uu.seUppsala universitets publikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Is what you see what you get?: Standard inclinometry of set upper arm elevation angles
Uppsala universitet, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centrum för klinisk forskning, Gävleborg.
Visa övriga samt affilieringar
2015 (Engelska)Ingår i: Applied Ergonomics, ISSN 0003-6870, E-ISSN 1872-9126, Vol. 47, s. 242-252Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Fritextbeskrivning
Abstract [en]

Previous research suggests inclinometers (INC) underestimate upper arm elevation. This study was designed to quantify possible bias in occupationally relevant postures, and test whether INC performance could be improved using calibration. Participants were meticulously positioned in set arm flexion and abduction angles between 0 degrees and 150 degrees. Different subject-specific and group-level regression models comprising linear and quadratic components describing the relationship between set and INC-registered elevation were developed using subsets of data, and validated using additional data. INC measured arm elevation showed a downward bias, particularly above 600. INC data adjusted using the regression models were superior to unadjusted data; a subject-specific, two-point calibration based on measurements at 0 and 900 gave results closest to the 'true' set angles. Thus, inclinometer measured arm elevation data required calibration to arrive at 'true' elevation angles. Calibration to a common measurement scale should be considered when comparing arm elevation data collected using different methods.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
2015. Vol. 47, s. 242-252
Nyckelord [en]
Measurement error, Observation, Working postures
Nationell ämneskategori
Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-245337DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2014.08.014ISI: 000347663600028PubMedID: 25479994OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-245337DiVA, id: diva2:792239
Tillgänglig från: 2015-03-03 Skapad: 2015-02-26 Senast uppdaterad: 2018-01-11Bibliografiskt granskad
Ingår i avhandling
1. Bias and Precision in Biomechanical Exposure Assessment: Making the Most of our Methods
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Bias and Precision in Biomechanical Exposure Assessment: Making the Most of our Methods
2017 (Engelska)Doktorsavhandling, sammanläggning (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
Abstract [en]

Background: Insufficient exposure assessment is a suggested contributing factor to the current lack of clearly characterised relationships between occupational biomechanical risk factors and musculoskeletal disorders. Minimal attention has been paid to the potential bias of measurement tools from expected true values (i.e. accuracy) or between measurement tools, and empirical data on the magnitudes of variance contributed by methodological factors for measurement tool precision are lacking.

Aim: The aim of this thesis was to quantify aspects of bias and precision in three commonly employed biomechanical risk factor assessment tools - inclinometry, observation, and electromyography (EMG) - and provide recommendations guiding their use.

Methods: Upper arm elevation angles (UAEAs) were assessed using inclinometers (INC) and by computer-based posture-matching observation, and bias relative to true angles was calculated. Calibration models were developed for INC data, and their efficacy in correcting measurement bias was evaluated. The total variance of trapezius and erector spinae (ES) EMG recordings during cyclic occupational work was partitioned into biological and methodological sources, including the variance uniquely attributable to sub-maximal normalisation. Using algorithms to estimate the precision of a group mean, the efficacy of different trapezius EMG study designs was evaluated. Using precision criteria, the efficacy of different normalisation methods was assessed for ES EMG recordings.

Results and Discussion: Inclinometer measured UAEAs were biased from true angles, with increasing bias at higher angles. In contrast, computer based posture-matching observations were not biased from true angles.  Calibration models proved effective at minimizing INC data bias. The dispersion of estimates between- and within- observers at any given set angle underlined the importance of repeated observations when estimating UAEAs.  For EMG, a unique but relatively small component of the total variance was attributable to the methodological process of normalisation. Performing three repeats of the trapezius EMG normalisation task proved optimal at minimizing variance for one-day EMG studies, while two repeats sufficed for multi-day EMG studies. A prone normalisation task proved superior for maximizing normalised lumbar ES EMG precision.

Conclusion: Key aspects of measurement tool accuracy, bias between tools, and tool precision were quantified, and recommendations were made to guide future research study design.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2017. s. 90
Serie
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine, ISSN 1651-6206 ; 1329
Nyckelord
measurement strategy, accuracy, inclinometry, electromyography, EMG, upper arm, shoulder, low back, lumbar, thoracic
Nationell ämneskategori
Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-314784 (URN)978-91-554-9902-0 (ISBN)
Disputation
2017-06-02, Krusenstjernasalen - Biblioteket, Högskolan i Gävle, Kungsbäcksvägen 47, 801 76, Gävle, 13:00 (Engelska)
Opponent
Handledare
Forskningsfinansiär
Forte, Forskningsrådet för hälsa, arbetsliv och välfärd, 2009-1761
Tillgänglig från: 2017-05-10 Skapad: 2017-04-07 Senast uppdaterad: 2018-01-13

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltext saknas i DiVA

Övriga länkar

Förlagets fulltextPubMed

Personposter BETA

Liv, Per

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Jackson, Jennie A.Liv, Per
Av organisationen
Centrum för klinisk forskning, Gävleborg
I samma tidskrift
Applied Ergonomics
Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 359 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf