Document Type: Original Articles

Authors

1 Department of Ergonomics, Faculty of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

2 Department of Ergonomics, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of Ergonomics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

Abstract

Background: Anthropometry is a branch of Ergonomics that considers the measurement and description of the human body dimensions. Accordingly, equipment, environments, and workstations should be designed using user-centered design processes. Anthropometric dimensions differ considerably across gender, race, ethnicity and age, taking into account ergonomic and anthropometric principles. The aim of this study was to determine anthropometric characteristics of microscope users and provide a regression model for anthropometric dimensions. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, anthropometric dimensions (18 dimensions) of the microscope users (N=174; 78 males and 96 females) in Shiraz were measured. Instruments included a Studio meter, 2 type calipers, adjustable seats, a 40-cm ruler, a tape measure, and scales. The study data were analyzed using SPSS, version 20. Results: The means of male and female microscope users’ age were 31.64±8.86 and 35±10.9 years, respectively and their height were 161.03±6.87cm and 174.81±5.45cm, respectively. The results showed that sitting and standing eye height and sitting horizontal range of accessibility had a significant correlation with stature. Conclusion: The established anthropometric database can be used as a source for designing workstations for working with microscopes in this group of users. The regression analysis showed that three dimensions, i.e. standing eye height, sitting eye height, and horizontal range of accessibility sitting had a significant correlation with stature. Therefore, given one’s stature, these dimensions can be obtained with less measurement.

Keywords

  1. Pheasant S, Haslegrave CM. Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work: CRC Press; 2005.
  2. Hanson L, Sperling L, Gard G, Ipsen S, Vergara CO. Swedish anthropometrics for product and workplace design. Appl Ergon 2009; 40(4): 797-806.
  3. Chuan TK, Hartono M, Kumar N. Anthropometry of the Singaporean and Indonesian populations. Int J Ind Ergon 2010; 40(6): 757-66.
  4. Garcia-Caceres RG, Felknor S, Cordoba JE, Caballero JP, Barrero LH. Hand anthropometry of the Colombian floriculture workers of the Bogota plateau. Int J Ind Ergon 2012; 42(2): 183-98.
  5. Zamanian Z, Salimian Z, Daneshmandi H, AliMohammadi Y. The REBA Technique Ergonomic Assessment of Musculoskeletal Disorders Risk Level among Midwives of Shiraz State Hospitals. Journal of Urmia Nursing And Midwifery Faculty 2014; 12(1): 1-7.
  6. Zamanian Z, Gharepoor S, Dehghani M. Effects of electromagnetic fields on mental health of the staff employed in gas power plants, Shiraz, 2009. Pak J Biol Sci 2010; 13(19): 956-60.
  7. Phisant E. Human, anthropometry, ergonomics and design. Trans Choobineh AR, Mououdi MA 3rd ed Tehran: Maad Press. 2012: 11.
  8. Akhlaghi M, Hajibeygi M, Zamani N, Moradi B. Estimation of stature from upper limb anthropometry in Iranian population. J Forensic Leg Med 2012; 19(5): 280-4.
  9. Krishan K, Kanchan T, Sharma A. Multiplication factor versus regression analysis in stature estimation from hand and foot dimensions. J Forensic Leg Med 2012; 19(4): 211-4.
  10. Krishan K, Kanchan T, DiMaggio JA. A study of limb asymmetry and its effect on estimation of stature in forensic case work. Forensic Sci Int 2010; 200(1): 181. e1-. e5.
  11. Raxter MH, Auerbach BM, Ruff CB. Revision of the Fully technique for estimating statures. Am J Phys Anthropol 2006; 130(3): 374-84.
  12. Pelin C, Zağyapan R, Yazıcı C, Kürkçüoğlu A. Body height estimation from head and face dimensions: a different method. J Forensic Sci 2010; 55(5): 1326-30.
  13. Agnihotri AK, Agnihotri S, Jeebun N, Googoolye K. Prediction of stature using hand dimensions. J Forensic Leg Med 2008; 15(8): 479-82.
  14. Zamanian Z, Mohammadi H, Rezaeeyani MT,Dehghani M. An investigation of shift work disorders in security personnel of 3 hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, 2009. Iran Occupational Health 2012; 9(1): 52-7.
  15. Arghavani F, Zamanian Z, Ghanbary A, Hassanzadeh J. Investigation of the Relationship Between Carrying School Bags (Handbags and Backpacks) and the Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Pains among 12-15 Year Old Students in Shiraz. Pak J Biol Sci 2014; 17(4): 550-4.
  16. Menezes RG, Kanchan T, Kumar GP, Rao PJ, Lobo SW, Uysal S, et al. Stature estimation from the length of the sternum in South Indian males: a preliminary study. J Forensic Leg Med 2009; 16(8): 441-3.
  17. Westgaard R, Aarås A. Postural muscle strain as a causal factor in the development of musculo-skeletal illnesses. Appl Ergon 1984; 15(3): 162-74.
  18. Snook SH. The design of manual handling tasks. Ergonomics 1978; 21(12): 963-85.
  19. Dewangan K, Owary C, Datta R. Anthropometric data of female farm workers from north eastern India and design of hand tools of the hilly region. Int J Ind Ergon 2008; 38(1): 90-100.
  20. Grimes P, Legg S. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in school students as a risk factor for adult MSD: a review of the multiple factors affecting posture, comfort and health in classroom environments. Journal of the Human-Environmental System 2004; 7(1): 1-9.
  21. Trevelyan FC, Legg SJ. The prevalence and characteristics of back pain among school children in New Zealand. Ergonomics 2010; 53(12): 1455-60.
  22. Haile EL, Taye B, Hussen F. Ergonomic workstations and work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the clinical laboratory. Lab Medicine 2012; 43(Supplement 2): e11-e9.
  23. Lin Y-C, Wang M-JJ, Wang EM. The comparisons of anthropometric characteristics among four peoples in East Asia. Appl Ergon 2004; 35(2): 173-8.
  24. Del Prado-Lu JL. Anthropometric measurement of Filipino manufacturing workers. Int J Ind Ergon 2007; 37(6): 497-503.
  25. Ali Ä°, Arslan N. Estimated anthropometric measurements of Turkish adults and effects of age and geographical regions. Int J Ind Ergon 2009; 39(5): 860-5.
  26. Karmegam K, Sapuan S, Ismail MY, Ismail N, Bahri MS, Shuib S, et al. Anthropometric study among adults of different ethnicity in Malaysia. International Journal of Physical Sciences 2011; 6(4): 777-88.
  27. Sadeghi F, Mazloumi A, Kazemi Z. An anthropometric data bank for the Iranian working population with ethnic diversity. Appl Ergon 2015; 48: 95-103.
  28. Phisant E. Human, anthropometry, ergonomics and design. Trans Choobineh AR, Mououdi MA 3rd ed Tehran: Maad Press. 2012: 105 - 12.
  29. Abedini R, Choobineh AR, Soltanzadeh A, Hoseinzadeh K, Hassani F, Amiri N. Measurement of Static Anthropometric Dimensions and Determination of Regression Equations in a Student Population. Journal of Health System Research 2012; 8(4).
  30. Habibi E, Sadeghi N, Mansouri F, Sadeghi M, Ranjbar M. Comparison of Iranian student’s anthropometric information and American and English standards. Journal of Jahrom University Of Medical Sciences 2012; 10: 22-30.
  31. Mououdi M. The determination of static anthropometry characteristics for designing and evaluating the comfort of saddle chair. Iran Occupational Health. 2012-2013; 1.