Objective: To compare a small cellular clamshell phone with a traditional office phone in the development of discomfort and muscle fatigue over time during phone use. Background: Phone use involves low-level static exertions that may be influenced by phone design. Phone design and its interactions with anthropometry may change shoulder and hand postures assumed during use, which in turn may modify the length-strength relationship and moment arms of the muscles. Method: Ten adults participated in a study that simulated phone use using a small clamshell and a traditional office phone. Discomfort information and electromyographic (EMG) muscle activity were monitored on four upper extremity muscles. Discomfort and fatigue data (EMG median frequency shifts) were analyzed to assess differences between phones as well as differing effects attributable to anthropometry. Results: Median frequency shifts supported discomfort claims and indicated muscle fatigue in the deltoid and thenar muscles. Biomechanical measures demonstrated that participants with short limb lengths developed more severe signs of thenar fatigue. Participants with longer arms developed greater discomfort in the neck, shoulder, and back. The deltoid confirmed this occurrence, showing signs of muscle fatigue. Conclusion: Phone design and anthropometry influenced the development of discomfort and fatigue during phone use. Phone design dictated grip style, resulting in differing discomfort and fatigue levels. Anthropometry influenced the severity of the discomfort and fatigue present in the shoulder and hand. Application: Use of small clamshell phones may contribute to a lack of rest and recovery from typical workday exposures. It should be explored from an ergonomic perspective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Borg, G. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 14, 377-381.
2.
Buckle, P.W., & Devereux, J.J. (2002). The nature of work-related neck and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. Applied Ergonomics , 33, 207-217.
3.
Caldwell, L.S., Chaffin, D.B., Dukes-Dobos, F.N., Kroemer, K.H., Laubach, L.L., Snook, S.H., et al. (1974). A proposed standard procedure for static muscle strength testing. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 35, 201-206.
4.
Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. (2004). CTIA's semi-annual wireless industry survey. Washington, DC: Author.
5.
Chaffin, D.B., Andersson, G., & Martin, B. (1999). Occupational biomechanics. New York: Wiley.
6.
Cram, J., & Kasman, G. (1998). Introduction to surface electromyography. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
7.
Delagi, E., Perotto, A., Iazzetti, J., & Morrison, D. (1980). Anatomic guide for the electromyographer. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
8.
DeLuca, C.J. (1985). Myoelectrical manifestations of localized muscular fatigue in humans. Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering , 11, 251-279.
9.
Eastman-Kodak Company. (1986). Ergonomic design for people at work. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
10.
Hermans, V., & Spaepen, A.J. (1997). Influence of electrode position on changes in electromyography parameters of the upper trapezius muscle during submaximal sustained contractions. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 75, 319-325.
11.
Karwowski, W. (2001). International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors. New York: Taylor & Francis.
12.
Kroemer, K., & Grandjean, E. (2001). Fitting the task to the human: A textbook of occupational ergonomics. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
13.
Langton, P. (1998). The [muscle] length-tension relation. Retrieved August 15, 2004, from http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Physiology/ugteach/ugindex/m1_index/nm_tension/page1.htm
14.
Marras, W.S. (1999). Occupational biomechanics. In W. Karwowski & W. S. Marras (Eds.), The occupational ergonomics handbook (pp. 167-204). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
15.
Marras, W.S., & Davis, K.G. (2001). A non-MVC EMG normalization technique for the trunk musculature: Part I. Method development. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 11, 1-9.
16.
McKnight, A.J., & McKnight, A.S. (1993). The effect of cellular phone use upon driver attention. Accident Analysis and Prevention , 25, 259-265.
17.
McLean, L., Tingley, M., Scott, R.N., & Rickards, J. (2000). Myoelectric signal measurement during prolonged computer terminal work. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology , 10, 33-45.
18.
McLean, L., Tingley, M., Scott, R.N., & Rickards, J. (2001). Computer terminal work and the benefit of microbreaks . Applied Ergonomics, 32, 225-237.
19.
Nokia. (2007a). Nokia 7380 phone features. Retrieved April 3, 2007, from www.nokiausa.com/phones/7380/0,7747,feat;1;00.html
20.
Nokia. (2007b). Nokia N80ie device features. Retrieved April 3, 2003, from www.nokiausa.com/phones/N80ie/0,7747,feat:1,00.html
21.
Nordin, M., Andersson, G. , & Pope, M. (Eds). (1997). Musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace: Principles and practice. Philadelphia: Mosby .
22.
Oftedal, G., Wilen, J., Sandstrom, M., & Mild, K.H. (2000). Symptoms experienced in connection with mobile phone use. Occupational Medicine, 50, 237-245.
23.
Pheasant, S. (1999). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work. London: Taylor & Francis .
24.
Punnett, L., & Wegman, D.H. (2004). Work-related musculoskeletal disorders: The epidemiologic evidence and the debate. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology , 14, 13-23.
25.
Redelmeier, D.A., & Tibshirani, R.J. (1997). Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. New England Journal of Medicine, 336, 453-458.
26.
Redfern, Mark. (1992). Functional muscle: Effects on electromyographic output. In G. L. Soderberg (Ed.), Selected topics in surface electromyography for use in the occupational setting: Expert perspectives (DHHS [NIOSH] Publication No. 91-100, pp. 104-120). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control.
27.
Salvendy, G. (1997). Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. New York: Wiley.
28.
Salvucci, D., & Macuga, K. (2002). Predicting the effects of cellular phone dialing on driver performance. Cognitive Systems Research, 3, 95-102.
29.
SAS. (1999). The SAS system for Windows (Release 8.02) [Computer software]. Cary, NC : Author.
30.
Schuldt, K., & Harms-Ringdahl, K. (1988). Activity levels during isometric test contractions of neck and shoulder muscles. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 20, 117-127.
31.
Sjogaard, G., & Jensen, B.R. (1999). Low level static exertions. In W. Karwowski & W. S. Marras (Eds.), The occupational ergonomics handbook (pp. 167-204). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
32.
Soderberg, G.L. (1992). Recording techniques. In In G. L. Soderberg (Ed.), Selected topics in surface electromyography for use in the occupational setting: Expert perspectives (DHHS [NIOSH] Publication No. 91-100, pp. 24-41). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control.
33.
Sporrong, H., Palmerud, G., & Herberts, P. (1996). Hand grip increases shoulder muscle activity: An EMG analysis with static hand contractions in 9 subjects. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica, 67, 485-490.
34.
Strayer, D.L., & Johnston, W.A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone . Psychological Science, 12, 462-466.
35.
Sundeen, M. (2003). Cell phones and highway safety: 2003 State legislative update. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures.
36.
Swanson, A.B., Matev I.B., & de Groot. G. (1970). The strength of the hand. Bulletin of Prosthetics Research, 10(14), 145-153.
37.
Watkins, J. (1999). Structure and function of the musculoskeletal system. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics .
38.
Wilen, J., Sandstrom, M., & Mild, K.H. (2003). Subjective symptoms among mobile phone users - A consequence of absorption of radiofrequency fields? Bioelectromagnetics , 24, 152-159.
