Heydarnia Sahar, Jalali Mahdi, Sabzehali Saied, Zarrin Majid, Habibi Ehsanollah
Student Research Committee, Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Workplace Health Research Center, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran.
Med Lav. 2025 Jun 17;116(3):16641. doi: 10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16641.
Although hand and arm injuries can be prevented with protective gloves, their use may reduce hand dexterity and muscle strength. This study examined the ergonomic criteria and usability of four cut-resistant protective gloves (CRPGs) types to identify the optimal glove choice.
In this experimental study, 22 male participants were tested under five conditions: barehanded, wearing nitrile-coated gloves, gel-coated gloves, material-coated gloves, and foam nitrile-coated gloves. Dexterity was assessed using the Bennett and O'Connor tests; grip and pinch force were measured with a dynamometer, and a goniometer assessed the range of motion. The gloves' usability was evaluated through the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire. At the same time, localized discomfort in different areas of the hand was assessed using the Local Perceived Discomfort (LPD) questionnaire. Finally, glove comparisons were made using appropriate statistical tests analyzed with SPSS version 24 software.
All examined CRPGs significantly lowered finger dexterity scores (p < 0.001). However, the effects of different gloves on hand dexterity varied. Wearing all four gloves reduced grip force, but statistically significant differences in grip force were noted only between the barehanded condition and Glove B (p = 0.004). Using all four gloves increased pinch force, though this increase was statistically significant only between the barehanded condition and Glove D (p = 0.005). Wearing all gloves caused a statistically significant reduction in wrist, palm, and finger range of motion compared to the barehanded condition (p < 0.005). Lastly, there was a significant statistical difference between the gloves regarding usability (p = 0.001) and LPD (p = 0.001).
CRPGs can greatly influence hand skills. Glove D, featuring a foam nitrile coating, exhibited the highest finger dexterity compared to the other gloves studied. Considering aspects like sweat resistance and anatomical design, this foam nitrile-coated glove is appropriate for cutting-resistant tasks within various industries.
尽管防护手套可预防手部和手臂受伤,但其使用可能会降低手部灵活性和肌肉力量。本研究考察了四种类型的防切割防护手套(CRPG)的人体工程学标准和可用性,以确定最佳的手套选择。
在这项实验研究中,22名男性参与者在五种条件下接受测试:裸手、佩戴丁腈涂层手套、凝胶涂层手套、材料涂层手套和泡沫丁腈涂层手套。使用贝内特和奥康纳测试评估灵活性;用测力计测量握力和捏力,并用测角计评估活动范围。通过系统可用性量表(SUS)问卷评估手套的可用性。同时,使用局部感知不适(LPD)问卷评估手部不同区域的局部不适。最后,使用SPSS 24版软件进行适当的统计测试,对手套进行比较。
所有检测的CRPG均显著降低手指灵活性得分(p < 0.001)。然而,不同手套对手部灵活性的影响各不相同。佩戴所有四种手套均会降低握力,但仅在裸手状态与手套B之间观察到握力的统计学显著差异(p = 0.004)。使用所有四种手套均会增加捏力,不过仅在裸手状态与手套D之间,这种增加具有统计学显著性(p = 0.005)。与裸手状态相比,佩戴所有手套均导致手腕、手掌和手指活动范围出现统计学显著减小(p < 0.005)。最后,手套在可用性(p = 0.001)和LPD(p = 0.001)方面存在显著的统计学差异。
CRPG会极大影响手部技能。与所研究的其他手套相比,具有泡沫丁腈涂层的手套D表现出最高的手指灵活性。考虑到诸如耐汗性和解剖学设计等方面,这种泡沫丁腈涂层手套适用于各行业的防切割任务。