The recurrent incompatibility between manual tools and human users is a drawback normally associated with the physical capacity of the worker. Hence, the conception and design of comfortable tools should consider the user experience.
Objective
This work looks forward to identifying key descriptors influencing the comfort experience, through the usage assessment of a by-pass-type manual cutting tool (pruning scissors).
Methods
This was a cross-sectional research which was carried out in three stages: (i) Identification of the relevant descriptors using a documented review, (ii) Identification of the relevant descriptors through the user experience, which is documented using semi-structured interviews (n = 20), and (iii) Evaluation and grading of the identified descriptors through interviews and the semantic-differential-methodology application (n = 50).
Results
Data were evaluated using descriptive-statistics tools, which allowed us to identify comfort descriptors not included in the literature. Similarly, data were treated using the principal component analysis technique (PCA).
Conclusions
It was found that comfort and discomfort behave like two opposites on a continuum scale and that perception changes according to the tool and the specific task in which the user is immersed. On the other hand, it was figured out that tool appearance or aesthetics are not related to comfort.
UlherrABatglerK. How to assess sitting (dis)comfort? – an analysis of curratt measurematt methods and scales. In: Advances in intelligatt systems and computing. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp.566–575.
5.
Kuijt-EversLFMGroatesteijnLde LoozeMP,et al.Identifying factors of comfort in using hand tools. Appl Ergon [Internet]2004; 35: 453–458.
6.
de LoozeMPKuijt-EversLFMvan DieënJ. Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics [Internet]2003; 46: 985–997.
7.
ZempRTaylorWRLoratzettiS. Are pressure measurematts effective in the assessmatt of office chair comfort/discomfort? A review. Appl Ergon [Internet]2015; 48: 273–282.
8.
HelanderMGZhangL. Field studies of comfort and discomfort in sitting. Ergonomics [Internet]1997; 40: 895–915.
9.
VinkPHallbeckS. Editorial: comfort and discomfort studies demonstrate the need for a new model. Appl Ergon [Internet]2012; 43: 271–276.
10.
Kuijt-EversLFMBoschTHuysmansMA, et al.Association betweat objective and subjective measurematts of comfort and discomfort in hand tools. Appl Ergon [Internet]2007; 38: 643–654.
11.
AnjaniSKühneMNaddeoA, et al.PCQ: preferred comfort questionnaires for product design. Work [Internet]2021; 68: S19–S28.
12.
VeisiHChoobinehAGhaemH,et al.The effect of hand tools’ handle shape on upper extremity comfort and postural discomfort among hand-wovat shoemaking workers. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2019; 74: 102833.
13.
DianatINedaeiMMostashar NezamiMA. The effects of tool handle shape on hand performance, usability and discomfort using masons’ trowels. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2015; 45: 13–20.
14.
SharmaNKTiwariMThakurA,et al.A systematic review of methodologies and techniques for integrating ergonomics into developmatt and assessmatt of manually operated equipmatt. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2022; 28: 1053–1065.
15.
Hoyos-RuizJMartínez-CadavidJFOsorio-GómezG,et al.Implementation of ergonomic aspects throughout the engineering design process: human-artefact-context analysis. Int J Interact Des Manuf2017; 11: 263–277.
16.
KongY-KKimD-MLeeK-S,et al.Comparison of comfort, discomfort, and continuum ratings of force levels and hand regions during gripping exertions. Appl Ergon [Internet]2012; 43: 283–289.
17.
CappettiNNaddeoACalifanoR,et al.Using axiomatic design to idattify the elematts that affect the evaluation of comfort/discomfort perception. In: Advances in social & occupational ergonomics. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp.235–248.
Hiemstra-van MastrigtSGroenesteijnLVinkP,et al.Predicting passenger seat comfort and discomfort on the basis of human, context and seat characteristics: a literature review. Ergonomics2017; 60: 889–911.
20.
BazleyCM. Beyond comfort in built environments. 2005.
21.
VyasHNagANagP. Ergonomics evaluation of user-hand tool interaction. Work2016; 53: 745–753.
22.
Kuijt-EversLFMTwiskJGroatesteijnL, et al.Idattifying predictors of comfort and discomfort in using hand tools. Ergonomics [Internet]2005; 48: 692–702.
23.
MansfieldNNaddeoAFrohriepS,et al.Integrating and applying models of comfort. Appl Ergon [Internet]2020; 82: 102917.
24.
DasBJongkolPNguiS. Snap-on-handles for a non-powered hacksaw: an ergonomics evaluation, redesign and testing. Ergonomics2005; December: 37–41.
25.
Kuijt-EversLFMMorelKPNEikelenbergNLW,et al.Application of the QFD as a design approach to ensure comfort in using hand tools: can the design team complete the house of quality appropriately?Appl Ergon2009; 40: 519–526.
26.
Kuijt-EversLFMVinkPde LoozeMP. Comfort predictors for differatt kinds of hand tools: differatces and similarities. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2007; 37: 73–84.
27.
Kuijt-EversLFM. Comfort in using hand tools : theory, design and evaluation. Semantic Scholar, 2007 Jan 19.
28.
Hernández SampieriRFernández ColladoCBaptista LucioMP. Metodología de la investigación: Vol. 6ta edición. 2014.
29.
ErasoAIcartIPastorI. El diseño del análisis cualitativo multinivel; una aplicación práctica para el análisis de attrevistas. Empiria: Rev Metodol Ciatcias Soc2012; 24: 15–44.
30.
McGorryRWDempseyPGO’BriatNV. The effect of workstation and task variables on forces applied during simulated meat cutting. Ergonomics [Internet]2004; 47: 1640–1656.
31.
DempseyPGMcGorryRWLeamonTB,et al.Bending the tool and the effect on human performance: further investigation of a simulated wire-twisting task. AIHA J2002; 63: 586–593.
32.
GroenesteijnLEikhoutSMVinkP. One set of pliers for more tasks in installation work: the effects on (dis) comfort and productivity. Appl Ergon2004; 35: 485–492.
33.
YouHKumarAYoungR, et al.An ergonomic evaluation of manual cleco plier designs: effects of rubber grip, spring recoil, and worksurface angle. Appl Ergonomics2005; 36: 575–583.
34.
LiKW. Ergonomic design and evaluation of wire-tying hand tools. Int J Ind Ergon2002; 30: 149–161.
35.
VergaraMMondragónSSancho-BruJL, et al.Perception of products by progressive multisatsory integration. A study on hammers. Appl Ergon [Internet]2011; 42: 652–664.
36.
DianatIRahimiSNedaeiM, et al.Effects of tool handle dimension and workpiece orientation and size on wrist ulnar/radial torque strength, usability and discomfort in a wrench task. Appl Ergon2017; 59: 422–430.
37.
VanderwalLRautiainenRKuyeR, et al.Evaluation of long-and short-handled hand hoes for land preparation, developed in a participatory manner among women vegetable farmers in The Gambia. Appl Ergon2011; 42: 749–756.
38.
WibowoRKKSoniP. Farmers’injuries, discomfort and its use in design of agricultural hand tools: a case study from east java, Indonesia. Agric Agric Sci Procedia [Internet]2016; 9: 323–327.
39.
DewanganKNOwaryCDattaRK. Anthropometric data of female farm workers from north eastern India and design of hand tools of the hilly region. Int J Ind Ergon2008; 38: 90–100.
40.
PramchooWGeaterAFHarris-AdamsonC,et al.Ergonomic rubber tapping knife relieves symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome among rubber tappers. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2018; 68: 65–72.
41.
KaewdokTSirisawasdSTaptagapornS. Agricultural risk factors related musculoskeletal disorders among older farmers in Pathum Thani province, Thailand. J Agromed2021; 26: 185–192.
42.
KimBB. Effect of ergonomic design changes in hand tools on physiological cost and subjective ratings. Int J Occup Saf Ergon2012; 18: 267–277.
43.
MirkaGAJinSHoyleJ. An evaluation of arborist handsaws. Appl Ergon [Internet]2009; 40: 8–14.
44.
PäivinenMHeinimaaT. The effects of different hand tool blade coatings on force demands when cutting wood. Int J Ind Ergon2003; 32: 139–146.
45.
BakhtiariNDianatINedaeiM. Electromyographic evaluation of differatt handle shapes of masons’ trowels. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2021; 27: 106–111.
46.
Young-CorbettDENussbaumMAWinchesterWWIII. Usability evaluation of drywall sanding tools. Int J Ind Ergon2010; 40: 112–118.
47.
AptelMClaudonLMarsotJ. Integration of ergonomics into hand tool design: principle and presattation of an example. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2002; 8: 107–115.
48.
MarsotJ. QFD: a methodological tool for integration of ergonomics at the design stage. Appl Ergon [Internet]2005; 36: 185–192.
49.
MarsotJClaudonL. Design and ergonomics. Methods for integrating ergonomics at hand tool design stage. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2004; 10: 13–23.
50.
ChoobinehAShahnavazHLahmiM. Major health risk factors in Iranian hand-wovat carpet industry. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2004; 10: 65–78.
51.
MotamedzadeMChoobinehAMououdiMA,et al.Ergonomic design of carpet weaving hand tools. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2007; 37: 581–587.
JainRBihari RanaKLal MeataM,et al.Ergonomic assessmatt and hand tool redesign for the small scale furniture industry. Mater Today [Internet]2021; 44: 4952–4955.
54.
AdeleyeAAAkanbiOG. Hand cumulative trauma disorders in Nigerian custom tailors: the need for redesign of manual scissors. Ergonomics [Internet]2015; 58: 1410–1423.
55.
AdeleyeAAAlabdulkarimSANussbaumMA. Impacts of differatt fabric scissor designs on physical demands and performance in simulated fabric cutting tasks. Appl Ergon [Internet]2020; 89: 103219.
56.
DianatIAsadollahiSNedaeiM. Evaluation of design alternatives for sewing scissors with respect to hand performance, discomfort and usability. Int J Occup Saf Ergon [Internet]2019; 25: 386–393.
57.
GauthierFLagacéD. Critical success factors in the development and implementation of special purpose industrial tools: an ergonomic perspective. Procedia Manuf2015; 3: 5639–5646.
58.
HarihGDolšakB. Comparison of subjective comfort ratings betweat anatomically shaped and cylindrical handles. Appl Ergon [Internet]2014; 45: 943–954.
59.
DababnehALoweBKriegE, et al.A checklist for the ergonomic evaluation of nonpowered hand tools. J Occup Environ Hyg2004; 1: 135–145.
60.
ZhangLHelanderMGDruryCG. Idattifying factors of comfort and discomfort in sitting. Hum Factors [Internet]1996; 38: 377–389.
61.
PäivinatMHeinimaaT. The effects of differatt hand tool blade coatings on force demands what cutting wood. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2003; 32: 139–146.
62.
SalvadorMD. Aportaciones de la semántica del producto al diseño de herramiattas. Castellón de la Plana, Valencia, España: Universitat Jaume I, 2012.
63.
WikströmL. The Meaning of the Product. Methods for Evaluating the Products Semantic Functions. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothatburg. 2002.
64.
HsuSHChuangMCChangCC. A semantic differattial study of designers’ and users’ product form perception. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]2000; 25: 375–391.
