Descriptive analysis of seat ergonomics among Utica college population.

摘要

Abstract Purpose: The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of seating ergonomics among the Utica College community. The secondary purpose is to develop and validate a Simple Seat Satisfaction Questionnaire [SSSQ] in order to assess the users' overall satisfaction with, and the ergonomic value of, the seats used within the Utica College community. Importance: Currently, there is no graphically enhanced valid and reliable questionnaire that can be utilized to assess the overall user-satisfaction and ergonomic appropriateness of office chair design. The SSSQ is designed to be generalizable to a variety of educational institutions and workplace settings across the United States, so that it may ultimately be utilized to assess the quality of seating ergonomics and further target the growing problem of LBP. It is intended that identifying areas in need of ergonomic intervention will not only decrease the incidence of LBP, but will also increase productivity among workers. Methods: Photos of 62 chairs throughout the Utica College community were taken and analyzed for their ergonomic appropriateness. Twenty participants were chosen based on random sample of convenience to participate in an interview and pilot study. These participants consisted of 10 students, 4 faculty, and 6 staff. After completion of the pilot study, full survey implementation was initiated. With full survey implementation, paper-based copies were distributed to 99 students and 100 faculty and staff members. Surveys distributed to the student population represented four commonly used chair designs among the Utica College campus, while the faculty and staff population represented a large variety of chairs among the Utica College campus. Response rate was 82%, which included the subjects from the pilot study. A statistical validation and inference was then conducted. Results: The questionnaire was deemed statistically valid with overall Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of .85. Almost 50% of the sample had subjective pain that they claimed to be related to their seats, with more reported complaints among females. Similarly, complaints and dissatisfaction with seats were greater amongst students than instructors and staff. According to the proposed scoring system of this questionnaire, 30% of the seats needed ergonomic adjustments/intervention. Conclusion: The proposed SSSQ is a valid graphically enhanced, easy to use questionnaire that assesses the users' satisfaction, and the ergonomic value of the seats. This will help identify areas in need for ergonomic intervention which will not only decrease the incidence of low back pain, but will also increase productivity among workers. Future studies should be directed towards establishing reliability of the SSSQ's use outside of the educational setting.