Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 7, 2026
07:56
A Standardized Method for Measurement of Elbow Kinesthesia
Published on: October 10, 2020
8.0K
Standardizing upper arm movement definitions across observational and sensor-based methods: A Delphi consensus study
Anders Dreyer Frost1, Mikael Forsman, Luiz Augusto Brusaca
1National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. adf@nfa.dk.
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
|April 6, 2026
Summary
Experts reached consensus on time-based definitions for fast upper arm movements and static postures, crucial for reducing musculoskeletal disorders. However, amplitude thresholds remain undefined, requiring further research for reliable ergonomic assessments.
Area of Science:
- Occupational Health
- Ergonomics
- Biomechanics
Background:
- Repetitive upper arm movements cause significant musculoskeletal disorders, leading to sickness absence and productivity loss.
- Current observational and sensor-based assessments lack standardized definitions, hindering cross-study comparisons and practical application.
- Inconsistent definitions impede the reliable measurement of upper arm movements in occupational settings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To establish consensus on threshold criteria for defining upper arm movements and static postures.
- To explore differences between practical observability and biomechanical measurability in ergonomic assessments.
- To improve standardization in defining upper arm exposure in research and practice.
Main Methods:
- A two-round Delphi study involving 35 European experts was conducted following ACCORD guidelines.
- Experts rated agreement on proposed definitions for upper arm movements and postures.
- Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with thematic analysis guiding definition revisions.
Main Results:
- Consensus was reached on defining fast-paced movements as ≤1 second (80% agreement) and static postures as ≥4 seconds with ±5° movements (87% agreement).
- No agreement was found on minimum amplitude thresholds for arm movements (e.g., 10° vs. 20°; 53% agreement).
- Experts noted a conflict between observability (favoring higher amplitudes) and biomechanical relevance (favoring lower amplitudes), emphasizing velocity's importance.
Conclusions:
- Time-based thresholds for fast movements and static postures offer a foundation for standardized ergonomic assessment.
- The lack of consensus on amplitude thresholds necessitates field validation studies to determine reliability and predictive value for musculoskeletal health.
- These findings promote transparency in defining upper arm exposure but highlight ongoing conceptual and methodological challenges.
