模拟腹腔镜手术中的坐姿与站姿工作姿势:从用户偏好、舒适度、性能和生物力学角度进行比较。

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Ergonomics Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1080/00140139.2024.2332786
Saif K Al-Qaisi, Ilham Abousaleh, Rim Banat, Zavi Lakissian, Rida Zeineddine, Ahmad Zaghal, Abdul Sattar Raslan, Rana Sharara-Chami
{"title":"模拟腹腔镜手术中的坐姿与站姿工作姿势:从用户偏好、舒适度、性能和生物力学角度进行比较。","authors":"Saif K Al-Qaisi, Ilham Abousaleh, Rim Banat, Zavi Lakissian, Rida Zeineddine, Ahmad Zaghal, Abdul Sattar Raslan, Rana Sharara-Chami","doi":"10.1080/00140139.2024.2332786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prolonged standing in surgery has been linked to an increased risk of musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of this study was to determine whether sitting could serve as an alternative work posture in laparoscopic procedures. Twenty medical students in their third and fourth years were recruited. Sitting and standing were compared at two task complexity levels on a laparoscopic surgery simulator. Measured variables included user posture preferences, perceived discomfort, performance and biomechanics. Electromyography data from the upper trapezius and erector spinae muscles were analysed. Results showed that posture did not affect surgical performance and erector spinae muscle activation. Sitting showed higher muscle activation at the trapezius muscles; however, perceived discomfort was unaffected. Most participants preferred sitting for the difficult task and standing for the easy task. Findings showed that sitting, with appropriate seat design considerations, could serve as an alternative or even as a preferred work posture for simulated laparoscopic procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":50503,"journal":{"name":"Ergonomics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sitting versus standing work postures during simulated laparoscopic surgery: in terms of user preferences, comfort, performance and biomechanics.\",\"authors\":\"Saif K Al-Qaisi, Ilham Abousaleh, Rim Banat, Zavi Lakissian, Rida Zeineddine, Ahmad Zaghal, Abdul Sattar Raslan, Rana Sharara-Chami\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00140139.2024.2332786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Prolonged standing in surgery has been linked to an increased risk of musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of this study was to determine whether sitting could serve as an alternative work posture in laparoscopic procedures. Twenty medical students in their third and fourth years were recruited. Sitting and standing were compared at two task complexity levels on a laparoscopic surgery simulator. Measured variables included user posture preferences, perceived discomfort, performance and biomechanics. Electromyography data from the upper trapezius and erector spinae muscles were analysed. Results showed that posture did not affect surgical performance and erector spinae muscle activation. Sitting showed higher muscle activation at the trapezius muscles; however, perceived discomfort was unaffected. Most participants preferred sitting for the difficult task and standing for the easy task. Findings showed that sitting, with appropriate seat design considerations, could serve as an alternative or even as a preferred work posture for simulated laparoscopic procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ergonomics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ergonomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2024.2332786\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2024.2332786","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

手术中长期站立与肌肉骨骼疾病风险增加有关。本研究旨在确定在腹腔镜手术中,坐姿是否可以作为一种替代工作姿势。研究人员招募了 20 名三、四年级的医学生。在腹腔镜手术模拟器上对两种任务复杂程度的坐姿和站姿进行了比较。测量变量包括使用者的姿势偏好、感知到的不适、表现和生物力学。还分析了斜方肌上部和竖脊肌的肌电图数据。结果显示,姿势不会影响手术效果和竖脊肌的激活。坐姿显示斜方肌的肌肉活化程度更高,但感觉到的不适却不受影响。大多数参与者在完成困难的任务时喜欢坐着,而在完成简单的任务时喜欢站着。研究结果表明,考虑到适当的座椅设计,坐姿可以作为模拟腹腔镜手术的替代姿势,甚至是首选工作姿势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sitting versus standing work postures during simulated laparoscopic surgery: in terms of user preferences, comfort, performance and biomechanics.

Prolonged standing in surgery has been linked to an increased risk of musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of this study was to determine whether sitting could serve as an alternative work posture in laparoscopic procedures. Twenty medical students in their third and fourth years were recruited. Sitting and standing were compared at two task complexity levels on a laparoscopic surgery simulator. Measured variables included user posture preferences, perceived discomfort, performance and biomechanics. Electromyography data from the upper trapezius and erector spinae muscles were analysed. Results showed that posture did not affect surgical performance and erector spinae muscle activation. Sitting showed higher muscle activation at the trapezius muscles; however, perceived discomfort was unaffected. Most participants preferred sitting for the difficult task and standing for the easy task. Findings showed that sitting, with appropriate seat design considerations, could serve as an alternative or even as a preferred work posture for simulated laparoscopic procedures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ergonomics
Ergonomics 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
147
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ergonomics, also known as human factors, is the scientific discipline that seeks to understand and improve human interactions with products, equipment, environments and systems. Drawing upon human biology, psychology, engineering and design, Ergonomics aims to develop and apply knowledge and techniques to optimise system performance, whilst protecting the health, safety and well-being of individuals involved. The attention of ergonomics extends across work, leisure and other aspects of our daily lives. The journal Ergonomics is an international refereed publication, with a 60 year tradition of disseminating high quality research. Original submissions, both theoretical and applied, are invited from across the subject, including physical, cognitive, organisational and environmental ergonomics. Papers reporting the findings of research from cognate disciplines are also welcome, where these contribute to understanding equipment, tasks, jobs, systems and environments and the corresponding needs, abilities and limitations of people. All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees.
期刊最新文献
The effect of font boldness, noise disturbance and time pressure on human error in the context of cloud change operation. How flight experience impacts pilots' decision-making and visual scanning pattern in low-visibility approaches: preliminary evidence from eye tracking. The comfort and functional performance of personal protective equipment for police officers: a systematic scoping review. Virtual fit and design improvements of a filtering half-mask for sub-adult wearers. The impact of remote work using mobile information and communication technologies on physical health: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1