Scientific Studies
Scientific Study Study #1 Abstract
Introduction: Conventional wisdom to avoid back pain while making your bed recommends not to lean across your bed to tuck in the sheets, and to keep your back straight and use Core Muscles. This is not practical or possible with any of the many different designs currently available. At present, there is no safe way to make your bed, which can significantly increase the risk of injury and create lifelong disabilities for both individuals and certain professional bedmakers such as house keepers, and caregivers.
Objective: It was hypothesized that the use of an Instant Tuck™ Mat can significantly lower the Back-Compression Force (BCF) on the Lower Back and fall far below the risk threshold level stated by the NIOSH. The Instant Tuck™ Mat addresses this major health problem of back pain and injuries by eliminating the need to ever lift a mattress when making the bed.
Method: A sample of 35 subjects performed the task of making a bed with a queen-sized mattress with and without the Instant Tuck™ Mat in a random order. BCF, the number of lifts to make the bed as well as the length of time for each lift, and the number of times each individual bent forward was measured during each trial.
Results: There were significant differences for all the measured variables. Regarding the BCF, there was an approximately 85% reduction of pressure on the lower back when using the Instant Tuck™ Mat vs. not using it, which was a highly significant decrease
Scientific Study #2 Abstract
Objective: Currently, there are multiple bed-making tools utilized by consumers and businesses with the intention of increasing safety and reducing time to make a bed. In this study, we will compare musculoskeletal stress, time, and preference of making a bed using the EasyTuck pad versus three other bed-making tools and making a bed without any bed-making tool.
Methods: A sample of ten subjects performed the task of making a queen size mattress bed with one bottom fitted sheet and one top flat sheet, using the EasyTuck pad versus three other bed-making tools, and making a bed without any bed-making tool, in a random order. Time to make the bed, forces on the low back, shoulders and wrist, and the number of times each individual bent forward were measured during each trial. In addition, subjective preferences were measured using a simple questionnaire.
Results: Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to analyze the differences between the five different procedures. There were significant differences for all the measured variables. Regarding the time needed to make one bed, the EasyTuck pad had the least time range (80.6 s±4.3), which was approximately 40 s less than making the bed with no tool (p<0.001). Furthermore, for the overall lumbar spine impulse force, the EasyTuck pad had the largest overall reduction in this category (90.6%). Regarding the subjective data, the EasyTuck pad had an overall rating of 9.4 out of 10, compared to the other tools with ratings of 5.9, 5.1, and 3.4 out of 10, which was a statistically significant difference (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Making beds on a regular basis poses risk of injury, especially for those who are required to perform this for their occupation. However, using assistive tools for bed-making, could minimize, and prevent injuries and overload to the lower back, and other parts of the body, making the bed-making task safer. Based on our findings, the EasyTuck pad was by far the most efficient and safest tool to assist in making beds, with the lowest possible risk of injury when compared to all the other tools tested