The influence of the viewing angle on neck-load during work with video display units.

Ergonomic measures have been found to reduce load-related trouble from the neck-and-shoulders during visual display unit (VDU) work. An important question is the height at which the screen should be placed to give the lowest possible load. Should it be placed at eye-level or below? The aim of the present study was to investigate whether there was any difference in external loading moments of force about the C7-T1 segment when the VDU-operators had a viewing angle of 20 degrees below the horizontal plane as compared to 3 degrees above the horizontal. Eight secretaries were videofilmed in the sagittal plane in the two work postures during simulated work. The loading moment was calculated from the film. It was significantly lower at viewing angle 3 degrees above the horizontal than at 20 degrees below the horizontal, both at the beginning (1.3 vs 2.2 nm) and at the end (1.4 vs 2.1 nm) of the film sequences (p < 0.05).

[1]  A. Aarås.  Relationship between trapezius load and the incidence of musculoskeletal illness in the neck and shoulder , 1994 .

[2]  L J Fine,et al.  Musculoskeletal disorders among visual display terminal users in a telecommunications company. , 1994, Ergonomics.

[3]  P. McClure,et al.  The relationship between head and neck posture and VDT screen height in keyboard operators. , 1998, Physical therapy.

[4]  B Nilsson,et al.  Musculoskeletal disorders among visual display terminal workers: individual, ergonomic, and work organizational factors. , 1995, Ergonomics.

[5]  Wolfgang Jaschtnski-Kruza.  On the preferred viewing distances to screen and document at VDU workplaces , 1990 .

[6]  G. Németh,et al.  Load moments and myoelectric activity when the cervical spine is held in full flexion and extension. , 1986, Ergonomics.

[7]  M. P. J. M. Van Riel,et al.  Improving the sitting posture of CAD/CAM workers by increasing VDU monitor working height , 1992 .

[8]  M Thoresen,et al.  Musculoskeletal, visual and psychosocial stress in VDU operators before and after multidisciplinary ergonomic interventions. , 1998, Applied ergonomics.

[9]  S Saito,et al.  Ocular surface area as an informative index of visual ergonomics. , 1995, Industrial health.

[10]  K. Harms-Ringdahl,et al.  Cervical spine positions and load moments during bicycling with different handlebar positions. , 1989, Clinical biomechanics.

[11]  M. Hagberg,et al.  Prevalence rates and odds ratios of shoulder-neck diseases in different occupational groups. , 1987, British journal of industrial medicine.

[12]  W. T. Dempster,et al.  SPACE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SEATED OPERATOR, GEOMETRICAL, KINEMATIC, AND MECHANICAL ASPECTS OF THE BODY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE LIMBS , 1955 .

[13]  G Parenmark,et al.  Ergonomic on-the-job training of assembly workers. Arm-neck-shoulder complaints drastically reduced amongst beginners. , 1988, Applied ergonomics.

[14]  L M Schleifer,et al.  Work Posture, Workstation Design, and Musculoskeletal Discomfort in a VDT Data Entry Task , 1991, Human factors.

[15]  B. Knave,et al.  Eye discomfort and work with visual display terminals. , 1994 .

[16]  E Grandjean,et al.  Postural and visual loads at VDT workplaces. I. Constrained postures. , 1981, Ergonomics.

[17]  E Grandjean,et al.  VDT Workstation Design: Preferred Settings and Their Effects , 1983, Human factors.

[18]  A Aarås,et al.  Postural load during VDU work: a comparison between various work postures. , 1997, Ergonomics.

[19]  Relative mechanical load on shoulder and elbow muscles in standing position when handling materials manually. A study of packing work. , 1987, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.