Coca Aitor, Roberge R, Shepherd A, Powell J B, Stull J O, Williams W J
National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA, 15236, USA.
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2008 Sep;104(2):351-9. doi: 10.1007/s00421-007-0644-z. Epub 2007 Dec 13.
Firefighter turnout gear and equipment protect the wearer against external hazards but, unfortunately, restrict mobility. The aim of this study was to determine the ease of mobility and comfort while wearing a new prototype firefighter ensemble (PE) with additional chemical/biological hazard protection compared to a standard ensemble (SE) by measuring static and dynamic range of motion (ROM), job-related tasks, and comfort. Eight healthy adults (five males, three females), aged 20-40 years, participated in this study. The study consisted of two repeated phases, separated by five uses of the ensembles. Subjects randomly donned either the SE or PE in either dry or wet conditions on separate days. In each phase, five tests were carried out as follows: baseline (non-ensemble), SE-dry, SE-wet, PE-dry, and PE-wet. There was a significant reduction (P < 0.05) of wrist flexion for PE-dry condition compared to the same SE-dry condition. Donning the PE took 80 s longer than the SE in phase 1, this difference disappeared in phase 2. There was a significant decrease (P < 0.05) in post-test comfort wearing the PE compared to the SE. The data collected in this study suggest that, in spite of design features to enhance chemical/biological hazard protection, the PE design does not decrease the wearer's overall functional mobility compared to the SE. However, subjects seem to be more comfortable wearing the SE compared to the PE. These overall findings support the need for a comprehensive ergonomic evaluation of protective clothing systems to ascertain human factors issues.
消防员的灭火防护服和装备能保护穿着者免受外部危险,但遗憾的是,会限制行动能力。本研究的目的是通过测量静态和动态活动范围(ROM)、与工作相关的任务以及舒适度,来确定与标准套装(SE)相比,穿着带有额外化学/生物危害防护功能的新型原型消防员套装(PE)时的行动便利性和舒适度。八名年龄在20至40岁之间的健康成年人(五名男性,三名女性)参与了本研究。该研究包括两个重复阶段,中间间隔对套装进行五次使用。受试者在不同日期分别在干燥或潮湿条件下随机穿着SE或PE。在每个阶段,进行了如下五项测试:基线(不穿套装)、SE-干燥、SE-潮湿、PE-干燥和PE-潮湿。与相同的SE-干燥条件相比,PE-干燥条件下的手腕弯曲度显著降低(P < 0.05)。在第一阶段,穿上PE比穿上SE多花80秒,这种差异在第二阶段消失。与SE相比,穿着PE进行测试后的舒适度显著下降(P < 0.05)。本研究收集的数据表明,尽管PE在设计上增强了化学/生物危害防护功能,但与SE相比,PE的设计并没有降低穿着者的整体功能行动能力。然而,与PE相比,受试者穿着SE似乎更舒适。这些总体研究结果支持对防护服系统进行全面的人体工程学评估以确定人为因素问题的必要性。