Published in

IOS Press, WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation, 2(76), p. 737-747, 2023

DOI: 10.3233/wor-220440

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Redesign and ergonomic assessment of a chest-support baby walker

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Parents often use baby walkers (BWs) as assistive devices to improve their infants’ independent movement and motor skill acquisition. However, the literature suggests that conventional baby walkers (CBW) may cause delays in an infant’s ability to walk independently and musculoskeletal burden on parents. OBJECTIVE: In the current study, a baby walker (RBW) with chest support was redesigned and ergonomically assessed during an infant-walking task. METHODS: The anthropometric dimensions of 90 infants aged 7–11 months were measured in the city of Urmia, northwestern Iran. Following redesigning based on the results from expert panel meetings and prototyping of the RBW, 18 mothers (age: 28.33±4.27 and height: 163.75±5.32 and weight: 59.45±5.99) with their infants (9 boys and 9 girls) performed a simulated infant walking task in two experimental sessions using the CBW and RBW over a repeated measurements design. The infants’ feet track patterns, including the number of steps and step distances were assessed via the image analysis of the footprints. The mothers’ body posture and lower back spinal load were evaluated using Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) technique and 3D Static Strength Prediction Program (3DSSPP), respectively. RESULTS: Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed infants walked more steps with the RBW (p = 0.002). Similarly, the distance between the infants’ left heel strike (p = 0.008) and their right and left toe-off (p = 0.03 and 0.02 respectively) was also significantly lower in the RBW use. Additionally, the body posture of mothers was improved (RULA final score from 7 for CBW to 5 for RBW). Moreover, lower back compression and shear forces were reduced significantly (p = 0.002) by the RBW use. CONCLUSION: According to the feet track pattern, infants took more balanced steps when the RBW was used. In addition, mothers were subjected to less pressure on the lumbar region when they placed and lifted their infant from the RBW. However, further work is necessary to investigate potential long-term effects of the RBWs use.