In-chair movements: Categorizations and patterns over time based on a literature review.

Journal Article (2025)
Author(s)

A Kruithof (TU Delft - Materializing Futures, Hanze Hogeschool Groningen)

YW Song (TU Delft - Materializing Futures)

P Vink (TU Delft - Human-Centered Design)

Research Group
Materializing Futures
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815251394878
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Materializing Futures
Issue number
1
Volume number
83
Pages (from-to)
74-83
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Background
In recent years in-chair movements (ICM) have gained attention in comfort and discomfort studies, but the role of these movements in preventing and/or alleviating discomfort remains unclear. Furthermore, differences in study design and terminology make cross-study comparisons difficult.

Objective
This study aims to synthesize current research on ICM, particularly the categorization of different ICM types. It also aims to provide an overview of ICM over time, focusing on their progressions, characteristics, and possible patterns.

Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA framework using Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Data from the included studies were extracted and organized according to three ICM descriptors: frequency, amplitude, and posture change.

Results
Eighteen out of 230 identified papers met the inclusion criteria. Substantial heterogeneity in terminology and measurement partly explains inconsistencies in findings. Across most studies, ICM frequency increased over time, although a minority reported decreased movement or a “stiffening effect”. Findings regarding ICM amplitude were inconsistent, while a shift or change toward more slumped posture appears to be especially common during driving activities. These variations suggest that ICM patterns are influenced by task demands, seat characteristics, and individual differences.

Conclusion
ICM patterns are not solely time-dependent but are shaped by seat characteristics, task demands, and individual factors. While several studies suggest correlations between ICM strategies and discomfort, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Developing a comprehensive ICM framework that integrates movement strategies, and active or dynamic seating approaches will benefit cross-study comparability and provide directions for future ICM research.