference procedures to ensure precise and accurate posture measurements. Full article

Encouraging feedback is shown to increase motivation and facilitate learning in different settings, though there is a lack of knowledge of applying it in work technique training. This pilot study aimed to evaluate two accumulated vibrotactile feedback strategies for work technique training using a smart workwear system. Eight women and two men participated in the study. They were divided into two groups, receiving the corrective feedback or the combined corrective and encouraging feedback while doing simulated manual handling tasks in a lab environment. Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used to evaluate the motivation, learning, and user experiences. In this small sample size, we saw that both groups significantly improved their work technique of upper arm and trunk postures, and no significant difference between groups was seen. In addition, both groups reported increased ergonomic awareness, were satisfied with the feedback training, and considered the system useful. However, the combined feedback group had slightly lower ratings of motivation and more negative experiences of the corrective feedback itself compared to the corrective feedback group. Both groups had positive experiences with the encouraging feedback. Future research should consider investigating the long-term learning effects of using solely corrective or encouraging accumulated feedback for work technique training with such systems. Full article

Smart workwear systems with embedded inertial measurement unit sensors are developed for convenient ergonomic risk assessment of occupational activities. However, its measurement accuracy can be affected by potential cloth artifacts, which have not been previously assessed. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the accuracy of sensors placed in the workwear systems for research and practice purposes. This study aimed to compare in-cloth and on-skin sensors for assessing upper arms and trunk postures and movements, with the on-skin sensors as the reference. Five simulated work tasks were performed by twelve subjects (seven women and five men). Results showed that the mean (±SD) absolute cloth–skin sensor differences of the median dominant arm elevation angle ranged between 1.2° (±1.4) and 4.1° (±3.5). For the median trunk flexion angle, the mean absolute cloth–skin sensor differences ranged between 2.7° (±1.7) and 3.7° (±3.9). Larger errors were observed for the 90th and 95th percentiles of inclination angles and inclination velocities. The performance depended on the tasks and was affected by individual factors, such as the fit of the clothes. Potential error compensation algorithms need to be investigated in future work. In conclusion, in-cloth sensors showed acceptable accuracy for measuring upper arm and trunk postures and movements on a group level. Considering the balance of accuracy, comfort, and usability, such a system can potentially be a practical tool for ergonomic assessment for researchers and practitioners. Full article

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are a major concern globally affecting societies, companies, and individuals. To address this, a new sensor-based system is presented: the Smart Workwear System, aimed at facilitating preventive measures by supporting risk assessments, work design, and work technique training. The system has a module-based platform that enables flexibility of sensor-type utilization, depending on the specific application. A module of the Smart Workwear System that utilizes haptic feedback for work technique training is further presented and evaluated in simulated mail sorting on sixteen novice participants for its potential to reduce adverse arm movements and postures in repetitive manual handling. Upper-arm postures were recorded, using an inertial measurement unit (IMU), perceived pain/discomfort with the Borg CR10-scale, and user experience with a semi-structured interview. This study shows that the use of haptic feedback for work technique training has the potential to significantly reduce the time in adverse upper-arm postures after short periods of training. The haptic feedback was experienced positive and usable by the participants and was effective in supporting learning of how to improve postures and movements. It is concluded that this type of sensorized system, using haptic feedback training, is promising for the future, especially when organizations are introducing newly employed staff, when teaching ergonomics to employees in physically demanding jobs, and when performing ergonomics interventions. Full article