Advertisement

Anthropometric Data of Chilean Male Workers

  • H. I. Castellucci
  • C. A. Viviani
  • J. F. M. Molenbroek
  • P. M. Arezes
  • M. Martínez
  • V. Aparici
  • S. Bragança
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to update the Chilean male workers’ anthropometric database to be used for design purposes and to examine the secular changes observed in a group of anthropometric variables for Chilean male workers. Data collection involved a sample of 2,346 male workers with ages ranging from 18 to 65+, assigned to the Mutual de Seguridad C.Ch.C in the two most populated regions of Chile (Valparaíso and Metropolitana) distributed in nine economic activities branches. Data collection was performed by two teams of 3 physiotherapies each. Before starting the collection process, the measurement teams underwent a training session of one week that included a theoretical session on the basic concepts of anthropometrics, as well as some practical instructions. A total of 32 anthropometric measures were gathered following the ISO standard 7250-1. Before applying the data, a checking process was carried out, trying to identify errors related to the data collection process. The magnitude of the positive secular trend for the stature was 1.0 cm per decade and the highest value was found for shoulder breadth, with a positive increase of 2.7 cm per decade. The results obtained allowed to observe the existence of a positive secular trend for most of the selected body measurements. Finally, it was also possible to verify that the current research may be used for design purposes and to establish the baseline data for long-term observation regarding anthropometric changes among Chilean male workers.

References

  1. 1.
    Nadadur G, Parkinson MB (2013) The role of anthropometry in designing for sustainability. Ergonomics 56(3):422–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Apud E, Gutiérrez M (1997) Diseño ergonómico y características antropométricas de mujeres y hombres adultos chilenos. Prim Jornadas Iberoam Prevención Riesgos OcupGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cole TJ (2003) The secular trend in human physical growth: a biological view. Econ Hum Biol 1(2):161–168MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fredriks AM, van Buuren S, Burgmeijer RJ, Meulmeester JF, Beuker RJ, Brugman E et al (2000) Continuing positive secular growth change in The Netherlands 1955–1997. Pediatr Res 47(3):316–323Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gutiérrez M, Apud E (1992) Estudio antropométrico y criterios ergonómicos para la evaluación y diseño de mobiliario escolar. Cuad Médico Soc 33(4):72–80Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arcaleni E (2006) Secular trend and regional differences in the stature of Italians, 1854–1980. Econ Hum Biol 4(1):24–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baynouna LM, Revel AD, Nagelkerke NJD, Jaber TM, Omar AO, Ahmed NM et al (2009) Secular trend in height in Al Ain-United Arab Emirates. Econ Hum Biol. 7(3):405–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bogin B (2001) The growth of humanity. Wiley-Liss, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tomkinson GR, Daniell N, Fulton A, Furnell A (2017) Time changes in the body dimensions of male Australian Army personnel between 1977 and 2012. Appl Ergon 58:18–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schönbeck Y, Talma H, van Dommelen P, Bakker B, Buitendijk SE, HiraSing RA et al (2013) The world’s tallest nation has stopped growing taller: the height of Dutch children from 1955 to 2009. Pediatr Res 73(3):371–377Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tanner J (1992) Growth as a measure of the nutritional and hygienic status of a population. Horm Res 38:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hauspie R, Vercauteren M, Susanne C (1996) Secular changes in growth. Horm Res 45:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ahacic K, Kåreholt I (2010) Prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in the general Swedish population from 1968 to 2002: age, period, and cohort patterns. Pain 151:206–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hagen K, Linde M, Heuch I, Stovner LJ, Zwart JA (2011) Increasing prevalence of chronic musculoskeletal complaints. A large 11-year follow-up in the general population. Pain Med 12:1657–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dianat I, Kord M, Yahyazade P, Karimi MA Stedmon AW (2015) Association of individual and work-related risk factors with musculoskeletal symptoms among Iranian sewing machine operators. Appl Ergon 51:180–188Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spyropoulos P, Papathanasiou G, Georgoudis G, Chronopoulos E, Koutis H, Koumoutsou F (2007) Prevalence of low back pain in Greek public office workers. Pain Phys 10:651Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kushwaha D, Kane P (2016) Ergonomic assessment and workstation design of shipping crane cabin in steel industry. Int J Ind Ergon 52:29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drury C (2008) The future of ergonomics/the future of work: 45 years after Bartlett (1962). Ergonomics 51(1):14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ISO. ISO 7250-1: Basic human body measurements for technological design - Part 1: body measurement definitions and landmarks. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Portney LG, Watkins MP (2008) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 3rd edn. Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    WHO (2000). Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. WHO Technical report Series 894, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heineck G (2006) Height and weight in Germany, evidence from the German socio-economic panel, 2002. Econ Hum Biol 4(3):359–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gordon CC, Bradtmiller B (2012) Anthropometric change: implications for office ergonomics. Work 201241(Suppl. 1):4606–4611Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tomkinson GR, Clark AJ, Blanchonette P (2010) Secular changes in body dimensions of royal australian air force aircrew (1971–2005). Ergonomics 53(8):994–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Matton L, Duvigneaud N, Wijndaele K, Philippaerts R, Duquet W, Beunen G et al (2007) Secular trends in anthropometric characteristics, physical fitness, physical activity, and biological maturation in Flemish adolescents between 1969 and 2005. Am J Hum Biol 19(3):345–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Molenbroek JFM, Albin TJ, Vink P (2017) Thirty years of anthropometric changes relevant to the width and depth of transportation seating spaces, present and future. Appl Ergon 65:130–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Castellucci HI, Arezes PM, Molenbroek JFM (2014) Applying different equations to evaluate the level of mismatch between students and school furniture. Appl Ergon 45(4):1123–1132Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Viviani C, Arezes PM, Bragança S, Molenbroek J, Dianat I, Castellucci HI (2018) Accuracy, precision and reliability in anthropometric surveys for ergonomics purposes in adult working populations: A literature review. Int J Ind Ergon 65:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    da Silva GV, Halpern M, Gordon CC (2017) Anthropometry of Brazilian air force pilots. Ergonomics 60(10):1445–1457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ball R (2009) 3-D design tools from the SizeChina project. Ergon Des Q Hum Factors Appl 17(3):8–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pandarum R, Yu W, Hunter L (2011) 3-D breast anthropometry of plus-sized women in South Africa. Ergonomics 54(9):866–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. I. Castellucci
    • 1
  • C. A. Viviani
    • 2
  • J. F. M. Molenbroek
    • 3
  • P. M. Arezes
    • 4
  • M. Martínez
    • 5
  • V. Aparici
    • 6
  • S. Bragança
    • 7
  1. 1.Centro de Estudios del Trabajo y Factores Humanos, Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad de ValparaísoValparaísoChile
  2. 2.Facultad de Ciencias, Escuela de KinesiologíaPontificia Universidad Católica de ValparaísoValparaísoChile
  3. 3.Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering Section Applied Ergonomics and DesignDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  4. 4.ALGORITMI Centre, School of EngineeringUniversity of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal
  5. 5.Mutual de la Cámara Chilena de la ConstrucciónSantiagoChile
  6. 6.Universidad de Viña del MarViña del MarChile
  7. 7.Research Innovation and EnterpriseSolent UniversitySouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations