99
Views
9
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
ORIGINAL RESEARCH

A Comparison of Examination Equipment Used During Common Clinical Ophthalmologic Tasks

, , &
Pages 105-117 | Received 01 May 2014, Accepted 01 Sep 2014, Published online: 24 Nov 2014
 

Abstract

OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONS Ophthalmologists and other eye-care physicians frequently use clinical examination equipment that restricts access to patients and requires the adoption of sustained, non-neutral working postures of the neck and shoulders. The use of ergonomic principles in the design of examination equipment could help reduce these physical demands, which may be partly responsible for the high prevalence of neck and shoulder pain among ophthalmologists. This study compared the effects of a set of this alternative “ergonomic” equipment to a set of conventional equipment on measures of neck and shoulder muscle activity and upper arm posture during simulations of common clinical ophthalmologic tasks. Results suggested that some aspects of the alternative equipment may help reduce exposures to sustained, non-neutral working postures of the neck and shoulder among ophthalmologists. Ophthalmologists and other eye-care physicians may consider implementing similar alternative equipment interventions into their practices.

TECHNICAL ABSTRACT Background: Ophthalmologists report a high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal symptoms, particularly of the neck and shoulders. Improving the design of equipment used in the clinical environment may reduce exposures to physical risk factors (e.g., sustained muscular exertions and non-neutral postures) associated with neck and shoulder pain among ophthalmologists. Purpose: This study compares estimates of neck and shoulder muscle activity and upper arm posture during use of conventional and alternative examination equipment common in clinical ophthalmologic practice. Methods: Fifteen ophthalmologists performed one mock clinical examination using conventional equipment and one mock clinical examination using alternative equipment with the potential to reduce exposure to sustained muscular exertions and non-neutral upper arm postures. The alternative equipment included a slit lamp biomicroscope with inclined viewing oculars, adjustable elbow supports, and a wider tabletop with more room for supporting the arms in comparison to the conventional slit lamp biomicroscope. A wireless binocular indirect ophthalmoscope was also evaluated that had a more even weight distribution than the conventional design. Measurements of upper trapezius and anterior deltoid muscle activity, upper arm posture, and perceived usability were used to compare the conventional and alternative equipment. Results: In comparison to the conventional slit lamp biomicroscope, the alternative slit lamp biomicroscope led to (i) 12% to 13% reductions in upper trapezius muscle activity levels, (ii) a 9% reduction in left anterior deltoid muscle activity levels, and (iii) a 15% reduction in the percentage of work time spent with the left upper arm elevated in positions greater than 60º. In addition, participants rated the comfort and adjustability of both the alternative slit lamp biomicroscope and binocular indirect ophthalmoscope more favorably than the conventional equipment. Conclusions: The results suggest that the alternative slit lamp biomicroscope may help to reduce overall muscular demands and non-neutral postures of the neck and shoulder region among ophthalmologists.

FUNDING

This research was supported by a contract from Haag-Streit USA/Reliance Medical Products, Mason, OH, USA, and two extramural research grants of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), including the Great Plains Center for Agricultural Health and Safety (grant 5U54OH007548-13A) and the Heartland Occupational Safety and Health Research Center (grant 5T42OH008491-08). The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of any of the funding sources.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 61.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 129.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.