PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9084366

Ergonomics.

S J Scheer·A Mital
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Ergonomics is the application of natural laws governing human work in order to maximize safety and efficiency in the workplace. Ergonomic assessment includes job analysis from the biomechanical, physiologic, and physical viewpoints. The three most commonly described categories of ergonomic intervention are worker training, worker selection, and job redesign. In the last analysis, workplace redesign, using both engineering and administrative methods, is likely to be the most effective intervention.

Explore related subjects

Biomechanical PhenomenaCumulative Trauma DisordersEfficiencyEnvironment DesignErgonomicsHumansLow Back PainPhysical FitnessRisk FactorsSafetyVocational EducationWorkWork SimplificationWorkplaceJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S J Scheer, A Mital. 1997. Ergonomics.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-9993(97)90406-8

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1999

Low back pain: current physiologic concepts.

It is clear that low back pain is not a simple process that can be explained on purely anatomic, biomechanical, or neurophysiologic theories. The intimate relationship of these processes have to be considered. Each of the potential biomechanical stresses influence the different spinal structures in different ways, depending on the forces applied and the structure being affected. The biomechanical response to the trauma caused by these forces may be immunologic, inflammatory, or neurochemical, depending on the structures being traumatized. Once a nociceptive process is underway, it is greatly influenced by the spinal cord and the brain. Only by following this process through its various steps can a clinician begin to formulate an understanding of the mechanisms involved in the genesis of low back pain.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗
PubMed1999

Effects of retrograde femoral intramedullary nailing on the patellofemoral articulation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the patellofemoral contact areas as well as mean and maximal pressures after retrograde intramedullary nailing in a cadaveric model. STUDY DESIGN: Pressure-sensitive film was used to analyze patellofemoral joint pressures after insertion of a retrograde femoral nail in a cadaveric specimen. METHODS: A retrograde femoral nail was inserted into seven cadaveric knees. Pressure-sensitive film was placed into the patellofemoral joint and physiologic loads (700 newtons) were applied to the knee joint at 90 degrees and 120 degrees of flexion. Testing was performed with the nail three millimeters deep to the cartilage (In), flush with the cartilage (Flush), and one millimeter prominent (Out). The intact knee served as the Control. RESULTS: The mean contact areas showed no statistical differences among the four groups. There was a significant increase in mean pressure at 120 degrees and maximum pressure at 90 degrees and 120 degrees for the Out group when compared with the Control, In, and Flush groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in mean contact pressure, contact area, or maximum pressure among the Control, three-millimeter insertion depth, or flush insertion groups. There was, however, a significant increase in mean and maximum pressures with the nail one millimeter prominent. These results indicate that placement of a retrograde femoral intramedullary nail is critical, but that proper placement should not significantly influence the biomechanics of the patellofemoral joint.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗
PubMed1999

The biomechanics of hybrid external fixation.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to ascertain which factors determine the rigidity of a hybrid external fixation frame in a tibial periarticular fracture model. DESIGN: Laboratory investigation using a polyvinylchloride pipe periarticular tibia fracture model. SETTING: Simulated periarticular tibia fractures were created in a tibia model. Instrumented specimens were tested in a biomaterials testing system. INTERVENTION: Groups of simulated periarticular tibia fractures were stabilized with one of nine different external fixation constructs with components from one manufacturer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Elastic stiffness was measured for each specimen in compression, torsion, flexion bending, extension bending, and varus and valgus bending. RESULTS: The four-ring Ilizarov fixator was the stiffest in all modes of testing. There was a trend toward increasing stiffness with an increasing number of rings. Fixators constructed with multiple levels of fixation in the periarticular fragment were stiffer in all modes of testing. The additional spacing between wires gained by the use of a single thick carbon ring or the use of a drop wire three centimeters from a single ring did not increase stiffness in this model. Frame modifications intended to augment the bar-to-ring connection did not increase stiffness. The use of rings mounted with half-pins instead of a unilateral bar mounted with half-pins for diaphyseal fixation increased the stiffness of the frame only in torsional testing. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ideal stiffness of an external fixator is unknown, our results show that the addition of more than one level of fixation in the periarticular fragment increases the stiffness of hybrid external fixators in this periarticular tibia fracture model. Augmentation of the ring-to-bar connection did not significantly affect the stiffness of the frame.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗