Authors : Floremie S. Coleto; Jeonel S. Lumbab; Charlito M. Castrodes

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 9 - September

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/yckabvpb

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2pwpf88w

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25sep432

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study explores technology-driven ergonomic solutions for enhancing multipurpose workstations, grounded on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as the theoretical framework. The growing integration of technology in workplaces and the demand for flexible workstation designs highlight the need for setups that are both ergonomic and adaptable to digital tools. The research investigates user responses to ergonomic innovations incorporated into workstation prototypes and evaluates their impact on comfort, efficiency, and productivity. Using a descriptive study design, data were gathered from participants exposed to technology-enhanced workstation models. Findings revealed that users generally perceived the workstation as functional, adaptable, and effective in reducing strain. These positive responses were consistent across different age groups and professions, underscoring the versatility of the design. Participants highlighted its ability to support diverse tasks, accommodate varying physical needs, and seamlessly integrate with digital workspaces. Descriptive statistical analysis further emphasized recurring positive patterns, suggesting that ergonomic and technological elements significantly influence workplace improvements. The study thus provides empirical evidence that the convergence of ergonomics and technology enhances work efficiency and user well-being. Beyond immediate outcomes, the results contribute to organizational decision-making, design innovation, and workplace training. The research extends existing knowledge on workplace ergonomics and technology adoption by offering practical insights into how employees engage with adaptive, multifunctional setups. Ultimately, it underscores the significance of technology-driven ergonomic solutions in creating sustainable, worker-centered, and future-ready environments that meet the evolving demands of the contemporary workforce.

Keywords : Ergonomics, Technology Acceptance Model, Technology-Driven Solutions, Workplace Innovation, Workstation Optimization.

References :

1. Alsyouf, A., Ishak, A. K., Alrawashdeh, T., & Alsyouf, I. (2023). Adoption of wearable technologies in healthcare: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021347
2. Bortolini, M., Faccio, M., Gamberi, M., Pilati, F., & Regattieri, A. (2023). Adaptive automation workstation for human-centered manufacturing. Machines, 11(9), 898. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines11090898
3. Chim, P., & Chen, Y. (2023). Ergonomic challenges of work-from-home during the COVID-19 pandemic: Musculoskeletal discomfort and workstation setup. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4), 3050. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043050
4. Edwardson, C. L., et al. (2022). Effectiveness of the SMART Work and Life intervention    for reducing sitting time in office workers: Three-arm cluster RCT. BMJ, 378, e069288. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-069288
5. Haliburton, W., Veenstra, M., & Chen, X. A. (2023). Smart desks for healthier work: Algorithmic posture adjustment and user experience. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(CSCW1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3596260
6. Konradt, U., Nath, A., Krys, S., & Heblich, F. (2022). Longitudinal effects of a sit-stand desk intervention—Persistence, fade-out,and psychological momentum: A randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychology, 10, 246. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-022-00948-
7. Lin, C.-Y., Shibata, A., Ishii, K., Koohsari, M. J., Hadgraft, N., Dunstan, D. W., Owen, N., & Oka, K. (2023). Reallocating desk workers’ sitting time to standing or           stepping: Associations with work performance. Occupational Medicine, 73(9), 575–580. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqad142
8. Ma, C., et al. (2021). The effects of sit–stand desks on office worker health and productivity: A randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11604. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111604
9. Strawderman, L., Koubek, R., & Chen, J. (2022). Ergonomic acceptance of wearable posture-monitoring devices in industrial environments. Applied Ergonomics, 99, 103381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2022.10338             
10. Weatherson, K. A., Wunderlich, K., Faulkner, G., & Rhodes, R. (2020). Low-cost sit–stand desk interventions in Canadian workplaces: Impacts on sedentary behavior. Applied Ergonomics, 82, 102951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102