Affiliations: [a]
Department of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| [b]
Curtin School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| [c]
Center of Planning, Budgeting and Performance Evaluation, Department of Environment, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
| [d] Access Physiotherapy, Coolum Beach, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
Correspondence:
[*]
Address for correspondence: Hamid Reza Mokhtarinia, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Kodakyar Ave. Daneshjo Blvd., Evin, 1985713834, Tehran, Iran. E-mails: Hrmokhtarinia@yahoo.com; hr.mokhtarinia@uswr.ac.ir.
Abstract: BACKGROUND:With progressing technology in the portable computing field, laptops are now integral for work, home and social settings. Different working postures adopted by laptop users impose different loads on the relevant muscles, which can be associated with musculoskeletal discomfort in the various body regions. Some Arabic and Asian cultures adopted postures are not well investigated, particularly for the 20–30 years age-group. OBJECTIVE:This study compared muscle activity in the cervical spine, arm, and wrist among different laptop workstation setups. METHODS:In this cross-sectional study, 23 healthy female university students (age = 24.2±2.28 years, range 20–26 years) performed a standardized 10 minute typing task in four different laptop workstation setups: DESK, SOFA, GROUND sitting with back support, and laptop table (LAP-Tab). Differences between electromyography (EMG) muscle activity recorded in the trapezius (TR), cervical extensors (CE), deltoid (DEL), and wrist extensors (WE) were determined using one-way repeated ANOVA measures with a post-hoc Bonferroni test. RESULTS:Significantly higher muscle activity was observed respectively in the workstations of DESK > LAP-Tab > SOFA > GROUND. Significant differences were found between WE muscle activity and the three other muscle groups (p < 0.001). There was a significant interaction between workstations and muscle activity (F(9,264) = 3.81, p < 0.001, = 0.11), where the WE and DEL muscles showed respectively higher and lower muscle activity in all setups. CONCLUSION:Muscles showed variable activity in different workstations such that the GROUND workstation provided the minimum load, while the DESK workstation showed the maximum load on the measured muscle groups. These findings require further investigation in different cultural and gender specific groups.
