Snap-on-handles for a non-powered hacksaw: an ergonomics evaluation, redesign and testing

Hand anthropometry survey in Iranian adults and comparisons with other populations

BACKGROUND

Hand anthropometry is useful for designing manual systems such as hand tools, controls, and gloves. There are limited published data on the hand dimensions of Iranian male and female adults.

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to measure the hand anthropometric dimensions in Iranian adults to compare data between two genders and also with the corresponding data from other nationalities.

METHODS

A total of 34 dimensions of the right hand were measured in 217 male and 128 female adults using a digital caliper and tape. The mean, standard deviation, and the main percentiles are summarized in a table and the mean of each dimension is compared by independent t-tests between genders. Hand dimensions are compared between Iranian and other nationalities such as North Colombian, Korean, Turkish, Nigerian, Bangladeshi, Jordanian, and Vietnamese using the published data.

RESULTS

Females had significantly smaller hand dimensions than males in all dimensions ranged from 4.21%to 18.16%, with the largest differences in hand breadths. Compared with other nationalities, the Iranian male and female adults had wider (greater breadth and circumferences) hands with shorter fingers.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed significant differences of hand anthropometry between Iranian and other nationalities which should be included in the design and selection of hand tools for Iranian population.

Non-powered hand tool improvement research for prevention of work-related problems: a review

PURPOSE

In lower-middle-income countries, most of the work is performed manually using non-ergonomic hand tools which results in work-related health problems. Using hand tools designed in line with ergonomic principles may play an important role in reducing work-related health concerns significantly.

METHODS

Scientific databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost) and e-publishers were searched for articles from 1985 to 2015 using the following keywords: 'hand tool', 'ergonomics', 'usability' and 'design'. After applying selection criteria to 614 articles, 58 articles related to the physical design of hand tools were selected.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were related to hand tool improvement in the manufacturing sector. Musculoskeletal disorders were found to be the most frequently occurring work-related health problems. Most of the articles focused on product and qualitative variables for improvement in hand tools, while few articles considered human and task variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature shows that hand tool improvement studies have been given less importance in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. However, some work of significance is reported in the agriculture sectors of these countries. Hence, it is concluded that ergonomic intervention in hand tools is much needed for those industries which employ traditional methods of working.

Association between objective and subjective measurements of comfort and discomfort in hand tools

In the current study, the relationship between objective measurements and subjective experienced comfort and discomfort in using handsaws was examined. Twelve carpenters evaluated five different handsaws. Objective measures of contact pressure (average pressure, pressure area and pressure-time (P-t) integral) in static and dynamic conditions, muscle activity (electromyography) of five muscles of the upper extremity, and productivity were obtained during a sawing task. Subjective comfort and discomfort were assessed using the comfort questionnaire for hand tools and a scale for local perceived discomfort (LPD). We did not find any relationship between muscle activity and comfort or discomfort. The P-t integral during the static measurement (beta=-0.24, p<0.01) was the best predictor of comfort and the pressure area during static measurement was the best predictor of LPD (beta=0.45, p<0.01). Additionally, productivity was highly correlated to comfort (beta=0.31, p<0.01) and discomfort (beta=-0.49, p<0.01).