1. Background
There is a correlation between worker health and productivity and natural resource management; therefore, it is necessary to pioneer sustainable environmental practices that increase productivity and reduce natural resource consumption (1). There is an increasing body of literature devoted to the study of ergonomics and musculoskeletal disorders, which indicates the growing problem this topic represents in various fields (2, 3). Hence, the importance of conducting sufficient analysis to assess the ergonomic risk to which teachers are exposed in their academic activities and propose mitigation measures.
Several methods for determining ergonomic risk were explored [LEST, RULA, REBA, and Rapid Office Strain Assessment (ROSA)]. The ROSA method was selected because it offers a rapid assessment with urgent action steps if necessary. It is applicable to jobs where the worker sits in a chair, at a desk, and operates a computer with a screen. These activities are closely related to the academic practices that faculty implement in their work. Furthermore, the ROSA method has been used to assess ergonomic risk among faculty (4, 5). Likewise, the ERGONIZA software is a tool that helps identify ergonomic risks present in the workplace (4).
2. Objectives
Evaluate ergonomic risk factors among teachers to foster a sustainable environment.
3. Methods
3.1. Study Design
A quantitative study employed an observational, cross-sectional design to measure the ergonomic risk of full-time professors (FTP) at the Sonora State University, Hermosillo Campus. Data were collected through surveys in their workspaces, direct observational logs, and with the support of the ROSA method.
3.2. Participants and Sampling
The target population for this study comprised all 158 FTP assigned to the Sonora State University, Campus Hermosillo. Thus, a statistically representative survey was applied with 92% reliability and a maximum allowed error (α) of 0.08. The calculation resulted in a required sample of 76 FTPs. Participant recruitment and data collection for the FTPs occurred between April and June 2023.
Inclusion criteria: (A) be a full-time professor (PTP) in one of the programs at the Sonora State University, Hermosillo Campus; (B) be present during the evaluation and ergonomic assessment; (C) have a workspace (cubicle) to perform their duties; (D) allow direct observation in their workspace to generate reports and apply the ROSA method; There were no specific exclusion criteria beyond not meeting the outlined inclusion criteria. All selected participants provided informed consent prior to data collection.
3.3. Measures and Data Analysis
Once the data on ergonomic risks was collected, the ERGONIZA software was applied for analysis. The data obtained from the surveys was automatically compiled into a Google spreadsheet linked to the form.
4. Results
4.1. Survey Results
Teachers spend an average of 4 hours a day in front of the computer during their workday, and 75.3% of them report that the breaks they take are involuntary or unconscious, as they use them to satisfy their physiological needs. Break times range from 5 to 15 minutes, although the majority (64.5%) report taking breaks of 5 to 10 minutes, while 24.7% of teachers surveyed stated they do not take breaks during their workday. Considering the importance of the type of chair in measuring ergonomic risk, teachers were asked about the seat they use. The responses show that 67.9% of teachers use swivel chairs and 32.1% sit in fixed chairs.
4.2. Results of the Rapid Office Strain Assessment Method
To evaluate the chair, screen, and peripheral elements referred to above, the ROSA method uses a weighting between 1 and 10 that measures the level of risk. Number 1 corresponds to negligible risk, while numbers 9 - 10 indicate extreme risk.
4.3. Chair Results
The chair analysis corresponds to reviewing the seat, armrest, and backrest data. After analyzing the information collected, the risk intervals were determined. We found that 43.6% of FTPs are at a risk level of 2, 3, and 4. There were 24.4% of FTPs at risk level 5, and finally, 32.1% of FTPs at levels 6, 7, and 8.
4.4. Screen and Peripheral Results
The general risk level is weighed according to the data collected with the application of the ROSA method. We found that 51.28% of the FTPs are at risk levels 2, 3, and 4; there is 24.36% at risk level 5; and finally, 23.08% at risk levels 6, 7, and 8.
The study suggests that 71.8% of the FTPs at Sonora State University, Campus Hermosillo, are at a high or very high level of ergonomic risk (Table 1). Therefore, strategies that improve the conditions for academic desk work are required.
| Level Risk | FTPs Corresponding to the Sample (%) | Risk | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 28.2 | Improvable | Some elements of the position can be improved. |
| 2 | 23.1 | High | Action is necessary. |
| 3 | 48.7 | Very high | Action is necessary as soon as possible. |
Data on the Different Risk Levels Was Obtained from the Rapid Office Strain Assessment Method — from My Own Source
5. Discussion
The education sector is not exempt from ergonomic risks, and teachers face challenges during their activities (6). Among the main causes of musculoskeletal disorders are inadequate and sustained posture for too long and repetitive work (5). The results obtained by the ERGONIZA software with the ROSA method align with the perception of teachers obtained through the survey. While 73.1% of FTPs assume that they do not maintain an adequate posture when working, the application of the ROSA method estimated that 71.8% of teachers are at high and very high risk.
The available evidence indicates that teachers who teach online and telework frequently experience musculoskeletal disorders (7, 8). This is consistent with our study, as 76.9% of teachers have experienced back, shoulder, or neck pain in the past six months. Some studies measuring work-related musculoskeletal disorders and ergonomic risk factors in special education teachers and students indicate that 86% of those evaluated have musculoskeletal disorders, a higher percentage than the one found in this study (8).
Providing adequate facilities for academic practice is essential for positively impacting workers, improving productivity, health, and creating a sustainable environment (6, 7, 9). The above contributes to improving worker well-being, combating absenteeism and medical expenses, increasing productivity, and, therefore, greater work efficiency, while reducing the use of natural resources.
