ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2025
Utilizing the Finnish method to assessment the dentist's adaptability to physical, environmental, cognitive, and macro-ergonomic features in dental practice: A health promotion approach.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDentistry, as a profession with the high stress and high precision in execution, is crucial in establishing optimal working conditions. Given the limited studies on ergonomics and physical risk factors in the dental work environment, this research aims to quantitatively assess clinical dentistry's physical, environmental, cognitive, and macro-ergonomic aspects, focusing on improving physical interactions with the environment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis descriptive-analytical study was conducted from March to December 2024 in Ardabil Dental Clinics, Iran. A total of 196 dentists were randomly selected through simple random sampling. Data collection involved direct observation using the standard ergonomic quantification checklist based on the Finnish method and environmental measurements. The dentist's adaptation and acceptance of existing working conditions were also examined. Instruments used included a photometer to assess illumination (lux), a sound level meter to evaluate noise (decibels), and a WBGT thermometer to measure workplace temperature (Celsius). Data were statistically analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and one-sample
resultsAmong the evaluated dental offices, 81.1% were general dentists, and 18.9% were specialists, with 89.3% working in private and 10.7% in public clinics. Analysts' evaluations showed significant differences compared to the dentists' self-assessments in indicators such as physical activity, lifting loads, and satisfaction with work components. Analysts assessed these aspects as being in poorer conditions than the dentists themselves reported. Additionally, a comparison of environmental indicators with optimal standards revealed that the average illumination (1547.59 lux) was higher, while temperature (20.61°C) and noise levels72.61 dB) were lower than the standard values (1500 lux, 24.5°C, and85dB) (
conclusionAlthough some environmental factors in dental offices deviate from optimal standards-such as increased illumination and reduced temperature and noise levels-overall dentist evaluations indicate relative satisfaction with ergonomic conditions. Therefore, improving and optimizing these factors is recommended to enhance dentists' comfort and efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.