Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluation of fitness between school furniture and children body size in two primary schools in Haiphong, Vietnam
2003 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (One Year)), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

AIM: This study was carried out in order to determine the level of mismatch between students’ body size and the furniture (chair/desk) that they use at two primary schools including urban and suburb primary schools in Haiphong city, Vietnam. SUBJECTS: A total of 240 student participants (2 schools x 3 form levels x 40 students per form) were investigated (120 boys and 120 girls). They were divided into age groups (6, 8 and 10 years) according to the grade of each child at the moment of the survey. METHODOLOGY: The body size of each student was assessed using standard anthropometric measurement techniques including measurements of sitting elbow height, shoulder height, upperarm length, knee height, popliteal height, buttock-popliteal length, stature and weight. The existing furniture dimensions were also measured, including seat height, depth, and slope: table/desk height, depth and slope. The comparison between student body size and furniture dimension were done by using the following criteria of mismatch: seat height = >99% or <80% of popliteal height: seat depth = <80% or >99% of the buttock-popliteal length: desk/table is <2cm higher than knee height: maximum desk height is determined by: he =0.8517 hev + 0.1483 hs, where hev is vertical elbow height: and hs is shoulder height. and this value was added by existing seat height and compared with existing desk height. in addition, the questionnaire on musculo-skeletal discomfort was applied to assess musculoskeletal discomfort among students. results: the results of study showed that there was a gradual increase in students’ body dimensions by age, but not significant differences by gender and locations (urban or suburb schools). the stature was significantly and highly correlated to almost body dimensions (r=0.52-0.88, p<0.05 & 0.01), except sitting elbow height for girls at age 6 years, and for boys age 8 and 10 years (r=0.04-0.12, p>0.05) and upper arm for girls at 6 and 10 years (r=0.24-0.28, p>0.05). There was a variety of school furniture used in two schools. Majority of students found the seat too high and too deep or too shallow depending on grades and schools. In the suburb school, 95-100% of students in grade 1 85-100% in grade 3 and 75-100% in grade 5 found the existing seat too high and too shallow. In urban school, 100% of students in grade 1 found the existing seat too high and too shallow while 55% of students in grade 3 and 32.5% in grade 5 found their seats too high and too deep. Almost students were not fit to the existing chair-desk combinations, except 3 students (accounted for 1.25%) in grade 1 of the suburb school who were fit one of chair- desk combinations available to them. There were 20.8% students in urban school and 22.5% of students in suburb school who complained musculo-skeletal pain in different body parts. The distribution of complains by grades was different in two schools. The relationship between mismatch and musculoskeletal pain was not found. CONCLUSION: Almost students in both schools did not find any of existing chair-desk combinations which were fit to them. Further investigation on a larger sample of primary school children representative over Vietnam should be carried out in order to have children body size data. And based on these data, the dimensions of school furniture will be developed to be fit to children.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Keyword [en]
Technology, children, school furniture
Keyword [sv]
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-54242ISRN: LTU-EX--03/102--SELocal ID: b3522224-8855-411f-8f2c-f39c1503dcdbOAI: diva2:1027622
Subject / course
Student thesis, at least 15 credits
Educational program
Ergonomics, master's level
Validerat; 20101217 (root)Available from: 2016-10-04 Created: 2016-10-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(741 kB)