Biomechanical and perceptual evaluation of a design studio chair: Implications for dynamic seating, musculoskeletal health and ergonomic redesign
1 Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
3 Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lead City University, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Research Article
International Journal of Frontiers in Engineering and Technology Research, 2026, 10(02), 014-035.
Article DOI: 10.53294/ijfetr.2026.10.2.0012
Publication history:
Received on 21 February 2026; revised on 13 April 2026; accepted on 16 April 2026
Abstract:
Prolonged sitting remains a common posture in both educational and occupational settings, despite the reports linking sustained seated positions with musculoskeletal discomfort and lower back pain. While ergonomic chair designs are intended to minimise these risks, the comfort experienced by users does not always reflect actual biomechanical suitability. In this study, user experience, perceived comfort and region specific discomfort associated with a Design Studio (DS) chair used in an educational studio environment were investigated. A cross sectional survey (n = 29) was carried out in order to evaluate anthropometric compatibility, perceived structural comfort and discomfort across different body regions including the neck, shoulders, upper back, lower back, buttocks, thighs, lower legs and feet. Descriptive statistics, chi square goodness of fit tests, confidence intervals and effect size estimates were used to examine the response patterns. There were evidence of high ratings for structural comfort particularly for the seat pan cushion (89.7%) and backrest cushion (75.9%). Notwithstanding, noticeable discomfort was still reported in key load bearing areas especially in the buttocks (58.6%), lower back (44.8%) and upper back (41.4%). The foregoing implies a disconnect between perceived cushioning and actual biomechanical support. In addition, although 92.6% of participants reported that the chair height was compatible with the table, a majority (65.5%) still preferred a lower seat height. These findings are in agreement with Mandal’s Homo Sedens theory, which proposes that static sitting, even in chairs that feel comfortable, can lead to cumulative spinal loading and localised pressure. The implication is that there is need for more dynamic seating approaches, better anthropometric adaptability and improved integration between the chair and the workstation. In practical terms, this includes features such as adjustable seat height, seat designs that improve pressure distribution, and options that allow for posture variation. The outcomes of this study has significant contributions to enriching the field of applied ergonomics, where users’ perceived comfort is linked with underlying biomechanical factors in educational studio settings.
Keywords:
Seating ergonomics; Musculoskeletal discomfort; Anthropometric compatibility; Lumbar biomechanics; Chair redesign
Full text article in PDF:
Copyright information:
Copyright © 2026 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0