The effects of static seated and standing positions on posture in dental hygiene students: a pilot study.

Abstract

Background: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are highly prevalent among dental hygiene professionals. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate and compare seated and standing postures during simulated dental hygiene practice to determine ergonomic risks associated with each posture.

Methods: A convenience sample of 35 female second-year dental hygiene students with no history of musculoskeletal disorders was enrolled in this IRB-approved study. In 2 separate sessions, 1 seated and 1 standing, participants instrumented 1 quadrant of the mouth in a simulated oral environment. Two images per session, per participant, were taken to evaluate biomechanical demands of each posture using the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) tool. The same 4 calibrated researchers scored all images independently and mean scores for each posture were analysed.

Results: Thirty-four students completed the study. Results revealed statistically significant (p = 0.001) differences in mean RULA scores between seated (M = 3.91, SD = 0.77) and standing (M = 4.50, SD = 1.00) postures, although these differences may not be clinically relevant.

Discussion: When postures were independently assessed, seated postures were more acceptable on average compared to standing postures, yet both were in the unacceptable range. Lack of training in standing postures may have impacted the results.

Conclusion: Results support the need for additional ergonomic training in dental hygiene curricula. Less than ideal posture when seated or standing could increase MSD risk. Future research should examine biomechanical loads of seated and standing postures, as well as the combination of these postures, for more insight into their ergonomic benefits and associated MSD risks.