The purpose of the study was to check which way of sitting allows the most optimal posture during the performance of cognitive tasks and to find appropriate intensity of cycling which will not significantly affect the work efficieny and at the same time provide suitable physiological areas. The study included 17 healthy subjects, 7 men and 10 women, aged 18 to 30 years. METHODS: Subjects came to the measurment twice at one week interval. On the first visit each subject performed 4 cycling interventions: (i) sitting on an ordinary office chair (control condition), (ii) cycling on an ordinary office chair, (iii) cycling on a bicycle with normal seat and (iv) cycling on a bicycle with a saddle seat. On the second visit, 3 interventions were performed: (i) cycling on a bicycle with normal seat at 30 W, (ii) cycling on a bicycle with a normal seat at an intensity of 60 W and (iii) cycling on a bicycle with a cylindrical seat at an intensity of 30 W. The intervention of one version of cycling lasted 19 minutes. During the cycling, we monitored the subject`s posture with inertial measuring units and checked the subject`s work efficiency with computer tasks (mouse task, typing test and Stroop test). RESULTS: The pelvic tilt of the pelvis proved to be statistically significant and was the largest in the cycling versions of sitting and the smallest in the office chair – cycling condition. The difference in torso-thigh angles between the mentioned conditions was statistically significant. As expected, the heart rate increased with higher cycling intensity. Statistical differences in operating efficiency between the 30 W and 60 W conditions were not confirmed. CONCLUSION: From the obtained results we can conclude that the most optimal seat from the body geometry point of view is the office chair – cycling and that the inclusion of active workstations in office jobs has a small or no impact on a work performance regardless of intensity level 30 W or 60 W.
|
