University Studentsł Notebook Computer
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Applied Ergonomics 40 (2009) 404–409 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Ergonomics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apergo University students’ notebook computer use Karen Jacobs a,*, Peter Johnson b, Jack Dennerlein c, Denise Peterson d, Justin Kaufman e, Joshua Gold f, Sarah Williams g, Nancy Richmond h, Stephanie Karban a, Emily Firn a, Elizabeth Ansong d, Sarah Hudak a, Katherine Tung d, Victoria Hall e, Karol Pencina i, Michael Pencina i a Boston University, Sargent College, Department of Occupational Therapy, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA b University of Washington, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Box 357230, Seattle, WA 98195-7230, USA c Harvard University, School of Public Health, Landmark 404L, 665 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA 02115, USA d Boston University, Sargent College, Department of Physical Therapy and Athletic Training, 635 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA e Boston University, College of Arts and Sciences, 725 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA f Boston University, Metropolitan College, 755 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA g Boston University, School of Education, 2 Sherborn Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA h Northeastern University, Career Services, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA i Boston University, School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, 704 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA article info abstract Article history: Recent evidence suggests that university students are self-reporting experiencing musculoskeletal Received 1 November 2007 discomfort with computer use similar to levels reported by adult workers. The objective of this study was Accepted 15 November 2008 to determine how university students use notebook computers and to determine what ergonomic strategies might be effective in reducing self-reported musculoskeletal discomfort in this population. Keywords: Two hundred and eighty-nine university students randomly assigned to one of three towers by the Self-reported notebook computer-related university’s Office of Housing participated in this study. The results of this investigation showed musculoskeletal discomfort a significant reduction in self-reported notebook computer-related discomfort from pre- and post-survey Computer usage software Notebook computer accessories in participants who received notebook computer accessories and in those who received accessories and participatory ergonomics training. A significant increase in post-survey rest breaks was seen. There was a significant correlation between self-reported computer usage and the amount measured using computer usage software (odometer). More research is needed however to determine the most effective ergonomics intervention for university students. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction instructional systems design process with active adult learning and inquiry into a computer ergonomics workshop, students were able There are a limited number of systematic studies that have to increase their knowledge of computer ergonomics and were able examined university students’ use of computers (Katz et al., 2000; to apply this knowledge to solve computer workstation problems Crook and Barrowcliff, 2001; Cortes et al., 2002; Robertson et al., (Robertson et al., 2002). Participatory ergonomics is, ‘‘The 2002; Hupert et al., 2004; Hamilton et al., 2005; Fay, 2006; involvement of people in planning and controlling a significant Menendez et al., 2007; Jenkins et al., 2007). Several of these studies amount of their work activities, with sufficient knowledge and reported an association between university students’ computer use power to influence both processes and outcomes in order to ach- and self-reported musculoskeletal discomfort (Katz et al., 2000; ieve desirable goals’’ (Wilson and Haines, 1997, pp. 490–513). Cortes et al., 2002; Robertson et al., 2002; Hupert et al., 2004; Although a participatory ergonomics approach has been used Hamilton et al., 2005; Menendez et al., 2007; Jenkins et al., 2007). effectively in industry, Robertson et al’s study is one of the first to One of these studies (Robertson et al., 2002) attempted to address report its successful use with university students. this association, and implemented a participatory ergonomics Notebook computers account for 25% of the computer market approach to the process of developing a computer ergonomics (Consumers Union of US, Inc., 2005–2008) and sales are projected training workshop for university students. Results suggested that to increase 28% over the next year (Daoud and Bell, 2007). Note- by using a participatory approach that incorporated an book computer use by university students has increased from 52.8% in 2005 to 75.8% in 2007 (Salaway and Caruso, 2007), but despite this growth in popularity, there is a scarcity of studies that specif- * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 617 353 7516; fax: þ1 617 353 2926. ically investigate notebook computer use in this population (Fay, E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Jacobs). 2006). Since a majority of today’s students may work in office 0003-6870/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2008.11.009 K. Jacobs et al. / Applied Ergonomics 40 (2009) 404–409 405 environments in a few years, it is therefore important to under- on their notebook computer. At the conclusion of the participatory stand university students’ notebook computer use, and to design ergonomic training, participants in condition #2 were asked to ergonomic strategies for this population that are effective in pre- write a personal goal for promoting a safe and comfortable venting or reducing self-reported musculoskeletal discomfort. computer workstation environment. Over the duration of the study Additionally, since these students spend the majority of their (three months) participants corresponded through monthly e-mail notebook computer usage time at ‘‘home’’ in their dormitories (Fay, with the primary investigator to evaluate their goal, problem solve 2006), it is ecologically desirable to conduct studies of notebook ways to facilitate progress towards the goal and, when necessary, computer use in the dormitory setting. It is also vital to investigate reformulate the goal or set a new goal. For example, one participant the ergonomics strategies involved in the student population as wrote the goal to spend less time on the notebook computer for ‘‘the ergonomic design of the learning environment influences nonschool related activities. This participant reported using a timer learning performance’’ (Smith, 2007, p. 1532). to limit her daily nonschool use. The purpose of this study is to investigate how university At the conclusion of the study, the participants returned their students use notebook computers and to determine what ergo- external notebook accessories. nomic strategies such as promoting students to find their comfort zone and to safely arrange and adjust their notebook computer 2.3. Survey methods and instruments work areas might be effective in reducing self-reported musculo- skeletal discomfort in this population. There were two methods of data collection: self-report and direct measurement. Table 1 lists exposure data with correspond- 2. Methods ing survey instruments and method. 2.1. Study participants 2.3.1. Self-report methods There were two self-report methods used: 10-statement true/ Two hundred and eighty-nine undergraduate students (39% false ergonomics quiz and the College Computing and Health males; 61% females) were recruited in spring 2007 from a single Survey. Both measures were paper-based and completed at pre- college dormitory at a private university in the New England area of and post-study. On average, completion of the quiz was 3–5 min the United States. Only students using notebook computers were and the survey was 10–15 min. invited to participate in the study. Because of the notebook The 10-statement true/false ergonomics quiz was composed of restriction and attrition, 223 undergraduates participated for the content from the participatory ergonomics training. Two examples full duration of the study. Institutional Review Board approval was of these true/false statements are: obtained from the university. When typing on a notebook computer, your wrists, hands and 2.2. Study design forearms should be in their neutral comfort zone. You should rest your hands and wrists while typing or pointing. A repeated measures study design was used. The duration of the study was three months from pre- to post-surveys. At base- The quiz was administered to participants prior to the partici- line, all participants completed an ergonomics quiz and the pants’ completion of the College Computing and Health Survey at College Computing and Health Survey. Anthropometric pre- and post-study. The sum of all of the correct answers was measurements were taken to ensure that participants in all of the calculated as the ergonomic score. The objective of the quiz was to conditions were comparable in body size. Participants were ascertain the participant’s knowledge and beliefs about photographed in their dormitory room while using their note- ergonomics. book computers in non-poised postures. In addition, computer The College Computing and Health Survey was used to record usage software (Tools for exposure assessment of physical risk demographic information and document physical change, behav- factors of VDT Workers (NIOSH 2 R01 OH003997, PI: Jack Den- ioral change, and discomfort