Thermography's effectiveness in detecting tendinitis among dental professionals

¶ … ergonomics in the practice of dentistry, focusing on tendinitis. Improper ergonomics exacerbates a tendency to acquire tendinitis and other musculoskeletal concerns. In particular, the lack of hand and wrist supports during dental work is related to the presence of tendinitis in those joint areas. This research used thermo graphical methods to measure the difference between a dentist who experiences tendinitis and one who does not. Thermography is a common tool used in medical diagnosis. Results revealed a noticeable difference between the two participants, as the dentist who suffered from tendinitis exhibited a higher temperature and distribution range than the one who did not have the musculoskeletal complaint. The results can be used to encourage more research into how to improve dentists' working conditions and encourage the use of ergonomics in the workplace.

Research Problem

Musculoskeletal disorders are relatively common among practitioners of dentistry, due to the repetitive nature of the work and the intensity and duration of activities like dental surgery. The researchers hypothesized that using thermography the differences between a dentists with tendinitis and one without can be visualized and therefore conceptualized better.

Flaws in Procedural Design

The procedural design exhibits a number of flaws. For one, only two participants is almost unheard of in a professional peer-reviewed journal. To make the research more valid and reliable, a large number of participants from different backgrounds would be required. Second, the researchers do not explain whether the specific model of infrared camera is appropriate for measuring body temperature. Perhaps there are other devices that can detect changes in the body temperature with greater accuracy. It is also possible that the participant with tendinitis had the condition regardless of workplace conditions, and it is impossible to tell whether the musculoskeletal disorder was due to the occupational hazards or to other lifestyle issues. The authors do not indicate the age, gender, or ethnicity differences between the participants, which would have impacted the validity of the research. Moreover, to ensure accuracy the authors only lower ambient temperature and the lights. Other factors may also come into play.

Analysis of Data

The results support the hypothesis that infrared cameras can detect differences between a dentist with tendinitis and one without. Yet the results do not mean anything in terms of how to change the workplace environment. Of course there will be a difference between the two participants; the key to making the research meaningful is showing what techniques or tools can be introduced into the workplace that would make dentistry more ergonomic.

Conclusions

The research question is valid because dentistry is not exempt from ergonomic considerations. However, future studies should be designed more professionally. A larger sample and one more representative of the population should be selected. Also, it would be more meaningful to design a study that can actually help improve the ergonomics of the workplace rather than simply substantiate what is already known: that there are thermal imaging differences between an individual suffering from tendinitis and one who does not.