Impact of a seated-standing protocol on postures and pain among undergraduate dental hygiene students: A pilot study

Purpose: Although repetitive movements may lead to musculoskeletal pain, static and sedentary postures may be primary contributors to musculoskeletal disorders. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine whether an alternating seated-standing protocol would improve postures, decrease ergonomic risks, and reduce perceived pain scores among dental hygiene students.Methods: Thirty undergraduate dental hygiene students enrolled during the summer term were recruited to participate in the randomized control design pilot study. Participants were randomly assigned to the training (n=15) and control (n=15) groups. The training group alternated between sitting and standing every 30 minutes while providing dental hygiene care. The Modified-Dental Operator Posture Assessment Instrument (M-DOPAI) was used to evaluate ergonomic scores, the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) was used to evaluate ergonomic risk, and the Modified-Standardized Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (M-SNMQ) was used to assess self-reported pain. Photographs were captured and levels of perceived pain were assessed at baseline, week-4, and week-8. Three raters independently evaluated the photographs using the M-DOPAI and RULA. Participants completed a survey about their experiences in the study at the end of week-8. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVAs were used to analyze the quantitative data; thematic analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data.Results: Although all participants perceived a reduction of pain over the duration of the eight-week study (p<.05), the training group demonstrated no significant differences in ergonomic scores, ergonomic risks, or pain scores at the three time points (p>.05). Qualitatively, participants in the training group perceived that the seated-standing protocol clinically improved their postures and reduced their pain.Conclusion: The results suggest there were minimal impacts of the alternating seated standing protocol on ergonomic scores, ergonomic risks, or perceived pain. More research is needed to determine whether there are objective benefits to an alternating seated-standing protocol.