Operating a mouse for long periods of time increases the risk of muscle fatigue in the upper limbs of office workers.
Objective
This study aimed to contribute to the field of knowledge by providing guidance on the selection of a suitable computer mouse control-display gain (CDG) for office workers, and to reduce muscle fatigue and fatigue accumulation in office workers who use computer mice.
Method
Thirty healthy office workers used five different control-display gain settings to complete five sessions of a 30-min Fitts’ task. Muscle activity in the extensor digitorum, extensor carpi ulnaris and flexor digitorum superficialis were measured by surface electromyography (sEMG). Subjective muscle fatigue was assessed using the Borg Rating Scale and user performance was recorded using the GoFitts program.
Results
It was found that when the control-display gain was set to 12.97, the highest effective frequency of operation was reached by the users. Additionally, the subjects reported more subjective muscle fatigue at a control-display gain of 12.97, and the sEMG data showed that manipulation led to more upper limb muscle fatigue when the control-display gain was set to 8.64 and 12.97. Upper limb muscle fatigue, subjective muscle fatigue and user performance also varied between genders. Overall, female subjects had lower error rates while male subjects reported higher levels of subjective muscle fatigue and were more adaptable to the low control-display gain setting.
Conclusion
This study found a correlation between muscle fatigue and subjective fatigue with control-display gain. Similar to the subjective fatigue for control-display gain settings, the control-display gain settings that are commonly used by office workers may lead to higher levels of fatigue in the forearm muscles. This study could provide guidance for the selection of computer mouse control-display gain to reduce muscle fatigue and fatigue accumulation in office workers who use computer mice.
AlsobhiMAldhabiR. Understanding the pattern of musculoskeletal pain and its contributing factors among Hajj pilgrims. Work2024; 79: 417–424.
2.
MokhtariniaHAlimohammadiBSadeghi-YarandiM, et al.Investigating the relationship between physical, cognitive, and environmental factors of ergonomics with the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders: a case study in a car-parts manufacturing industry. Work2024; 79: 215–229.
3.
MirzaeiEKouhnavardBDaneshmandiH, et al.Determining the effect of environmental factors, work postures and mental workload on musculoskeletal disorders in rescue workers and accidents of one of the water and sewage companies in Iran. Work2024; 78: 969–981.
4.
UnuvarBSGercekHTufekciO, et al.The relationship between lower extremity muscle tightness and pain and disability in individuals with non-specific chronic low back pain. Work2024; 79: 323–330.
5.
JovanovićSŠimuničB. Effect of ergonomic armrest® forearm support on wrist posture related to carpal tunnel pressure during computer mouse work. Int J Ind Ergon2021; 86: 103220.
6.
ZhaoJAnRXuR,et al.Comparing hand gestures and a gamepad interface for locomotion in virtual environments. Int J Hum-Comput Stud2022; 166: 102868.
7.
OrtegaFRWilliamsASTarreK, et al.3d Travel comparison study between multi-touch and GamePad. Int J Hum-Comput Interact2020; 36: 1699–1713.
8.
ChakrabortyPYadavS. Applicability of fitts’ law to interaction with touchscreen: review of experimental results. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 2023; 24: 532–546.
9.
KorekWTLiWLuL,et al.Investigating pilots’ operational behaviours while interacting with different types of inceptors 2022: 314–25.
10.
HematiKMirjaliliSGhasemiMS, et al.Functional parameters, wrist posture deviations and comfort: a comparison between a computer mouse and a touch pen as input devices. Work2020; 65: 701–706.
11.
GaudezCCailF. Effects of mouse slant and desktop position on muscular and postural stresses, subject preference and performance in women aged 18-40 years. Ergonomics2016; 59: 1473–1486.
12.
OveisiEKhanlariPEbrahimzadeh-AfrouziM. Carpal tunnel syndrome severity, hand discomfort, and usability among three types of computer mouse. Work2024; 77: 873–882.
13.
ShiriRFalah-HassaniK. Computer use and carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci2015; 349: 15–19.
14.
RingDC. Clinical faceoff: routine electrodiagnostic testing is not helpful in the management of carpal tunnel syndrome. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research2016; 474: 1770–1774.
15.
PattathPWebbL. Computer-usage and associated musculoskeletal discomfort in college students. Work2022; 73: 327–334.
16.
KeirPJBachJMRempelD. Effects of computer mouse design and task on carpal tunnel pressure. Ergonomics1999; 42: 1350–1360.
17.
FagarasanuMKumarS. Carpal tunnel syndrome due to keyboarding and mouse tasks: a review. Int J Ind Ergon2003; 31: 119–136.
18.
SzetoGPYShamKSW. The effects of angled positions of computer display screen on muscle activities of the neck–shoulder stabilizers. Int J Ind Ergon2008; 38: 9–17.
19.
ChoobinehAMotamedzadeMKazemiM, et al.The impact of ergonomics intervention on psychosocial factors and musculoskeletal symptoms among office workers. Int J Ind Ergon2011; 41: 671–676.
20.
SkellyDL. Assessment of computer workstations for compliance with ergonomic guidelines: a field study. Work2021; 69: 1019–1026.
21.
JellinekHCardS. Powermice and user performance. In: ACM; 1990: 213–20.
22.
LiGWangMArippaF, et al.Professional and high-level gamers: differences in performance, muscle activity, and hand kinematics for different mice. Int J Hum-Comput Interact2022; 38: 691–706.
23.
McKinnonCDMartelDRCallaghanJP. The impact of a progressive sit-stand rotation exposure duration on low back posture, muscle activation, and pain development. Ergonomics2021; 64: 502–511.
24.
CasiezGVogelDBalakrishnanR,et al.The impact of control-display gain on user performance in pointing tasks. Hum Comput Interact2008; 23: 215–250.
25.
PenumudiSAKuppamVAKimJH,et al.The effects of target location on musculoskeletal load, task performance, and subjective discomfort during virtual reality interactions. Appl Ergon2020; 84: 103010.
26.
ChenHLinCJLinP. Effects of control-display gain and postural control method on distal pointing performance. Int J Ind Ergon2019; 72: 45–53.
27.
KotaSYoungJG. Effects of control-display mapping and spatially dependent gain on supported free-hand gesture pointing performance. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting2019; 63: 391–395.
28.
AgarabiMBonatoPDe LucaCJ. A sEMG-based method for assessing the design of computer mice. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc2004; 2004: 2450–2453.
29.
LinCJChenHJChoiJH. The postural and control-display gain effects of distal pointing on upper extremity fatigue. Ergonomics2016; 59: 73–84.
30.
ConroyETothAJCampbellMJ. The effect of computer mouse mass on target acquisition performance among action video gamers. Appl Ergon2022; 99: 103637.
31.
QuemeloPRVVieiraER. Biomechanics and performance when using a standard and a vertical computer mouse. Ergonomics2013; 56: 1336–1344.
32.
CoelhoDALourençoML. Dynamics of forearm muscle activity in slanted computer mice use. Work2021; 68: 123–135.
33.
FormanGNMelchiorreLPHolmesMWR. Impact of repetitive mouse clicking on forearm muscle fatigue and mouse aiming performance. Appl Ergon2024; 118: 104284.
34.
MacKenzieIS. Fitts’ law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction. Hum Comput Interact1992; 7: 91–139.
35.
XieYZhouRQuJ. Fitts’ law on the flight deck: evaluating touchscreens for aircraft tasks in actual flight scenarios. Ergonomics2023; 66: 506–523.
36.
SarkerPNorasiHKoenigJ, et al.Effects of break scheduling strategies on subjective and objective measures of neck and shoulder muscle fatigue in asymptomatic adults performing a standing task requiring static neck flexion. Appl Ergon2021; 92: 103311.
37.
RoynarinNChannakSJanwantanakulP. Postural shifts and body perceived discomfort during 1-h sitting when leaning and sitting on an air-filled seat cushion among healthy office workers. Ergonomics2024; 67: 2126–2137.
38.
SakoSSugiuraHTanoueH, et al.Electromyographic analysis of relevant muscle groups during completion of computer tasks using different computer mouse positions. Int J Occup Saf Ergon2017; 23: 267–273.
39.
BodinTBerglundKForsmanM. Activity in neck-shoulder and lower arm muscles during computer and smartphone work. Int J Ind Ergon2019; 74: 102870.
40.
WangMFanHYuS, et al.Effects of variations in the tragus expansion angle on physical comfort for in-ear wearables. Ergonomics2022; 65: 1352–1372.
41.
LinMBHongRHHuangYP. Influence of virtual keyboard design and usage posture on typing performance and muscle activity during tablet interaction. Ergonomics2020; 63: 1312–1328.
42.
HummelALaubliTPozzoM, et al.Relationship between perceived exertion and mean power frequency of the EMG signal from the upper trapezius muscle during isometric shoulder elevation. Eur J Appl Physiol2005; 95: 321–326.
43.
PangYHHoffmannERGoonetillekeRS. Effects of gain and index of difficulty on mouse movement time and fitts’ law. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst2019; 49: 684–691.
44.
DederingANemethGHarms-RingdahlK. Correlation between electromyographic spectral changes and subjective assessment of lumbar muscle fatigue in subjects without pain from the lower back. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)1999; 14: 103–111.
45.
ObergTSandsjoLKadeforsR. Subjective and objective evaluation of shoulder muscle fatigue. Ergonomics1994; 37: 1323–1333.
46.
CharnessGGneezyU. Strong evidence for gender differences in risk taking. J Econ Behav Organ2012; 83: 50–58.
47.
GerdesCGränsmarkP. Strategic behavior across gender: a comparison of female and male expert chess players. Labour Econ2010; 17: 766–775.
48.
HiltonENLundbergTR. Transgender women in the female category of sport: perspectives on testosterone suppression and performance advantage. Sports Med2021; 51: 199–214.
49.
WangMLiGArippaF, et al.The effects of mouse weight and connection type on performance, muscle activity, and preferences among professional gamers. Int J Ind Ergon2023; 97: 103493.
