File
Radwan A1,2, Hall J1, Carpenter D1, Gillam O1, Pajazetovic A1
1Utica College, Doctor of Physical Therapy Program, Utica, United States, 2Center for Ergonomic Analysis and Research (CEAR), Utica, United States
Background: Alternative seat designs are a growing industry which claims to improve posture, performance, and daytime activity, but currently supporting research is limited and continues to emerge. Development of evidence-based and effective alternative designs are essential to assist in curtailing the rising endemic of low back pain and the $100 billion annual cost associated with treatment, lost wages, and reduced productivity of sequella musculoskeletal issues.
Purpose: This systematic review analyzes the effects of alternatively designed chairs on productivity and their impact on the reduction and prevention of musculoskeletal discomfort compared to standard office chairs.
Methods: Researchers utilized multiple databases to obtain high quality-controlled trials comparing alternative seat designs to standard office chairs. The recruited articles had to be peer-reviewed and published within the last 10 years in English language. Sixteen full text articles met inclusion criteria and were evaluated for methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias and the PEDro scale.
Results: Quality of reviewed articles contributed moderate evidence towards the answer of our research question. Stability balls and stability ball chairs may improve posture, energy, and perceived balance. Ergonomic stools, produce appropriate lumbar and cervical posture while working. Active alternatives like a desk cycle or a treadmill increase exertion and activity but reduce task accuracy like typing, mousing, telephoning, and working memory. Such adverse productivity may likely outweigh therapeutic benefits in a business environment.
Conclusion(s): No single ergonomic alternative chair provides a panacea solution to the deleterious effects of prolonged seated posture while maintaining worker productivity. Individual users must prioritize their requirements and select a chair to fit individual needs.
Implications: The authors recommend the use of more than one seating option per office space and still follow the current ergonomic general consensus of mixing sitting with standing and walking.
Keywords: Ergonomics, seat design, Office workers
Funding acknowledgements: N/A
Purpose: This systematic review analyzes the effects of alternatively designed chairs on productivity and their impact on the reduction and prevention of musculoskeletal discomfort compared to standard office chairs.
Methods: Researchers utilized multiple databases to obtain high quality-controlled trials comparing alternative seat designs to standard office chairs. The recruited articles had to be peer-reviewed and published within the last 10 years in English language. Sixteen full text articles met inclusion criteria and were evaluated for methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias and the PEDro scale.
Results: Quality of reviewed articles contributed moderate evidence towards the answer of our research question. Stability balls and stability ball chairs may improve posture, energy, and perceived balance. Ergonomic stools, produce appropriate lumbar and cervical posture while working. Active alternatives like a desk cycle or a treadmill increase exertion and activity but reduce task accuracy like typing, mousing, telephoning, and working memory. Such adverse productivity may likely outweigh therapeutic benefits in a business environment.
Conclusion(s): No single ergonomic alternative chair provides a panacea solution to the deleterious effects of prolonged seated posture while maintaining worker productivity. Individual users must prioritize their requirements and select a chair to fit individual needs.
Implications: The authors recommend the use of more than one seating option per office space and still follow the current ergonomic general consensus of mixing sitting with standing and walking.
Keywords: Ergonomics, seat design, Office workers
Funding acknowledgements: N/A
Topic: Occupational health & ergonomics; Robotics & technology; Health promotion & wellbeing/healthy ageing
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: Utica College, Utica , NY, USA
Ethics committee: Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Reason not required: Not dealing with human subjects
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
