Ergonomic Pipette Research
•Als PPT, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•2,196 views
![Topics ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Ähnlich wie Ergonomic Pipette Research
Ähnlich wie Ergonomic Pipette Research (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Ergonomic Pipette Research
- 1. REDUCING THE RISK OF REPETITIVE STRESS INJURIES DUE TO PIPETTING Richard Scordato VistaLab Technologies, Inc.
- 3. Is Pipetting Really an Ergonomic Risk?
- 4. Hire an Ergonomist! Kevin Costello Dennis Mitchel
- 12. Why does Pipetting Increase the Risk of Injury?
- 17. General Ergonomic Risk Factors Vibration Personal Repetition Environment Posture Contact Stress Force Risk Factors
- 24. What Makes a Pipette Ergonomic?
- 25. General Ergonomic Risk Factors Vibration Personal Repetition Environment Posture Contact Stress Force Risk Factors
- 30. Posture Comparison Traditional pipettes Ovation “ Clenched Fist” Increases stress, reducing available hand strength and diminishing productivity Loose, Relaxed Increases available strength in hand, improving endurance and productivity during pipetting
- 31. Posture Comparison Traditional pipettes Ovation Elevated, “Winged Elbow” Arm/hand elevation exceeding 12” causes stress to the neck and shoulder Close to work surface Arm elevation remains low, minimizing stress to elbow, shoulder and neck
- 32. Posture Comparison Over-rotated Rotation exceeds 90º, causing stress to the wrist, hand and elbow. Arm Supinated Neutral, Relaxed Wrist remains in a neutral range of motion throughout all pipetting operations. Arm pronated Traditional pipettes Ovation
- 33. Reference: Rempel D, Bach J, Gordon L, Yuen S. Effects of Forearm Pronation/Supination on Carpal Tunnel Pressure. Journal of Hand Surgery 1998; 23A:38-42 . . . To Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Awkward Posture is the Leading Contributor . . .
- 34. Ergonomic Performance Carpal Tunnel Pressure 45 degrees pronation 0 degrees (vertical) 45 degrees supination Reference: Rempel D, Bach J, Gordon L, Yuen S. Effects of Forearm Pronation/Supination on Carpal Tunnel Pressure. Journal of Hand Surgery 1998; 23A:38-42 17 mmHg 27 mmHg 39 mmHg
- 36. Ergonomic Testing EMG (electromyogram) testing as used to measure the activity of muscle groups used during pipetting. Electrogoniometry is used to measure posture.
- 37. Example: Forces required by different pipettes to discard tips Recommended limit 15% MVC 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 OP Flexor Extensor Ovation A B C D Pipette %MVC (at full strength) Source: Ergonomic Technologies Corporation, Syosset, New York What Does This Mean When Pipetting?
- 38. Example: uninterrupted full cycle measurement of wrist extension and flexion Average Extension Average Flexion Ovation A B C D Pipette Degree of wrist flexion and extension Recommended Limit Recommended Limit Source: Ergonomic Technologies Corporation, Syosset, New York What Does This Mean When Pipetting?
- 39. Example: arm flexion and extension during aspiration Recommended limit Recommended limit 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 Max Flexion Max Extension Ovation A B C D Pipette Degree of arm flexion and extension Source: Ergonomic Technologies Corporation, Syosset, New York What Does This Mean When Pipetting?
- 40. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Re-designed Pipette for Reducing the Risk Factors for Musculoskeletal Disorders Ming-Lun (Jack) Lu, Ph.D. Sunil Sudhakaran, M.S. AEP March 24, 2005 National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH)
- 45. Thumb Force Different letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05)
- 46. Total Finger Force Different letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05)
- 47. Wrist Deviation Different letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05)
- 48. Shoulder Elevation Greater than 45 ° Different letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05)
- 50. A Comparison of Traditional and Alternative Pipettes: Comfort and Preference Tamara James, MA, CPE Ergonomics Director Duke University & Health System Durham, North Carolina USA
- 57. Pipette Ergonomics Focus Group Questions?
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- Tell story of VistaLab’s investigation of pipetting with traditionally-designed devices.
- The result of our work, a totally new design platform for pipetting was created. Explain structural elements
- Explain operational elements
- To come: appropriate ergonomic performance data and discussion of physical differences between pipetting with Ovation and competitive axial designed pipettes.
- All this Theory can be tested with modern measurement tools. We performed a study on volunteers to see the results of our new design compared to conventional axial designs. We compared Ovation to four popular Axial pipettes, including two models marketed as “ergonomic” designs. The testing measured the actual muscle activity and postural geometry (twisting etc) used in the pipetting activity and compared this to accepted norms.
- <in progress> . Data and other CTS MSD generally require the most extensive recovery time. In 1996, CTS cases resulted in the highest median number of days away from work for any injury or illness: 25 days for CTS compared to 5 days for all injuries and illnesses combined. That year, more than 57% of lost-workday CTS cases involved more than 20 days away from work, and more than 42% of all lost-workday CTS cases involved more than 30 days away from work. For example, the average per case costs for carpal tunnel syndrome cases are $8,070, which is more than double the $4,000 average per case costs for all other injuries *OSHA STD
- To come: appropriate ergonomic performance data and discussion of physical differences between pipetting with Ovation and competitive axial designed pipettes.