Journal of Education and Health Promotion

Abstract BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) were known as one of the main occupational
problems among health‑care workers. However, we had some limitations and difficulties for
transferring ergonomic concepts to the health‑care workers, especially nurses due to heavy work
task and insufficient time for that. This study compares the impacts of two ergonomic training
methods (lecture and pamphlet) in nurses of an Iranian tertiary hospital on prevalence of their upper
and lower extremity complaints.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present randomized clinical trial with parallel groups, 1140 nurses
were randomly selected and allocated to the control and two interventional groups. In the interventional
groups, nurses revived a training program and pamphlet as ergonomic training methods about
work‑related MSDs and related ergonomic concept to MSDs prevention and nurses in the control group,
did not receive any ergonomic training methods. Upper and lower extremity complaints measure among
study nurses with Nordic MSDs before 6 months and 1 year after trial intervention. Statistical analysis
including the Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness‑of‑fit, Chi‑square test, and independent sample t‑test
was performed using SPSS version 22. A two‑tailed P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: At the first and second parts of the study follow‑up, the prevalence of upper and lower
extremities significantly improved in the interventional groups in comparison with the control group.
Moreover, between the two trial groups, the frequency of MSDs in upper and lower extremities
significantly improved among nurses of the pamphlet group in comparison with the lecture group.
CONCLUSION: Findings of the study showed that we can use pamphlet as a suitable tool for
describing ergonomic concepts in comparison with lecture among nurses.

Abstract Ergonomics of schools and school furniture is one of the main issues in students’ education. The
proportion of school furniture to the anthropometric dimensions of students is one of the main
ergonomic challenges in schools that affect students’ health. This systematic review study aimed
to examine the match between anthropometric measures and school furniture dimensions among
Iranian students. A systematic review was carried out using databases to Google Scholar, SID,
IRANDOC, PubMed, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect and specific keywords to find papers published
before March 2020. The references of seminal studies were also used to extend the search scope.
Totally, 11 studies entered the review. The results showed that there was no proportion between
classroom furniture and students in schools under study. This lack of proportion was evident at
different grades in both boys’ and girls’ schools. The results showed a lack of proportion between
classroom furniture and Iranian students. There is a need to design and procure furniture based
on the anthropometric dimensions of the society that will help to health promotion of students. An
updated national anthropometric databank of Iranian students can be a step to solve the problem.

Abstract BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Dental students and practitioners are frequently prone to
work‑related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) due to the unawareness of ergonomic principles
when practicing dentistry. The aim of this study was to assess the dental student knowledge, attitude,
and practice toward ergonomics in three different dental schools.
METHODOLOGY: A cross‑sectional study was conducted among 1166 dental students from three
different dental schools of Andhra Pradesh, India, to assess knowledge, attitude, and practice
regarding ergonomics. All the participants were provided with prestructured questionnaire form
comprising 13 questions to know their knowledge, attitude, and practice related to ergonomics before
and after providing guidelines on ergonomic principles.
RESULTS: The majority of the dental students appreciate that the most affected regions due to
work‑related disorders were back (475 before and 559 after instructions), neck (354 and 420), hand
and wrist (205 and 117), and shoulder and elbow (132 and 70), respectively. Knowledge and practice
scores of dental students (mean and standard deviation) regarding WMSDs before and after applying
ergonomic principles were 3.92 ± 2.44, 1.29 ± 1.67 and 5.81 ± 0.87, 3.03 ± 0.60, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The present study provides an insight into ergonomics for dental students during
routine dental procedures. The knowledge, attitude, and practice related to ergonomics were
satisfactorily increased among the participants. Thus, ergonomic education of the dental health‑care
personnel must be focused in all the educational institutions and at continuing dental health programs by
delivering ergonomic principles both theoretically and practically and should be a part of the curriculum.