Michael Adheke1,2, Nicholas Asiwe2,3, Michael Okon2,4, Chiamaka Faustina Irozulike2,5, Favour Oja-Alumehe Erezih1, Ejayeta Jeroh6
1Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Southern Delta University, Ozoro, Delta State, Nigeria
2Frontiers Human Development Initiative, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
3Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Delta, Agbor, Delta State, Nigeria
4Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
5Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Rhema University, Aba, Abia State, Nigeria
6Department of Human Physiology, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Southern Delta University, Ozoro, Delta State, Nigeria
Evaluating Sitting Body Proportions: A Gender-Based Anthropometric Study Among Nigerian Igbos
J. Anthr. Sport Phys. Educ. 2026, 10(1), Ahead of Print | DOI: 10.26773/jaspe.260102
Abstract
Anthropometry, in the field of ergonomics, is relevant in the assessment of sitting postures between genders during sedimentary work lifestyles. The present study was done to evaluate sitting body proportions using selected anthropometric variables of Nigerian Igbo adults and to analyse where sexual differences exist between them. This cross-sectional descriptive study measured sitting anthropometrics of 500 Nigerian Igbo individuals aged 18 35 years, equally balanced by gender. Participants met the selection criteria such as no musculoskeletal issues, no limb surgeries, and engaged in routine activities, and were recruited via multi-stage random sampling. Standardized anthropometric protocols were used for obtaining measurements including standing height (H), body weight (W), body-mass index (BMI), sitting height (SH), sitting eye height (SEH), shoulder height (SSH), knee height (SKH), and popliteal height (SPH). Data were analysed using SPSS version 25.0, presenting descriptive statistics and comparing sexes via Student’s t-test, with significance set at p<0.05. Anthropometric outcomes in the current study revealed that the mean height and weight of the males were significantly higher compared to females, while the mean values for sitting height (SH) and knee height (SKH) differed significantly between genders. The other sitting anthropometric variables such as the eye height (SEH), shoulder height (SSH), and the popliteal height (SPH) did not differ significantly between genders (p < 0.05). The study concluded that there were selected gender differences observed in the sitting anthropometric parameters and this could be relevant towards the ergonomic design of seats for Nigerian Igbos.
Keywords
sitting height, eye height, shoulder height, knee height, popliteal height
View full article
(PDF – 304KB)
References
Abd Rahman, N. I., Md Dawal, S. Z., Yusoff, N., & Mohd Kamil, N. S. (2018). Anthropometric measurements among four Asian countries in designing sitting and standing workstations. Sādhanā, 43(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-017-0768-2
Adiga, U. (2023). Enhancing occupational health and ergonomics for optimal workplace well-being: A review. International Journal of Chemical and Biochemical Sciences, 24(4), 157–164.
Almaz, H., & Fawzy, A. (2022). The impact of anthropometrics on the functional design of office furniture. International Design Journal, 12(5), 21–30.
Baharampour, S., Nazari, J., Dianat, I., & Asgharijafarabadi, M. (2013). Student's body dimensions in relation to classroom furniture. Health Promotion Perspectives, 3(2), 165–174.
Been, E., & Kalichman, L. (2014). Lumbar lordosis. The Spine Journal, 14(1), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.07.464
Daruis, D. D. I., Deros, B. M., & Nor, M. J. M. (2011). Malaysian sitting anthropometry for seat fit parameters. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 21(5), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20260
Dianat, I., Molenbroek, J., & Castellucci, H. I. (2018). A review of the methodology and applications of anthropometry in ergonomics and product design. Ergonomics, 61(12), 1696–1720. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1502817
Garneau, C. J., & Parkinson, M. B. (2016). A survey of anthropometry and physical accommodation in ergonomics curricula. Ergonomics, 59(1), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1056237
Green, N., Gaydos, S., Ewan, H., & Nicol, E. (2019). Anthropometry. In Handbook of Aviation and Space Medicine (pp. 251–254). CRC Press.
Hey, H. W. D., Teo, A. Q. A., Tan, K. A., Ng, L. W. N., Lau, L. L., Liu, K. P. G., & Wong, H. K. (2017). How the spine differs in standing and in sitting—important considerations for correction of spinal deformity. The Spine Journal, 17(6), 799–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.01.016
Heymsfield, S. B., Bourgeois, B., Ng, B. K., Sommer, M. J., Li, X., & Shepherd, J. A. (2018). Digital anthropometry: A critical review. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 72(5), 680–687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-018-0143-7
Igbokwe, J. O., Osueke, G. O., Opara, U. V., Ileagu, M. O., & Ezeakaibeya, K. U. (2019). Considerations of anthropometrics in the design of lecture hall furniture. International Journal of Regulation and Governance, 7(8), 374–386.
Kahya, E. (2021). Assessment of musculoskeletal disorders among employees working office workplaces in the manufacturing sector. Work, 69(3), 1103–1113. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-213565
Kamijantono, H., Sebayang, M. M., & Lesmana, A. (2024). Risk factors and ergonomic influence on musculoskeletal disorders in the work environment. Journal La Medihealtico, 5(3), 660–670.
Kibria, M. G., & Rafiquzzaman, M. (2019). Ergonomic computer workstation design for university teachers in Bangladesh. Jordan Journal of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, 13(2), 109–116.
Kwon, Y., Kim, J. W., Heo, J. H., Jeon, H. M., Choi, E. B., & Eom, G. M. (2018). The effect of sitting posture on the loads at cervico-thoracic and lumbosacral joints. Technology and Health Care, 26(S1), 409–418. https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-174707
Léger, M. C., Dion, C., Albert, W. J., & Cardoso, M. R. (2023). The biomechanical benefits of active sitting. Ergonomics, 66(8), 1072–1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2022.2151223
Ma, L., & Niu, J. (2021). Three-dimensional (3D) anthropometry and its applications in product design. In Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (pp. 281–302).
Punchihewa, H. K., & Gyi, D. E. (2016). Reducing work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) through design: Views of ergonomics and design practitioners. Work, 53(1), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-152147
Reid, C. R., Bush, P. M., Karwowski, W., & Durrani, S. K. (2010). Occupational postural activity and lower extremity discomfort: A review. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(3), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.01.003
Taifa, I. W., & Desai, D. A. (2017). Anthropometric measurements for ergonomic design of students’ furniture in India. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 20(1), 232–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2016.08.004
Utkualp, N., & Ercan, I. (2015). Anthropometric measurements usage in medical sciences. BioMed Research International, 2015, 404261. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/404261
Van Niekerk, S. M., Louw, Q. A., & Hillier, S. (2012). The effectiveness of a chair intervention in the workplace to reduce musculoskeletal symptoms: A systematic review. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 13(1), 145. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-13-145
Widana, I. K., Sumetri, N. W., Sutapa, I. K., & Suryasa, W. (2021). Anthropometric measures for better cardiovascular and musculoskeletal health. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(3), 550–561. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22316
Wiggermann, N., Bradtmiller, B., Bunnell, S., Hildebrand, C., Archibeque, J., Ebert, S., & Jones, M. L. (2019). Anthropometric dimensions of individuals with high body mass index. Human Factors, 61(8), 1277–1296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819845318