跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(34.204.198.73) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/16 17:35
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:鄭光庭
研究生(外文):Cheng, Kuang-Ting
論文名稱:輔具使用者滿意度和舒適性調查: 以手部輔具執行手工具操作任務為例
論文名稱(外文):User satisfaction and comfort of orthosis: an example of wearing hand orthosis in performing hand tools tasks
指導教授:李昀儒李昀儒引用關係
指導教授(外文):Lee, Yun-Ju
口試委員:盧俊銘劉倩秀
口試委員(外文):Lu, Jun-MingLiu, Chien-Hsiou
口試日期:2020-07-16
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立清華大學
系所名稱:工業工程與工程管理學系碩士在職專班
學門:工程學門
學類:工業工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2020
畢業學年度:108
語文別:中文
論文頁數:57
中文關鍵詞:手部輔具滿意度舒適性手工具
外文關鍵詞:Cock-upQUEST-TSatisfactionComfortHand tools
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:389
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:71
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
人們在選用合適的輔具時,主要目的是希望能促進功能、省力、避免進一步的傷害,在日常生活、工作、休閒時達到更好地參與表現。從復健的角度來看,輔具的介入同樣被視為是很重要的治療項目之一。而國內設有輔具補助相關辦法中,內容多在專業人員對於患者的生理功能評估、購買建議,以及進行追蹤輔具在購買後廠商的售後服務和使用說明,較少了解使用者的需求和主客觀感受。
本研究以人因的角度評估,比較兩種不同的輔具在進行手工具操作以及握力測試,模擬工作狀態的表現。讓使用者穿戴市售、客製化豎腕副木,目的在於分析兩種不同方式的副木滿意度、主客觀舒適度。收集20位右手慣用的成年人,研究人員第一步為受試者的慣用手製作客製化豎腕副木,以及選擇合適尺寸的市售豎腕副木後,先後安裝壓力感測片在市售、客製化豎腕副木與皮膚的接觸面,第二步請受試者戴上市售、客製化豎腕副木進行最大握力施測以及手工具操作測驗,完成工作任務後填寫台灣版魁北克輔具使用者滿意度評量(QUEST-T)、舒適度主觀評分表,總共耗時約一小時。
實驗結果在主觀感受方面發現在受試者對於客製化豎腕副木有較高的滿意度且具有顯著差異,且對於輔具以及輔具服務都是具有顯著差異,而主觀舒適度在手部區域分數也顯示在手掌的掌指關節和手臂前臂這兩個區域有顯著差異,客製化豎腕副木高於支撐型固定護腕,在手工具等工作任務表現上穿戴客製化豎腕副木有較好的工作表現。本研究也發現在執行各種工作任務時有不同區域的壓力承重,在主客觀相關性分析方面,滿意度與客觀壓力數值和工作任務表現皆沒有顯著相關,主觀舒適度與客觀壓力參數在兩種輔具上有不同的相關性。期待未來也可以從人因的評估與壓力分析進行實驗因子的相互比較,提供未來建立輔具服務的量化評估方式,從輔具使用者為中心提升輔具服務的成效以及品質。
The assistive device aims to promote functions, save efforts, avoid further secondary hurt, and better participation in daily life, work, and leisure. From the point of view in rehabilitation processing, assistive devices’ intervention is regarded as a critical rehabilitation treatment project. There are related measures for assistive technology in Taiwan, the content is mostly in the physical functional status of the patients with disabilities, purchase suggestions, and follow the after-sales service and instructions for use, much less the user's needs, subjective and objective feelings. This study aims to analyze the users’ experience in hand tools while using the hand devices, the subjective and objective comparison of satisfaction and comfort.
This study evaluated human factors and the performance of working conditions by comparing two different aids in hand tooling and grip strength testing. The users were instructed to wear a composite orthosis and custom-made cock-up splint separately. The purpose was to analyze the two different ways of cock-up splint’s satisfaction, subjective and objective comfort, and to evaluate the weight and length of the two hand accessories.
Twenty healthy right-handed participants were recruited in the experiment. The first step was to prepare custom-made wrist splint for the participant’s right hand and to select the appropriate size of the composite orthosis. In the composite and custom-made orthosis contact surface of the wrist and the skin, the second step was to evaluate the maximum grip strength and the hand tools operation test. After the hand tools operating working test, the participants filled in the Taiwan version of Quebec accessory user satisfaction evaluation (QUEST-T), a comfortable subjective score sheet, which took about one hour.
In terms of subjective feelings, the results found that the subjects had high satisfaction and significant differences in custom-made cock-up splint. And there were significant differences in the items of assistive devices and assistive services. The regional scores also show that there are significant differences between the metacarpophalangeal joints of the palm and the forearm of the arm. The custom-made cock-up splint is higher than the composite orthosis. When the user worn the custom-made cock-up, using hand tools had better task performance. We also found that there are different areas of pressure when performing various work tasks. In the subjective and objective correlation analysis, satisfaction is not significantly related to objective pressure values and task performance. There were different correlations between comfort and each area of the pressure of hand when wearing the two assistive devices.
Looking forward to the future, the experimental factors from the human factor assessment and the pressure analysis would take into consideration to provide a quantitative evaluation method for the future establishment of the service, and improve the effectiveness and quality of the assistive technology service in the center of users.
摘要 I
Abstract III
表目錄 VIII
圖目錄 IX
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 1
1.3 研究架構 2
第二章 文獻探討 3
2.1 國內輔具使用慨況 3
2.2 輔具服務的重要性 5
2.3 使用者滿意度 7
2.4 主觀舒適度 9
2.5 客觀壓力值 11
2.6 小結 13
第三章 研究方法 14
3.1 問題定義與描述 14
3.2 實驗流程 14
3.2.1 研究對象 14
3.2.2 設備以及評估工具 15
3.3 實驗方法與步驟 20
3.3.1 實驗步驟 20
3.3.2 工作任務 21
3.4 數據分析 22
3.4.1 主觀參數 22
3.4.2 客觀參數 23
3.5 統計分析 25
第四章 實驗結果 27
4.1 人口學特徵 27
4.2 滿意度 27
4.3 主觀舒適度 28
4.4 客觀壓力值 29
4.5 工作任務表現 32
4.6 主客觀相關性分析 33
第五章 討論與研究限制 38
5.1 穿戴不同手部輔具對於滿意度與主觀舒適度的影響 38
5.2 穿戴不同手部輔具對於客觀壓力感受的影響 41
5.3 穿戴不同手部輔具對於工作任務表現的影響 42
5.4 主客觀相關性 43
5.5 研究限制 44
第六章 結論與未來方向 46
參考文獻 49
附錄一 53
附錄二 57
1. 胡名霞、柯志昌、柴惠敏、吳英黛 (2004)。失能者輔具使用現況之初測報告。物理治療,29(6),396-404.
2. 陳子夫 (2008)。手提握把形狀對手部壓力和舒適度的影響。國立高雄應用科技大學,高雄市。
3. 衛生福利部社會及家庭署 (2019)。107年度輔具服務彙整分析報告。取自https://newrepat.sfaa.gov.tw/home/download-file/2c90e4c770af431b0170bd0aa1eb3f75
4. 鍾印鈞 (2007)。以把手壓力探討不同自行車種之把手設計研究。大同大學工業設計學系所學位論文,台北市。
5. Aldien, Y., Welcome, D., Rakheja, S., Dong, R., & Boileau, P.-E. (2005). Contact pressure distribution at hand–handle interface: role of hand forces and handle size. J International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(3), 267-286.
6. Baker, N. A., Moehling, K. K., Rubinstein, E. N., Wollstein, R., Gustafson, N. P., & Baratz, M. (2012). The comparative effectiveness of combined lumbrical muscle splints and stretches on symptoms and function in carpal tunnel syndrome. Archives of physical medicine rehabilitation, 93(1), 1-10.
7. Chen, C.-L., Teng, Y.-L., Lou, S.-Z., Lin, C.-H., Chen, F.-F., & Yeung, K.-T. (2014). User satisfaction with orthotic devices and service in Taiwan. PloS one, 9(10), e110661.
8. Cook Albert, H., & Hussey Susan, M. (2001). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice. In: London: Mosby.
9. De Looze, M. P., Kuijt-Evers, L. F., & Van Dieen, J. (2003). Sitting comfort and discomfort and the relationships with objective measures. Ergonomics, 46(10), 985-997.
10. Demers, L., Monette, M., Lapierre, Y., Arnold, D., & Wolfson, C. (2002). Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disability and rehabilitation, 24(1-3), 21-30.
11. Demers, L., Weiss-Lambrou, R., & Ska, B. (1996). Development of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Assistive Technology, 8(1), 3-13.
12. Fellows, G., & Freivalds, A. (1991). Ergonomics evaluation of a foam rubber grip for tool handles. J Applied Ergonomics, 22(4), 225-230.
13. Haskett, S., Backman, C., Porter, B., Goyert, J., & Palejko, G. (2004). A crossover trial of custom‐made and commercially available wrist splints in adults with inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis Care & Research: Official Journal of the American College of Rheumatology, 51(5), 792-799.
14. Assistive Technology Act of 1998, 108-364 C.F.R. (2004, October 25). Retrieved from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-108publ364/pdf/PLAW-108publ364.pdf
15. Joseph, M., Constant, R., Rickloff, M., Mezzio, A., & Valdes, K. (2018). A survey of client experiences with orthotics using the QUEST 2.0. Journal of Hand Therapy, 31(4), 538-543. e531.
16. Kong, Y. K., & Lowe, B. D. (2005). Optimal cylindrical handle diameter for grip force tasks. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(6), 495-507.
17. Kuijt-Evers, L., Twisk, J., Groenesteijn, L., De Looze, M., & Vink, P. (2005). Identifying predictors of comfort and discomfort in using hand tools. Ergonomics, 48(6), 692-702.
18. Kuijt-Evers, L. F., Groenesteijn, L., de Looze, M. P., & Vink, P. (2004). Identifying factors of comfort in using hand tools. Applied ergonomics, 35(5), 453-458.
19. Lee, S.-H. (2014). Users’ satisfaction with assistive devices in South Korea. Journal of Physical Therapy Science, 26(4), 509-512.
20. Liu, C.-H., & Fan, S.-C. (2014). Ergonomic design of a computer mouse for clients with wrist splints. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(3), 317-324.
21. Mao, H.-F., Chen, W.-Y., Yao, G., Huang, S.-L., Lin, C.-C., & Huang, W.-N. W. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): the development of the Taiwanese version. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24(5), 412-421.
22. McKee, P., & Rivard, A. (2004). Orthoses as enablers of occupation: client-centred splinting for better outcomes. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(5), 306-314.
23. Richards, L. (1980). On the psychology of passenger comfort. human factors in transport research edited by Dj Oborne, Ja Levis, 2.
24. Sandford, F., Barlow, N., & Lewis, J. (2008). A study to examine patient adherence to wearing 24-hour forearm thermoplastic splints after tendon repairs. Journal of Hand Therapy, 21(1), 44-53.
25. Slater, K. (1985). Human comfort (Vol. 1): Springfield, Ill., USA: CC Thomas.
26. Thiele, J., Nimmo, R., Rowell, W., Quinn, S., & Jones, G. (2009). A randomized single blind crossover trial comparing leather and commercial wrist splints for treating chronic wrist pain in adults. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 10(1), 129.
27. Walker, W. C., Metzler, M., Cifu, D. X., & Swartz, Z. (2000). Neutral wrist splinting in carpal tunnel syndrome: a comparison of night-only versus full-time wear instructions. Archives of physical medicine rehabilitation, 81(4), 424-429.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top