Repository logo
 
Publication

Comparison between anthropometric equipment and scanners in hand measurement

dc.contributor.authorFilho, P. C. Anacleto
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Lincoln da
dc.contributor.authorCastellucci, H. I.
dc.contributor.authorRodrigues, Matilde
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Eduarda
dc.contributor.authorPombeiro, Ana
dc.contributor.authorColim, Ana
dc.contributor.authorCarneiro, Paula
dc.contributor.authorArezes, Pedro
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-10T14:33:27Z
dc.date.available2024-05-10T14:33:27Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractAnthropometric studies have influenced the design of apparel, accessories, medical prostheses, equipment, workstations, and tools. Particularly, hand anthropometry is related to safety and adequacy of hand tools and devices. Different equipment and methods can be used to obtain body measurements with different precision and reliability levels. However, precision and reliability are not the only aspects to be considered. The present study aims to evaluate the agreement of four different pieces of equipment for anthropometric measurement of the hand, namely, anthropometer, anthropometric tape, 2D scanner, and 3D scanner. These measurement methods were compared in terms of required time, precision, complexity, and cost, for the case of two-dimensional hand measurements. Data was collected on hand length and breadth from 25 workers in North Portugal. Among the main findings, we can highlight a relatively low accuracy and higher measurement times for 2D and 3D scanners due to scanning, processing, digitalization, and calibration steps. Traditional direct measurement methods were considered the most appropriate to obtain hand length and breadth measures, as they required less time and were more accurate, less costly and complex than 2D and 3D scanner methods. These results emphasize the caution required when selecting anthropometric methods.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationFilho, P. C. A., Da Silva, L., Castellucci, H. I., Rodrigues, M. A., Pereira, E., Pombeiro, A., Colim, A., Carneiro, P., & Arezes, P. (2024). Comparison Between Anthropometric Equipment and Scanners in Hand Measurement. Em P. M. Arezes, R. B. Melo, P. Carneiro, J. Castelo Branco, A. Colim, N. Costa, S. Costa, J. Duarte, J. C. Guedes, G. Perestrelo, & J. S. Baptista (Eds.), Occupational and Environmental Safety and Health V (1ª, Vol. 492, pp. 43–58). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38277-2_4pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-3-031-38277-2_4pt_PT
dc.identifier.isbn978-3-031-38277-2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.22/25497
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherSpringerpt_PT
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-38277-2_4pt_PT
dc.subjectPhysical ergonomicspt_PT
dc.subjectAnthropometrypt_PT
dc.subjectUpper limbpt_PT
dc.subjectMeasuring methodspt_PT
dc.titleComparison between anthropometric equipment and scanners in hand measurementpt_PT
dc.typebook part
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage58pt_PT
oaire.citation.issuept_PT
oaire.citation.startPage43pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleOccupational and Environmental Safety and Health IV pt_PT
oaire.citation.volume492pt_PT
person.familyNameRodrigues
person.givenNameMatilde
person.identifier.ciencia-id5110-3A70-C3F3
person.identifier.orcid0000-0001-6175-6934
person.identifier.ridN-7022-2015
person.identifier.scopus-author-id55485977900
rcaap.rightsclosedAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typebookPartpt_PT
relation.isAuthorOfPublication8ddb200d-027c-40ca-8ca4-7e3a5981bcb1
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery8ddb200d-027c-40ca-8ca4-7e3a5981bcb1

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
CAP_Matilde Rodrigues.pdf
Size:
14.68 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: