Ergonomic Criteria and Usability Testing of Cut-Resistant Protective Gloves: An Experimental Study

Sahar Heydarnia; Mahdi Jalali; Saied Sabzehali; Majid Zarrin; Ehsanollah  Habibi

doi:10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16641

Autori

Sahar Heydarnia Student Research Committee, Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Mahdi Jalali Workplace Health Research Center, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5335-9082
Saied Sabzehali Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Majid Zarrin Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Ehsanollah Habibi Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2738-7498

Parole chiave:

Hand dexterity; , Protective clothing;, Anti-cut gloves;, Usability testing; , Ergonomics

Abstract

Background: Although hand and arm injuries can be prevented with protective gloves, their use may reduce hand dexterity and muscle strength. This study examined the ergonomic criteria and usability of four cut-resistant protective gloves (CRPGs) types to identify the optimal glove choice. Methods: In this experimental study, 22 male participants were tested under five conditions: barehanded, wearing nitrile-coated gloves, gel-coated gloves, material-coated gloves, and foam nitrile-coated gloves. Dexterity was assessed using the Bennett and O'Connor tests; grip and pinch force were measured with a dynamometer, and a goniometer assessed the range of motion. The gloves' usability was evaluated through the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire. At the same time, localized discomfort in different areas of the hand was assessed using the Local Perceived Discomfort (LPD) questionnaire. Finally, glove comparisons were made using appropriate statistical tests analyzed with SPSS version 24 software. Results: All examined CRPGs significantly lowered finger dexterity scores (p < 0.001). However, the effects of different gloves on hand dexterity varied. Wearing all four gloves reduced grip force, but statistically significant differences in grip force were noted only between the barehanded condition and Glove B (p = 0.004). Using all four gloves increased pinch force, though this increase was statistically significant only between the barehanded condition and Glove D (p = 0.005). Wearing all gloves caused a statistically significant reduction in wrist, palm, and finger range of motion compared to the barehanded condition (p < 0.005). Lastly, there was a significant statistical difference between the gloves regarding usability (p = 0.001) and LPD (p = 0.001). Conclusions: CRPGs can greatly influence hand skills. Glove D, featuring a foam nitrile coating, exhibited the highest finger dexterity compared to the other gloves studied. Considering aspects like sweat resistance and anatomical design, this foam nitrile-coated glove is appropriate for cutting-resistant tasks within various industries.

Riferimenti bibliografici

1. Hertz RP, Emmett EA. Risk Factors for Occupational Hand Injury. J Occup Environ Med. 1986;28(1):36-41.

2. Yarahmadi R, Jalali M. The risk assessment of related factors of hand activities in the automotive industry. Iran Occup Health. 2012;9(1).

3. Khan H, Jamshaid H, Mishra R, Militky J, Sramek R. Development of cost effective cut resistant gloves by us-ing virgin and recycled PPTA. Novelties in fibrous material science.273.

4. Abu-Taleb W, Rehan Youssef A. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders among Egyptian physical thera-pists. Bull Fac Phys Ther. 2021;26:1-11.

5. Gyer G, Michael J, Inklebarger J. Occupational hand injuries: a current review of the prevalence and pro-posed prevention strategies for physical therapists and similar healthcare professionals. J Integr Med. 2018;16(2):84-9.

6. Yedulla NR, Battista EB, Koolmees DS, Montgomery ZA, Day CS. Workplace-related musculoskeletal injury trends in the United States from 1992 to 2018. Injury. 2022;53(6):1920-6.

7. Buhman DC, Cherry JA, Bronkema-Orr L, Bishu R. Effects of glove, orientation, pressure, load, and handle on submaximal grasp force. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2000;25(3):247-56.

8. Wajngarten D, Campos JÁDB, Garcia PPNS. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scale in the eval-uation of disability-A literature review. Med Lav. 2017;108(4):314-23.

9. Sehsah R, El-Gilany A-H, Ibrahim AM. Personal protective equipment (PPE) use and its relation to accidents among construction workers. Med Lav. 2020;111(4):285.

10. Irzmańska E. The impact of different types of textile liners used in protective footwear on the subjective sensa-tions of firefighters. Appl Ergon. 2015;47:34-42.

11. Kang M, Lee S. A study on the design improvement of protective footwear for firefighters. Fash Text. 2018;5(1):1-13.

12. Jahangiri M, Choobineh A, Salehi M, Zare A. A study of clinicians' views on medical gloves size in Iran: A challenge and solutions. Int Arch Health Sci. 2021;8(1).

13. Zare A, Choobineh A, Mokarami H, Jahangiri M. The Medical Gloves Assessment Tool (MGAT): Developing and validating a quantitative tool for assessing the safety and ergonomic features related to medical gloves. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(3):591-601.

14. Motamedzadeh M, Jalali M, Golmohammadi R, Faradmal J, Zakeri HR, Nasiri I. Ergonomic risk factors and mus-culoskeletal disorders in bank staff: an interventional follow-up study in Iran. J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2021;96(1):1-10.

15. Ramadan MZ. The Effects of Industrial Protective Gloves and Hand Skin Temperatures on Hand Grip Strength and Discomfort Rating. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14(12):1506.

16. Tian Y, Ding L, Liu H, Li Y, Li D, Wang L. Effects of EVA gloves on grip strength and fatigue under low temper-ature and low pressure. Appl Ergon. 2016;53:17-24.

17. Dianat I, Haslegrave CM, Stedmon AW. Methodology for evaluating gloves in relation to the effects on hand performance capabilities: a literature review. Ergonomics. 2012;55(11):1429-51.

18. Md Rezali KA, Griffin MJ. Transmission of vibration through gloves: effects of contact area. Ergonomics. 2017;60(1):69-81.

19. Irzmańska E, Okrasa M. Preliminary study evaluating manual dexterity tests assessing gloves protecting against cuts and stabs by hand knives. Int J Ind Ergon. 2016;56:138-49.

20. Irzmańska E, Tokarski T. A new method of ergonomic testing of gloves protecting against cuts and stabs during knife use. Appl Ergon. 2017;61:102-14.

21. Hewitt S, Dong R, McDowell T, Welcome D. The efficacy of anti-vibration gloves. Acoust Aust. 2016;44(1):121-7.

22. Wimer B, McDowell TW, Xu XS, Welcome DE, Warren C, Dong RG. Effects of gloves on the total grip strength applied to cylindrical handles. Int J Ind Ergon. 2010;40(5):574-83.

23. Yu A, Sukigara S. Evaluation of the design and materials of anti-vibration gloves: Impact on hand dexterity and forearm muscle activity. Appl Ergon. 2022;98:103572.

24. Kovacs K, Splittstoesser R, Maronitis A, Marras WS. Grip force and muscle activity differences due to glove type. AIHA Journal. 2002;63(3):269-74.

25. Zedalis MS, Kessler K. Frequently asked questions: Ergonomics and hand protection. Occupational health & safety (Waco, Tex). 2007;76(4):64-6.

26. Fritzsche FR, Dietel M, Weichert W, Buckendahl A-C. Cut-resistant protective gloves in patholo-gy—effective and cost-effective. Virchows Archiv. 2008;452(3):313-8.

27. Zare Bidoki F, Ezazshahabi N, Mousazadegan F, Latifi M. An Overview of Protective Gloves with Regards to Hand Performance and the Evaluation Methods. J Text Polym. 2021;9(3):3-20.

28. Mose KF, Bach R, Crépy M-N. European Standards on Protective Gloves. Protective Gloves for Occupational Use: CRC Press; 2022. p. 63-70.

29. Ghasemi F, Heidarimoghadam R, Khanlari P. Investigating the effect of medical gloves on grip strength and manual dexterity. Iran J Ergon. ISSN. 2021;2345:5365.

30. Watkins J. Evaluation of Grip and Dexterity Test Methods for Characterization and Improvement to Struc-tural Firefighting Glove Design. 2011.

31. Bennett GK. Hand tool dexterity test manual. revised, The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace Jo-vanovich, Publ. 1981.

32. Berger MAM, Krul AJ, Daanen HAM. Task specificity of finger dexterity tests. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(1):145-7.

33. Puh U. Age-related and sex-related differences in hand and pinch grip strength in adults. Int J Rehabil Res. 2010;33(1):4-11.

34. Mital A, Kumar S. Human muscle strength definitions, measurement, and usage: Part II-The scientific basis (knowledge base) for the guide. Int J Ind Ergon. 2000;22(1-2):123-44.

35. Fess E. Clinical assessment recommendations. American society of hand therapists. 1981:6-8.

36. Khanlari P, Ghasemi F, Heidarimoghdam R. Protective gloves, hand grip strength, and dexterity tests: A comprehensive study. Heliyon. 2023;9(2).

37. Brooke J. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry. 1996;189(194):4-7.

38. Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT. An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Intl Journal of Hu-man–Computer Interaction. 2008;24(6):574-94.

39. Heidarimoghadam R, Babamiri M, Motamedzade M, Nouri N. Assessment of local discomfort in common pencils and ergonomic pencil designed with local discomfort scale in elementary school students. Iran J Ergon. 2017;5(3):36-40.

40. Mououdi M, Amin K. Comfort evaluation of penagain ergonomic pen with traditional pen (non-ergonomic). J Ilam Univ Med Sci. 2012;20(3):46-54.

41. Moerman F, Partington E. Materials of construction for food processing equipment and services: Require-ments, strengths and weaknesses. J Hyg Eng. 2014;6:10-37.

42. Roberts A, Brackley C. Friction of surgeons' gloves. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics. 1992;25(1A):A28.

43. Healy AF, Jones M, Lalchandani LA, Tack LA. Timing of quizzes during learning: Effects on motivation and re-tention. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2017;23(2):128.

44. Irzmańska E. Ergonomic Gloves. The evolution of ergonomic properties. Health & Safety International. 2014;55:15-25.