Open AccessCOMPARISON OF MUSCULOSKELETAL STRESS ON LUMBAR, SHOULDER, AND WRIST JOINTS WHILE MAKING A BED USING EASYTUCK PAD VERSUS OTHER BED-MAKING TOOLS
Author(s) -
Armia Abdo,
Hani H. Al-Nakhli
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
innovare journal of medical sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2321-4406
DOI - 10.22159/ijms.2020.v8i2.37101
Subject(s) - shoulders , medicine , wrist , physical therapy , physical medicine and rehabilitation , simulation , computer science , surgery
Objective: Currently, there are multiple bed-making tools utilized by consumers and businesses with the intention of increasing safety and reducing time to make a bed. In this study, we will compare musculoskeletal stress, time, and preference of making a bed using the EasyTuck pad versus three other bed-making tools and making a bed without any bed-making tool.
Methods: A sample of ten subjects performed the task of making a queen size mattress bed with one bottom fitted sheet and one top flat sheet, using the EasyTuck pad versus three other bed-making tools, and making a bed without any bed-making tool, in a random order. Time to make the bed, forces on the low back, shoulders and wrist, and the number of times each individual bent forward were measured during each trial. In addition, subjective preferences were measured using a simple questionnaire.
Results: Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to analyze the differences between the five different procedures. There were significant differences for all the measured variables. Regarding the time needed to make one bed, the EasyTuck pad had the least time range (80.6 s±4.3), which was approximately 40 s less than making the bed with no tool (p<0.001). Furthermore, for the overall lumbar spine impulse force, the EasyTuck pad had the largest overall reduction in this category (90.6%). Regarding the subjective data, the EasyTuck pad had an overall rating of 9.4 out of 10, compared to the other tools with ratings of 5.9, 5.1, and 3.4 out of 10, which was a statistically significant difference (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Making beds on a regular basis poses risk of injury, especially for those who are required to perform this for their occupation. However, using assistive tools for bed-making, could minimize, and prevent injuries and overload to the lower back, and other parts of the body, making the bed-making task safer. Based on our findings, the EasyTuck pad was by far the most efficient and safest tool to assist in making beds, with the lowest possible risk of injury when compared to all the other tools tested.