Original Article

Investigating Hand Anthropometric Dimensions- A Case Study on Office Personnel and Car Mechanics

Hand Anthropometric

Abstract

The present study was aimed to distinguish the effects of work type on hand dimensions and investigate the relationship between anthropometric dimensions and occupation. Methods: The participants included 91 males in two groups, namely 51 manual labor and 40 office employees. The anthropometric data of 12 hand anthropometric dimensions were collected. A simple random method was applied to identify samples. All data were analyzed using SPSS version 18. Results: All the measurements unless manual workers grip diameter were significantly greater than office personnel. The hand perimeter had the greatest value among the 12 measured dimensions while the thickness of the side little finger was the smallest one. In four dimensions, namely width of four fingers together from the central hinge; diameter of thumb to face; diameter of the index finger to face; hand thickness from index finger revealed the availability of a significant difference between manual labor jobs and office workers. Moreover, no significant relation was observed between weight and stature with hand dimension, which represents the correlation between occupation and the four dimensions. Conclusion: The results of this study showed a significant difference between occupational groups in terms of the four dimensions. Therefore, it is suggested that tool designers should consider this finding in their designing process.

1. Harih G, Dolšak B. Tool-handle design based on a digital human hand model. Int J Ind Ergon. 2013;43(4):288-95.
2. Falaki H, Motallebi Kashani M, Bahrami A, Sarsangi V, Akbari H, Rahimizadeh A. Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Related Risk Factors among the Water-Counter Manufacturer Workers. IAHS 2014;1(1):15-20.
3. García-Cáceres RG, Felknor S, Córdoba JE, Caballero JP, Barrero LH. Hand anthropometry of the Colombian floriculture workers of the Bogota plateau. Int J Ind Ergon.. 2012;42(2):183-98.
4. Chang J, Jung K, Hwang J, Kang Y, Lee S, Freivalds A. Determination of Bicycle Handle Diameters considering Hand Anthropometric Data and User Satisfaction. Proceedings of the Human Factors

and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting; 2010: SAGE Publications.
5. Ran L, Zhang X, Chao C, Liu T, Dong T. Anthropometric Measurement of the Hands of Chinese Children. Digital Human Modeling: Springer. 2009. p. 46-54.
6. Habibi E, Soury S, Hasan Zadeh A. Evaluation of Accuracy and Precision of Two-dimensional Image Processing Anthropometry Software of Hand in Comparison with Manual Method. J Med Signals Sens . 2013;3.(4)
7. Armstrong TJ, Radwin RG, Hansen DJ, Kennedy KW. Repetitive trauma disorders: job evaluation and design. Human Factors: HFES. 1986;28(3):325-36.
8. Mital A, Kilbom A. Design, selection and use of hand tools to alleviate trauma of the upper extremities: Part I—Guidelines for the practitioner. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992;10(1):1-5.
9. CHAFFIN DB, HERRIN GD, KEYSERLING WM, GARG A. A method for evaluating the biomechanical stresses resulting from manual materials handling jobs. AIHAJ. 1977;38(12):662-75.
10. Hlebš S, Majhenič K, Vidmar G. Body mass index and anthropometric characteristics of the hand as risk factors for carpal tunnel syndrome. Coll Antropol. 2014;38(1):219-26.
11. Vyavahare RT, Kallurkar S. Anthropometric and strength data of Indian agricultural workers for equipment design: a review. CIGR Journal. 2012;14(4):102-14.
12. Agrawal K, Singh R, Satapathy K. Anthropometric considerations of farm tools/machinery design for tribal workers of northeastern India. CIGR Journal. 2010;12.(1)
13. Choobineh A, Sani GP, Rohani MS, Pour MG, Neghab M. Perceived demands and musculoskeletal symptoms among employees of an Iranian petrochemical industry. Int J Ind Ergon. 2009;39(5):766-70.
14. Choobineh A, Tabatabaei SH, Tozihian M, Ghadami F. Musculoskeletal problems among workers of an Iranian communication company. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2007;11(1):32.
15. Choobineh A, Tabatabaee SH, Behzadi M. Musculoskeletal problems among workers of an Iranian sugar-producing factory. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2009;15(4):419-24.
16. Choobineh A, Tabatabaei SH, Mokhtarzadeh A, Salehi M. Musculoskeletal problems among workers of an Iranian rubber factory. JOH. 2007;49(5):418-23.
17. Nag A, Vyas H, Nag P. Gender differences, work stressors and musculoskeletal disorders in weaving industries. Ind. Health. 2010;48(3):339-48.
18. Chandna P, Deswal S, Chandra A. An anthropometric survey of industrial workers of the northern region of India. Int J Ind Syst Eng. 2010;6(1):110-28.
19. Chuan TK, Hartono M, Kumar N. Anthropometry of the Singaporean and Indonesian populations. Int J Ind Ergon .2010;40(6):757-66.
20. Chandra A, Chandna P, Deswal S. Estimation of hand index for male industrial workers of Haryana State (India). JESTECH. 2013;5(1):55-65.
21. Jee S-c, Yun MH. An anthropometric survey of Korean hand and hand shape types. Int J Ind Ergon. 2016;53:10-8.
22. Aghazadeh F, Mital A. Injuries due to handtools: Results of a questionnaire. Appl. Ergon. 1987;18(4):273-8.
23. Mandahawi N, Imrhan S, Al-Shobaki S, Sarder B. Hand anthropometry survey for the Jordanian population. Int J Ind Ergon. 2008;38(11):966-76.
24. Lin Y-C, Wang M-JJ, Wang EM. The comparisons of anthropometric characteristics among four peoples in East Asia. Appl. Ergon. 2004;35(2):173-8.
25. Vaghefi SHE, Elyasi L, Amirian SR, Vaghefi SE. Anthropometric survey of worker population in Bandar-Abbas. Thrita. 2014;3.(1).
26. Kar SK, Ghosh S, Manna I, Banerjee S, Dhara P. An investigation of hand anthropometry of agricultural workers. Int. J. Hum. Ecol. 2003;14(1):57-62.
27. Eksioglu M. Relative optimum grip span as a function of hand anthropometry. Int J Ind Ergon. 2004;34(1):1-12.
28. Yadav R, Tewari V, Prasad N. Anthropometric data of Indian farm workers—a module analysis. Appl. Ergon. 1997;28(1):69-71.
29. Gite L, Yadav B. Anthropometric survey for agricultural machinery design: an Indian case study. Appl. Ergon. 1989;20(3):191-6.
30. Okunribido OO. A survey of hand anthropometry of female rural farm workers in Ibadan, Western Nigeria. Ergonomics. 2000;43(2):282-92.
31. Koley S, Kaur SP. Correlations of handgrip strength with selected hand-arm-anthropometric variables in indian inter-university female volleyball players. Asian. J. Sports. Med. 2011;2(4):220.
32. Chandra A, Chandna P, Deswal S. Analysis of hand anthropometric dimensions of male industrial workers of Haryana state. IJE. 2011;5(3):242-56.
Files
IssueVol 12 No 3 (2020) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
Published2020-09-03
Keywords
Hand Dimensions Occupation Tool Design Car Repairman Employees

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Kelkanlo R, Kouhnavard B, Falaki SH. Investigating Hand Anthropometric Dimensions- A Case Study on Office Personnel and Car Mechanics. Int J Occup Hyg. 12(3):180-191.