Saddle Chairs and Back Pain: What Does the Research Actually Say?

Short answer: saddle chairs really do change how you sit, and there is genuine peer-reviewed research behind the idea. Researchers have measured the difference in spinal position, muscle activity and working posture. Several studies found better working posture or lower ergonomic-risk scores on saddle seats, and some found less discomfort. The HÅG Capisco itself has been tested during real surgical operations, where surgeons rated it among the most comfortable of the chairs tested. There are trade-offs too, and different saddle designs behave differently. Current research does not establish that saddle chairs reduce or treat back pain.

Why we wrote this

We sell the HÅG Capisco, and we think saddle seating is genuinely interesting. We also know that chair marketing is full of big health claims that the research does not support. So we went back to the studies themselves: systematic reviews, controlled trials and workplace studies in dentistry, surgery, music and office work, read in full where we could. This article explains what they found, good and bad. The full list of sources is at the end, and the numbers in square brackets point to it.

This is general information, not medical advice. If you have back pain, a diagnosed condition or symptoms that are getting worse, talk to a doctor or physiotherapist before changing how you sit.

What is a saddle chair?

A saddle chair has a seat shaped more like a riding saddle than a flat cushion. You sit astride it, with your thighs sloping down instead of level, your feet planted and your hips higher than on an ordinary chair. It is usually set higher than a standard office chair, so you perch rather than sit back. That is why saddle chairs are popular at raised desks and benches, and in work where you lean forward over a task.

Designs vary a lot. Some are simple backless stools; others, like the HÅG Capisco, add a backrest and can be sat on in several directions. That matters, because one saddle design does not necessarily behave like another, as the research shows.

What the research actually says

Here is the picture in brief:

• Saddle seats change posture. Opening the angle between your trunk and thighs tends to increase the natural inward curve of your lower back. This is the most consistent finding, and it has been measured objectively, not just asked about in questionnaires.
• Working posture scores improve. Two trials in dental students, combined in a 2018 meta-analysis, found substantially lower ergonomic-risk scores on saddle seats.
• Some people report less discomfort. Microsurgeons working on saddle seats reported less discomfort in several parts of the body, and a small office study found less lower-back discomfort.
• The Capisco has been tested in real work. In a Mayo Clinic study during operations of around two hours, surgeons rated it one of the two most comfortable of the four chairs tested.
• There are trade-offs. Some studies found the neck pushed further forward, more hip and buttock discomfort, or no difference at all.
• None of this shows saddle chairs treat back pain. That has simply not been demonstrated.

What kind of evidence is this?

Not all research carries the same weight, so it helps to know what sort of study each finding comes from, strongest first:

• Systematic and scoping reviews pool the best available studies. This is the strongest evidence overall, but for saddle seats it is still based on relatively few studies, mostly in dentistry [1, 2, 6, 10, 22].
• Controlled studies compare seats under set conditions. They are useful evidence about posture, muscle activity and comfort, usually over short periods [5, 11–15, 18–21, 23–25].
• Workplace studies ask people how they feel after real work. There is one positive discomfort finding, in microsurgeons [3].
• Capisco-specific research: one small controlled Mayo Clinic study [4].
• Small pilot studies give interesting signals, but not proof [16, 17, 26].
• Workplace guidance from safety bodies and universities shows how saddle seating is used, not whether it treats health conditions [G1–G4].

Posture is not the same as back pain

This is the one distinction worth keeping in mind through the rest of the article.

The saddle-seat studies measure things like the curve of your lower back, the angle of your hips, how risky a working posture looks, which muscles are working, and how comfortable people feel during or after work. Those are real, measurable effects. But they are not the same as treating back pain, and the research has not shown that link.

Current research does not establish that saddle chairs reduce or treat back pain. A systematic review of chairs that reduce how far your hips bend, which includes saddle-style and forward-sloping seats, found no evidence that they reduce low back pain or back discomfort, although people in several studies preferred them [10]. And in one office-chair study, settings that gave a more neutral lower-back posture still did not stop sitting-related pain developing in 39% of participants [23]. Better posture and less pain are simply not the same thing.

With that said, the posture findings are where the research gets interesting.

The strongest evidence: dental students and ergonomic risk

The most rigorous saddle-seat research is a 2018 systematic review and meta-analysis by Gouvêa and colleagues [1]. The researchers searched through more than 3,000 records and found two trials good enough to combine. Both studied second-year dental students learning to work on training mannequins, 150 students in total. Posture was scored with RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment), a standard observational tool that rates how risky a working posture is on a scale where higher means riskier.

The first of the two trials was at the University of Birmingham [24]. Sixty dental students were randomly given either a Bambach saddle seat or a conventional chair, trained to use it, and photographed at work ten weeks later. The saddle-seat group had much lower ergonomic-risk scores: on average about 2.7 to 2.8, against about 5 for the conventional-chair group. That is a large difference in posture score, and the researchers described the saddle-seat group's working posture as acceptable. The second trial, in India, found the same direction of result with a Salli saddle chair; it also tested magnifying loupes separately [25].

Across the two trials, students using saddle seats had substantially lower ergonomic-risk scores than those using conventional seats, by about three points on average. The review authors rated the evidence as moderate. The two studies differed considerably in how large the improvement was, so the result is encouraging rather than definitive. And these trials measured working posture during training, not pain, in students rather than experienced dentists or office workers.

A separate 2018 review found saddle seats were associated with improved working postures, from a limited number of studies, none of which measured pain [2]. And a 2022 scoping review of dental ergonomics, which also drew on expert-opinion articles, concluded that current evidence supports saddle chairs as one component of preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders in dental professionals, alongside magnification and wider-handled instruments, while calling for more robust, high-quality intervention studies [6].

What saddle seating does to your spine

Importantly, this is not just questionnaires. Researchers have measured spinal position directly, using photographic and sensor-based methods.

• More lower-back curve. In a study of 60 healthy adults, sitting on a saddle chair produced a deeper inward curve in the lower back and less forward lean of the trunk than an adjustable office chair with a backrest [12]. Older laboratory studies found the same basic mechanism when the seat slopes or the thighs angle down [13, 14]. In one, about two-thirds of the adjustment happened at the hips and one-third in the spine [14].
• A more open hip angle. In a dental laboratory study, people on a saddle stool sat with a hip angle of about 125 degrees, compared with 90 degrees on a standard stool [5]. In a four-person office study, a Bambach saddle seat gave a larger trunk-to-thigh angle for every participant [17].
• Pelvis and lower back. In a 14-person typing study comparing four chairs, the researchers judged the saddle chair to give the best position of the pelvis and lower back, although the comparison office chair had its backrest removed and the statistically significant lower-back differences were between other chairs. They also found that no chair produced an ideal posture across every part of the spine [16].
• Closer to standing. In 21 violin and viola players, a saddle stool gave spinal angles closest to those of standing [18].

An early Australian study, from 1989, also found the lower-back curve was greater on a saddle work seat than on a conventional seat in every participant [26]. It is worth knowing that, according to a later peer-reviewed paper, this research was carried out by the developer of the saddle seat [17], and that its authors went further than their data in concluding the seat reduces the risk of back injury. We include it for history, not as strong evidence.

But more curve is not automatically better. In the 60-person study, the saddle chair also pushed the neck further forward, which the researchers regarded as a negative effect [12]. In a dental laboratory study, a saddle stool moved the lower back past neutral into a more arched position, while a different stool with a backrest came closest to neutral [5]. And one study of a forward-sloping seat found no consistent change in trunk or pelvis posture at all [15]. The research shows saddle seats change posture; it does not show that one particular posture is right for everybody.

What studies found about discomfort

The clearest discomfort result comes from a 2019 study of 73 microsurgeons, who spend long periods leaning into an operating microscope [3]. Working on a saddle seat, they reported significantly less discomfort in the neck, shoulders, arms, back, elbows and forearms, and across the body as a whole. It is one study in a demanding, specialised job, measuring short-term discomfort ratings, and the published summary does not make clear whether the seats were compared directly or which saddle seat was used. But it is a positive result.

In the four-person office study, the saddle seat gave less lower-back discomfort than a standard office chair [17]. In a study of 21 people whose back pain is made worse by sitting, lower-back discomfort rose significantly less over an hour of typing on a forward-inclined chair than on a standard office chair, although overall body discomfort did not differ. That chair was not a saddle chair, but it was built on a similar idea [11].

The other side matters too. In the office study, participants had more discomfort in their hips, buttocks and legs on the saddle seat, and discomfort rose over time whichever seat they used [17]. That is one reason we suggest trying a saddle chair before you buy.

What muscle-activity research found

Researchers have also measured which muscles are working, using sensors on the skin. In some studies saddle seats changed which muscles do the work; in others they made no difference. They are not consistently "better" or "worse":

• In the string-player study, a saddle chair with low-back support produced the lowest activity in the lower-back muscles of the five seats tested [18].
• In the dental laboratory study, the back muscles worked harder on a standard stool, and the abdominal muscles worked harder on the saddle stool [5].
• In dental work, a Salli saddle chair made no difference to neck and upper-back muscle activity compared with other stools [20]. Another found greater deviation of the trunk from neutral, and of the neck in some tasks, on a saddle seat during dental training [21].
• A kneeling (Balans) chair, a close relative of the saddle chair, produced higher neck and lower-back muscle activity than an office chair and was rated less comfortable [19].
• Across studies of chairs that open the hip angle, a systematic review found no consistent change in trunk muscle activity [10].

What has actually been studied about the HÅG Capisco?

Most saddle research uses simple saddle stools. The Capisco is a specific design, and one controlled study has tested it by name [4]. That study is particularly interesting because it was done during real operations, not in a laboratory.

The Mayo Clinic surgical study

In 2016, a Mayo Clinic team compared four chairs used by gynaecological surgeons during vaginal operations: a plain round stool, a round stool with a backrest, a saddle chair with a backrest, and a Capisco [4]. Four surgeons each used every chair in a randomised, balanced order across 48 operations lasting around two hours on average. The researchers measured comfort, body discomfort before and after surgery, posture (with body-worn motion sensors) and how pressure was spread across the seat.

• Comfort: the Capisco and the round stool with a backrest were rated significantly more comfortable than the plain round stool and the other saddle chair. Chairs that spread pressure more evenly across the seat were rated more comfortable.
• A different saddle chair did badly. The other saddle chair was among the least comfortable in the study, a clear reminder that "saddle chair" is not one thing.
• Posture and discomfort did not change. Chair type did not change the surgeons' measured posture, which showed moderate to high risk for the neck and shoulders whatever they sat on. Their change in body discomfort from before to after surgery did not differ between chairs.

So, in real two-hour operations, the Capisco performed well for comfort, but it did not change measured posture or post-operative discomfort compared with the other chairs. It was also a small study: four surgeons doing one very specific task.

How the Capisco differs from a simple saddle stool

According to Flokk's own documentation, the Capisco 8106 differs from a basic saddle stool in several ways:

• A backrest you can lean into, or rest your arms on when you sit the other way round.
• Several sitting directions: forwards, backwards and sideways.
• Three gas lift heights. Flokk's 2025 factsheet lists 150, 200 and 265 mm gas lifts for the 8106, giving seat heights of 40–54 cm, 46–64 cm and 55–81 cm respectively, measured under load.
• Foot support at height. The HÅG FootRing fits the 200 and 265 mm lifts only, and the HÅG StepUp adds two extra foot levels.
• Adjustability. Seat depth adjusts through 37–47 cm and backrest height through 44–50 cm, and the seat tilts forwards and backwards.

Findings about simple saddle stools are useful background, but they are not findings about the Capisco.

Where the evidence is weaker

• There are not many studies. The meta-analysis found only two eligible trials [1]. A Cochrane review of ergonomic interventions for dental practitioners found only two randomised trials in total, and neither tested a saddle seat [22]. Recent dental reviews also point to a lack of high-quality intervention studies, and one found that no included study checked whether posture improvements lasted [6, 7]. Two 2025 reviews reported benefits from dental ergonomics in general, but did not separate out saddle seating [8, 9].
• The studies involve particular jobs. Most positive findings come from dentists, surgeons and musicians leaning over a task, not people typing at a desk.
• Legs work harder on some sloping seats. One study found a forward-sloping seat increased leg-muscle activity without consistently improving trunk posture [15].
• Neck findings are mixed. One study found the neck pushed further forward on a saddle chair [12], two dental studies found no neck benefit or more deviation [20, 21], and the 14-person typing study found a good neck position on the saddle chair [16].
• Comfort depends on the design and the person. One saddle chair was among the least comfortable in the Capisco study [4], and musicians rated an ordinary orchestra chair, sat on however they liked, highest for comfort, though not by a significant margin [18].
• No pain benefit has been shown. The hip-angle review found no evidence of reduced low back pain [10], and the authors of the kneeling-chair study said their results did not support claims that it would reduce back pain [19].

Why variation may matter more than one "perfect" posture

One thread runs through this research: no seat produced an ideal posture everywhere. The chair that suited the lower back could push the neck forward [12]. The 14-person study concluded that chair choice should be based on individual need [16]. And a more neutral lower-back posture did not stop sitting-related pain [23]. Canada's national occupational health and safety centre makes the same general point: there is no single chair that can be recommended for everyone [G1].

That is why we do not think of the Capisco as a way to hold a "correct" posture all day. Its practical strength is that it gives you more ways to sit and work: perched upright for close work, turned sideways, leaning back against the backrest, or with the seat raised high enough to move easily between sitting and standing. To be clear, no study has tested whether changing position more often reduces back pain. This is our practical reading of the evidence, not a research finding.

How saddle seating is used in workplaces

Workplace guidance is not clinical evidence, but it shows how saddle seating is used in practice:

• The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety lists saddle chairs as an alternative chair. It notes that they can encourage an upright, active posture, allow a semi-standing stance and suit work at a higher stance than normal sitting. It also warns of pressure on the genital area where the seat is raised, and static load on the back that can speed up fatigue [G1].
• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory lists the HÅG Capisco in its on-site ergonomics purchasing catalogue, as a perch chair and a high stool with a foot ring, for forward-leaning "active sitting" at computers, lab benches and high counters [G2].
• The University of Bergen in Norway lists the Håg Capisco among the common chair types used at the university. For saddle seats, its set-up advice is a seat height giving "about 125°-135° flexion in the knee and hip joints" [G3].
• The University of Virginia includes a saddle seat from another manufacturer among its lab chairs and stools, and advises staff to talk to its ergonomics team before buying [G4].

Is a saddle chair right for you?

Neither design is better for everyone. The studies that favour saddle seats involve people leaning forward over a task. If you mostly work back from a keyboard, lean back to read, or want a chair that holds you still with minimal effort, a well-adjusted conventional task chair may suit you better. Three questions usually decide it:

• What height do you work at? Saddle chairs come into their own at raised desks, benches, counters and sit-stand desks set between sitting and standing height.
• Do you lean forward or back? Forward-leaning, task-focused work suits a saddle. If you spend much of the day reclined, a conventional chair with a good recline is the more natural fit.
• Do you like to move? Some people enjoy changing position all day; others find constant balancing tiring. The only reliable way to find out is to sit in both.

Who might like one

• People who work at raised desks, benches, counters or part-raised sit-stand desks.
• Dental, clinical, laboratory, studio and tattoo work, where you lean over a person or task at a height you did not choose.
• People who prefer to change position frequently.

We do not recommend saddle chairs for particular medical conditions; if you have one, start with your clinician.

Who may not

• People who want to lean back and rest. A saddle keeps you upright and forward. The Capisco's backrest helps, but it is not a reclining chair.
• People who find the seat shape uncomfortable. Comfort differs between saddle designs [4], and a saddle seat increased hip and buttock discomfort in one study [17]. Try before you buy if you can.
• People with neck or shoulder complaints. The neck findings are mixed, so screen and desk position still matter.
• Anyone who finds balancing tiring. Sitting astride asks a little more of your balance than a flat seat, and there is no research we can point to on how long adapting takes.
• Some clothing. Sitting astride is awkward in a narrow skirt, though the Capisco can be sat on sideways.
• Limited mobility. If getting on and off a higher, straddled seat is difficult, a conventional chair may be safer and easier.

How to set up a saddle chair

1. Start with your working height. Set the seat so you can reach your work comfortably while perching. On a Capisco this decides which gas lift you need, so measure from the floor to your work surface before ordering.
2. Keep your feet supported on the floor, the base or a footring rather than leaving them dangling.
3. Set the seat depth and backrest. Keep the seat's front edge off the backs of your thighs, and set the backrest where it meets you.
4. Change position. Sit forward for close work, turn sideways, lean back against the backrest, or stand for a while.
5. Give it a fair trial. If it is still uncomfortable after a reasonable period, it may simply not be the right chair for you.

The bottom line

There is real science behind saddle chairs. They generally change how people sit: they open the hip angle and tend to increase the curve of the lower back, while effects on muscle activity are mixed. In the strongest studies, dental students on saddle seats had substantially lower ergonomic-risk scores. Some studies found less discomfort, and surgeons rated the HÅG Capisco among the most comfortable of four chairs during real operations.

The evidence has limits. The studies are fairly small and mostly in specialised jobs, some found trade-offs for the neck, hips and legs, and different saddle designs perform differently. Current research does not establish that saddle chairs reduce or treat back pain.

The strongest practical case for a saddle chair like the Capisco is flexibility: it lets you work higher, perch, turn and change position easily through the day. If that matches how you work, it is well worth trying. If you want to be held still while you lean back, a conventional task chair is likely to suit you better. Either way, the most reliable test is to sit in one, which is what our showroom in Pyrmont is for.

Frequently asked questions

Are saddle chairs good for your back?

Saddle chairs change how you sit. Studies have found they tend to increase the curve of the lower back and give better working posture scores in dental students, and some studies found less discomfort. But current research does not establish that saddle chairs reduce or treat back pain, and a systematic review found no evidence that chairs like them reduce back pain or back discomfort.

What is the strongest evidence for saddle chairs?

A 2018 meta-analysis of two trials in 150 dental students found saddle seats gave substantially lower ergonomic-risk scores than conventional seats, and the authors rated the evidence as moderate. It measured working posture during training tasks, not pain.

Is a saddle chair better than an ordinary office chair?

Not for everyone. Saddle chairs tend to suit work at raised desks, forward-leaning tasks and people who like to change position. A conventional task chair with a good recline usually suits people who work back from the desk or want to sit still.

Has the HÅG Capisco been scientifically studied?

Yes. In a small 2016 Mayo Clinic study during real operations, surgeons rated the Capisco among the most comfortable of four chairs. Chair type did not change their measured posture or their before-and-after discomfort.

Does a saddle chair give you a neutral spine?

Not simply. Saddle seats tend to increase the curve of the lower back, and in one laboratory study a saddle stool moved the lower back past neutral into a more arched position. A different stool with a backrest came closest to neutral.

Is a bigger lower-back curve always better?

No. Studies have also found a more-arched-than-neutral lower back and a more forward neck on saddle seats, and a more neutral posture has not been shown to prevent sitting-related pain.

Can a saddle chair help with back pain?

Current research does not establish that saddle chairs reduce or treat back pain. If you have back pain, speak to a doctor or physiotherapist, and treat any chair as part of your work setup rather than a treatment.

Research referenced

1. Gouvêa GR, Vieira WA, Paranhos LR, Bernardino ÍM, Bulgareli JV, Pereira AC. Assessment of the ergonomic risk from saddle and conventional seats in dentistry: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0208900. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0208900. PubMed 30557311.
2. Plessas A, Bernardes Delgado M. The role of ergonomic saddle seats and magnification loupes in the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders. A systematic review. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 2018;16(4):430–440. doi:10.1111/idh.12327. PubMed 29318741.
3. Labbafinejad Y, Ghasemi MS, Bagherzadeh A, Aazami H, Eslami-Farsani M, Dehghan N. Saddle seat reduces musculoskeletal discomfort in microsurgery surgeons. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2019;25(4):545–550. doi:10.1080/10803548.2017.1389463. PubMed 29034766.
4. Singh R, Carranza Leon DA, Morrow MM, Vos-Draper TL, Mc Gree ME, Weaver AL, Woolley SM, Hallbeck S, Gebhart JB. Effect of chair types on work-related musculoskeletal discomfort during vaginal surgery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016;215(5):648.e1–648.e9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.016. PubMed 27319363.
5. De Bruyne MA, Van Renterghem B, Baird A, Palmans T, Danneels L, Dolphens M. Influence of different stool types on muscle activity and lumbar posture among dentists during a simulated dental screening task. Applied Ergonomics. 2016;56:220–226. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.02.014. PubMed 26975788.
6. Wu J, McCullough M, Panisset MG, Galea MP. Prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among dental professionals: A scoping review. Work. 2022;72(1):91–108. doi:10.3233/WOR-205257. PubMed 35431203.
7. Danylak S, Walsh LJ, Zafar S. Measuring ergonomic interventions and prevention programs for reducing musculoskeletal injury risk in the dental workforce: A systematic review. Journal of Dental Education. 2024;88(2):128–141. doi:10.1002/jdd.13403. PubMed 37990449.
8. Gauthaman J, Ganesan A. Ergonomic interventions in the dental setups and their role in preventing musculoskeletal disorders among dentists: A systematic review. Journal of Lifestyle Medicine. 2025;15(1):18–25. doi:10.15280/jlm.2025.15.1.18. PubMed 40376692.
9. Sandoval-Alarcón S, Bäumle R, Castellucci HI. Impact of ergonomic interventions on musculoskeletal health and work performance in dentists and dental students: a scoping review. Applied Ergonomics. 2025;129:104602. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2025.104602. PubMed 40700983.
10. Curran M, O'Sullivan L, O'Sullivan P, Dankaerts W, O'Sullivan K. Does using a chair backrest or reducing seated hip flexion influence trunk muscle activity and discomfort? A systematic review. Human Factors. 2015;57(7):1115–1148. doi:10.1177/0018720815591905. PubMed 26175544.
11. O'Keeffe M, Dankaerts W, O'Sullivan P, O'Sullivan L, O'Sullivan K. Specific flexion-related low back pain and sitting: comparison of seated discomfort on two different chairs. Ergonomics. 2013;56(4):650–658. doi:10.1080/00140139.2012.762462. PubMed 23438303.
12. Truszczyńska-Baszak A, Drzał-Grabiec J, From D. The impact of saddle chairs on spinal curvatures. Work. 2017;57(4):627–633. doi:10.3233/WOR-172570. PubMed 28777760.
13. Bridger RS, Von Eisenhart-Rothe C, Henneberg M. Effects of seat slope and hip flexion on spinal angles in sitting. Human Factors. 1989;31(6):679–688. doi:10.1177/001872088903100604. PubMed 2635135.
14. Bendix T, Biering-Sørensen F. Posture of the trunk when sitting on forward inclining seats. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 1983;15(4):197–203. PubMed 6648391.
15. Hamaoui A, Hassaïne M, Zanone PG. Sitting on a sloping seat does not reduce the strain sustained by the postural chain. PLoS One. 2015;10(1):e0116353. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116353. PubMed 25587989.
16. Annetts S, Coales P, Colville R, Mistry D, Moles K, Thomas B, van Deursen R. A pilot investigation into the effects of different office chairs on spinal angles. European Spine Journal. 2012;21(Suppl 2):S165–S170. doi:10.1007/s00586-012-2189-z. PubMed 22349969.
17. Gadge K, Innes E. An investigation into the immediate effects on comfort, productivity and posture of the Bambach saddle seat and a standard office chair. Work. 2007;29(3):189–203. PubMed 17942990.
18. Cattarello P, Vinelli S, D'Emanuele S, Gazzoni M, Merletti R. Comparison of chairs based on HDsEMG of back muscles, biomechanical and comfort indices, for violin and viola players: a short-term study. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology. 2018;42:92–103. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2018.06.013. PubMed 30015135.
19. Lander C, Korbon GA, DeGood DE, Rowlingson JC. The Balans chair and its semi-kneeling position: an ergonomic comparison with the conventional sitting position. Spine. 1987;12(3):269–272. doi:10.1097/00007632-198704000-00014. PubMed 2954222.
20. De Bruyne MAA, Danneels L, Braet V, Van De Sijpe E, Vanwijnsberghe M, Verhenne L, Willems T. Do stool types have an influence on cervicothoracic muscle activity and cervicothoracic posture among dentists/dental students? Applied Ergonomics. 2021;97:103519. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103519. PubMed 34186246.
21. Pazos JM, Mota GM, Verri ED, Gomes GGC, Regalo SCH, Garcia PPNS. Effect of different types of dental stools on muscle activity during execution of preclinical procedures. European Journal of Dental Education. 2026;30(1):155–162. doi:10.1111/eje.13102. PubMed 40259773.
22. Mulimani P, Hoe VC, Hayes MJ, Idiculla JJ, Abas AB, Karanth L. Ergonomic interventions for preventing musculoskeletal disorders in dental care practitioners. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018;10:CD011261. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011261.pub2. PubMed 30320459.
23. De Carvalho DE, Callaghan JP. Effect of office chair design features on lumbar spine posture, muscle activity and perceived pain during prolonged sitting. Ergonomics. 2023;66(10):1465–1476. doi:10.1080/00140139.2022.2152113. PubMed 36437777.
24. Gandavadi A, Ramsay JR, Burke FJ. Assessment of dental student posture in two seating conditions using RULA methodology – a pilot study. British Dental Journal. 2007;203(10):601–605. doi:10.1038/bdj.2007.1047. PubMed 18037853.
25. Dable RA, Wasnik PB, Yeshwante BJ, Musani SI, Patil AK, Nagmode SN. Postural assessment of students evaluating the need of ergonomic seat and magnification in dentistry. Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. 2014;14(Suppl 1):51–58. doi:10.1007/s13191-014-0364-0. PubMed 26199492.
26. Gale M, Feather S, Jensen S, Coster G. Study of a workseat designed to preserve lumbar lordosis. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal. 1989;36(2):92–99. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.1989.tb01651.x.

Workplace guidance (not clinical evidence):

• [G1] Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. Working in a Sitting Position – Alternative Chairs. OSH Answers. ccohs.ca.
• [G2] Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Chairs, Ergonomics catalogue for on-site purchases. commons.lbl.gov.
• [G3] University of Bergen. Setting up your office workstation, HSE gateway. uib.no.
• [G4] University of Virginia Environmental Health & Safety. Chair Lab. ehs.virginia.edu.

Product information: Flokk, HÅG Capisco product pages (hag.flokk.com and info.flokk.com, "HÅG Capisco at 40"), and Flokk's HÅG Capisco factsheet (2025).