Volume 6, Issue 2 (Journal of Ergonomics 2018)                   Iran J Ergon 2018, 6(2): 46-54 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


1- Associate Professor, Health Sciences Research Center, Department of Ergonomics, School of Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
2- MSc in Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Member of the Student Research Committee, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran , mehrane.shabani@gmail.com
3- MSc in Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Member of the Student Research Committee, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
4- Assistant Professor, Occupational Health and Safety Research Center, Department of Ergonomics, School of Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
5- Assistant Professor, Modeling of Non-Communicable Diseases Research Center, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
Abstract:   (14166 Views)
Introduction: One of the factors affecting carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the lack of coordination and appropriateness of these tools. Designing a handy tool helps with a better performance, befitting and less fatigue. In this study, anthropometric data on the hands (right and left) of women and men were collected.
Materials & Methods: This research was descriptive and 576 people participated in this study; 10 anthropometric measurements of the hand according to the principles of measurement of Pheasant were measured by digital caliper under the same conditions. The measured anthropometric dimensions were the length of the hands and palms, the width of the hands and palms, the length of the fingers (m1-m2-m3-m4-m5) and the maximum power grip. Descriptive indices such as percentile 5, 50 and 95, maximum and minimum, mean and standard deviation were calculated using SPSS software.
Results: 290 women and 286 men participated in this study. Mean and standard deviation of age was (40.58 ± 9.95), height (1.66 ± 1.14) and BMI (26.85 ± 4.50). 90.8% were right handed and (9.2%) were left handed. The mean difference in length of hand, palm length, hand width, thumb length, middle finger length, small finger length, maximum power grip of women and men were statistically significant (P<0.01). All dimensions of the hand in men were larger than women.
 Conclusion: Anthropometric dimensions are influenced by factors such as gender, age, genetics, and even type of nutrition, occupation, and other factors. The size of the dimensions of the hands of women and men are different. Anthropometric database of two communities should be used to design handheld devices that are commonly used by both women and men. The findings can be used to design and redesign any hand tools and improve the convenience of users.

 
Full-Text [PDF 334 kb]   (11732 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Other Cases
Received: 2018/05/28 | Accepted: 2018/09/25 | ePublished: 2018/09/29

References
1. Abdoli-Eramaki M. Body mechanics and workstation design principles (ergonomics). Tehran Omide Majd Publ. 2000:241-50.
2. Stanton NA, Hedge A, Brookhuis K, Salas E, Hendrick HW. Handbook of human factors and ergonomics methods: CRC press; 2004. [DOI:10.1201/9780203489925]
3. Karwowski W. Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics. 2005;48(5):436-63. [DOI:10.1080/00140130400029167] [PMID]
4. Bridger R. Introduction to ergonomics: Crc Press. 2008. [DOI:10.1201/9781439894927]
5. Dianat I, Karimi MA, Hashemi AA, Bahrampour S. Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Applied ergonomics. 2013;44(1):101-8.
6. Choobineh A, Mohammadian M. Comparison of Grip and Pinch Strengths of Adults among Five Cities of IRAN. Journal of School of Public Health and Institute of Public Health Research. 2014;11(3):65-81.
7. Varmazyar S. design of school furniture based on anthropometric dimension girl students in Qazvine, Iran. Qom medical science university. 2008;3(2):40-5.
8. Habibi E, Asaadi Z, Hosseini SM. Proportion of elementary school pupils’ anthropometric characteristics with dimensions of classroom furniture in Isfahan, Iran. Journal of research in medical sciences: the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. 2011;16(1):98.
9. Zecevic A, Miller D, Harburn K. An evaluation of the ergonomics of three computer keyboards. Ergonomics. 2000;43(1):55-72. [DOI:10.1080/001401300184666] [PMID]
10. Carvalho M, Cavalcanti F, Miranda H, Soriano E. Partial rupture of supraspinous tendon in a dentist: A case report. FIEP Bull. 2006;76:131.
11. Buckle PW, Devereux JJ. The nature of work-related neck and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. Applied ergonomics. 2002;33(3):207-17. [DOI:10.1016/S0003-6870(02)00014-5]
12. Allahyari T, Jafari S, Khalkhali H. Measuring power hand grip strength in a sample of students aged 19-36 in Urmia. Journal of Ergonomics. 2015;3(3):44-50.
13. Karwowski W. International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors. Crc Press; 2001.
14. Takala J, Niu S, editors. Responses to the equity challenge in safety and health at work: improvement of working conditions in equitable bases. 27th international congress on occupational health; 2003.
15. Pheasant S. Bodyspace anthropometry, ergonomics, and the design of work Taylor & Francis Ltd.
16. Motamedzade M, Choobineh A, Mououdi MA, Arghami S. Ergonomic design of carpet weaving hand tools. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2007;37(7):581-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ergon.2007.03.005]
17. Haidari Moghadam R, Nouri N, Motamedzade M, Babamiri M. Assessment of local discomfort in common pencils and ergonomic pencil designed with local discomfort scale in elementary school students. Journal of Ergonomics. 2018;5(3):36-40.
18. Moshkdanian G, Moghani Ghoroghi F, Shiasi M, Hassanzadeh G, Alaghebandha N, Dehbashipour A, et al. Anthropometric characteristics of upper limb in Iranian and Pakistani subjects. Journal of Gorgan University of Medical Sciences. 2014;16(3).
19. Ng K, Poh, Saptari A. Hand Anthropometry: A Descriptive Analysis on Elderly Malaysians. Adult and Elderly Anthropometry. 2013:193-8.
20. Hsiao H, Whitestone J, Kau T-Y, Hildreth B. Firefighter hand anthropometry and structural glove sizing: a new perspective. Human factors. 2015;57(8):1359-77. [DOI:10.1177/0018720815594933] [PMID] [PMCID]
21. Kong Y-K, Kim D-M. The relationship between hand anthropometrics, total grip strength and individual finger force for various handle shapes. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2015;21(2):187-92. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2015.1029726] [PMID]
22. Cakit E, Durgun B, Cetik O, Yoldas O. A survey of hand anthropometry and biomechanical measurements of dentistry students in Turkey. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries. 2014;24(6):739-53. [DOI:10.1002/hfm.20401]
23. Sancho-Bru JL, Giurintano DJ, Pe ´rez-Gonza ´lez A, Vergara M. Optimum Tool Handle Diameter for a Cylinder Grip. Journal of Hand Therapy. 2003;16(4):160-1. [DOI:10.1197/S0894-1130(03)00160-1]
24. Moshkdanian Gh, Moghani Ghoroghi F, Shiasi M, Hassanzadeh G, Alaghebandha N, Dehbashipour A, et al. Anthropometric characteristics of upper limb in Iranian and Pakistani subjects. Journal of Gorgan University of Medical Sciences. 2014;16(3):80-5.
25. Wang CY, Cai DC. Hand tool handle design based on hand measurements. InMATEC Web of Conferences 2017;(119): 01044 EDP Sciences.

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.