Disturbance and recovery of trunk mechanical and neuromuscular behaviours following prolonged trunk flexion: influences of duration and external load on creep-induced effects

Trunk flexion results in adverse mechanical effects on the spine and is associated with a higher incidence of low back pain. To examine the effects of creep deformation on trunk behaviours, participants were exposed to full trunk flexion in several combinations of exposure duration and external load. Trunk mechanical and neuromuscular behaviours were obtained pre- and post-exposure and during recovery using sudden perturbations. Intrinsic trunk stiffness decreased with increasing flexion duration and in the presence of the external load. Recovery of intrinsic stiffness required more time than the exposure duration and was influenced by exposure duration. Reflexive trunk responses increased immediately following exposure but recovered quickly (～2.5 min). Alterations in reflexive trunk behaviour following creep deformation exposures may not provide adequate compensation to allow for complete recovery of concurrent reductions in intrinsic stiffness, which may increase the risk of injury due to spinal instability.

Statement of relevance: An increased risk of low back injury may result from flexion-induced disturbances to trunk behaviours. Such effects, however, appear to depend on the type of flexion exposure, and have implications for the design of work involving trunk flexion.     

Disturbance and recovery of trunk mechanical and neuromuscular behaviours following prolonged trunk flexion: influences of duration and external load on creep-induced effects

Trunk flexion results in adverse mechanical effects on the spine and is associated with a higher incidence of low back pain. To examine the effects of creep deformation on trunk behaviours, participants were exposed to full trunk flexion in several combinations of exposure duration and external load. Trunk mechanical and neuromuscular behaviours were obtained pre- and post-exposure and during recovery using sudden perturbations. Intrinsic trunk stiffness decreased with increasing flexion duration and in the presence of the external load. Recovery of intrinsic stiffness required more time than the exposure duration and was influenced by exposure duration. Reflexive trunk responses increased immediately following exposure but recovered quickly (～2.5 min). Alterations in reflexive trunk behaviour following creep deformation exposures may not provide adequate compensation to allow for complete recovery of concurrent reductions in intrinsic stiffness, which may increase the risk of injury due to spinal instability. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: An increased risk of low back injury may result from flexion-induced disturbances to trunk behaviours. Such effects, however, appear to depend on the type of flexion exposure, and have implications for the design of work involving trunk flexion.     

Progressive fatigue effects on manual lifting factors

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of progressive fatigue on factors that previously have been associated with increased risk of low back pain in various occupational settings, during a repetitive lifting task where a freestyle lifting technique was used. A laboratory experiment was conducted to evaluate electromyography amplitude, kinematic, and kinetic parameters of repetitive freestyle lifting during a 2‐hour lifting period. Subjective fatigue rating increased over time, indicating that the participant “felt” increasingly fatigued as the experiment progressed. Static composite strength decreased an average of 20% from the beginning to the end of the experiment. Effect of lifting posture (semi‐squat, semi‐stoop, and stoop) was observed on peak trunk flexion angle, trunk flexion angle at initiation of the lift, and knee angle at initiation of the lift indicating that, in freestyle lifting, participants assume quantitatively different lifting techniques. A significant effect of the time–posture interaction was observed on the dynamic leg lift floor to knuckle height strength, indicating that dynamic strength may change over time depending on lifting posture selected. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The effects of horizontal load speed and lifting frequency on lifting technique and biomechanics

Lifting loads that have a horizontal velocity (e.g. lifting from a conveyor) is often seen in industry and it was hypothesised that the inertial characteristics of these loads may influence lifting technique and low back stress. Seventeen male participants were asked to perform lifting tasks under conditions of four horizontal load speeds (0 m/s, 0.7 m/s, 1.3 m/s and 2.4 m/s) and two lifting frequencies (10 and 20 lifts/min) while trunk motions and trunk muscle activation levels were monitored. Results revealed that increasing horizontal load speed from 0 m/s to 2.4 m/s resulted in an increase in peak sagittal angle (73° vs. 81°) but lower levels of peak sagittal plane angular acceleration (480°/s² vs. 4°/s²) and peak transverse plane angular acceleration (200°/s per s vs. 140°/s per s) and a consistent increase in trunk muscle co-activation. Participants used the inertia of the load to reduce the peak dynamics of the lifting motion at a cost of increased trunk flexion and higher muscle activity.

Statement of Relevance: Conveyors are ubiquitous in industry and understanding the effects of horizontal load speed on the lifting motions performed by workers lifting items from these conveyors may provide some insight into low back injury risk posed by these tasks.     

Effect of lifting height and load mass on low back loading

The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of lifting height and mass lifted on the peak low back load in terms of net moments, compression forces and anterior–posterior shear forces. Ten participants had to lift a box using four handle heights. Low back loading was quantified using a dynamic 3-D linked segment model and a detailed electromyographic driven model of the trunk musculature. The effects of lifting height and lifting mass were quantified using a regression technique (GEE) for correlated data. Results indicate that an increase in lifting height and a decrease in lifting mass were related to a decrease in low back load. It is argued that trunk flexion is a major contributor to low back load. For ergonomic interventions it can be advised to prioritise optimisation of the vertical location of the load to be lifted rather than decreasing the mass of the load for handle heights between 32 cm and 155 cm, and for load masses between 7.5 and 15 kg. Lifting height and load mass are important determinants of low back load during manual materials handling. This paper provides the quantitative effect of lifting height and mass lifted, the results of which can be used by ergonomists at the workplace to evaluate interventions regarding lifting height and load mass.     

Effect of foot movement and an elastic lumbar back support on spinal loading during free-dynamic symmetric and asymmetric lifting exertions

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of an elastic lumbar back support on spinal loading and trunk, hip and knee kinematics while allowing subjects to move their feet during lifting exertions. Predicted spinal forces and moments about the L5/S1 intervertebral disc from a three-dimensional EMG-assisted biomechanical model, trunk position, velocities and accelerations, and hip and knee angles were evaluated as a function of wearing an elastic lumbar back support, while lifting two different box weights (13.6 and 22.7 kg) from two different heights (knee and 10 cm above knee height), and from two different asymmetries at the start of the lift (sagittally symmetric and 60°asymmetry). Subjects were allowed to lift using any lifting style they preferred, and were allowed to move their feet during the lifting exertion. Wearing a lumbar back support resulted in no significant differences for any measure of spinal loading as compared with the no-back support condition. However, wearing a lumbar back support resulted in a modest but significant decrease in the maximum sagittal flexion angle (36.5 to 32.7°), as well as reduction in the sagittal trunk extension velocity (47.2 to 40.2°s^-1). Thus, the use of the elastic lumbar back support provided no protective effect regarding spinal loading when individuals were allowed to move their feet during a lifting exertion.     

The effects of a sloped ground surface on trunk kinematics and L5/S1 moment during lifting

There are many work environments that require workers to perform manual materials handling tasks on ground surfaces that are not perfectly flat (e.g. in agriculture, construction, and maritime workplaces). These sloped ground surfaces may have an impact on the lifting strategy/technique employed by the lifter, which may, in turn, alter the biomechanical loading of the spine. Describing the changes in kinematics and kinetics of the torso is the first step in assessing the impact of these changes and is the focus of the current research. Subjects' whole-body motions were recorded as they lifted a 10 kg box while standing on two inclined surfaces (facing an upward slope: 10° and 20°), two declined surfaces (facing a downward slope: ? 10° and ? 20°), and a flat surface (0°) using three lifting techniques (leg lift, back lift and freestyle lift). These data were then used in a two-dimensional, five-segment dynamic biomechanical model (top-down) to evaluate the effect of these slopes on the net moment about the L5/S1 joint. The results of this study showed an interesting interaction effect wherein the net L5/S1 moment was relatively insensitive to changes in slope angle under the back lift condition, but showed a significant effect during the leg lift and freestyle lifting conditions. The results show that under the freestyle lifting condition the peak L5/S1 moment was significantly higher for the inclined surfaces as compared to the flat surfaces (6.8% greater) or declined surfaces (10.0% greater). Subsequent component analysis revealed that both trunk flexion angle and angular trunk acceleration were driving this response. Collectively, the results of this study indicate that ground slope angle does influence the lifting kinematics and kinetics and therefore needs to be considered when evaluating risk of low back injury in these working conditions.     

Age-related biomechanical differences during asymmetric lifting

This study investigated age-related biomechanical differences during asymmetric lifting. Eleven younger and twelve older participants were instructed to lift loads of different weights to an asymmetric destination. The trunk kinematics and low back moments were examined. The results showed that older adults adopted safer lifting strategies compared with younger adults. Specifically, the peak trunk sagittal flexion angle was 32% lower and the peak trunk transverse twisting angle was 22% lower in older adults compared with those in younger adults. It was also found that the average low back moment in the deposit phase was 32% higher in older adults than that in younger adults, most probably due to the age-related increased body weight. Based on these findings and the fact of age-related decreased muscle strengths, physical exercise programs were suggested to be more effective than instructions of safe lifting strategies in LBP risk reduction during asymmetric lifting for older adults. For younger adults, safe lifting strategy instructions might be effective to reduce risks of LBP.     

Fatigue influences the dynamic stability of the torso

Fatigue in the extensor muscles of the torso affects neuromuscular recruitment and control of the spine. The goal of this study was to test whether fatigue influences stability of dynamic torso movements. A controlled laboratory experiment measured the change in the maximum finite-time Lyapunov exponent, λ_max, before and after fatigue of the extensor muscles. Non-linear analyses were used to compute stability from the embedding dimension and Lyapunov exponent recorded during repetitive dynamic trunk flexion tasks. Torso extensor muscles were fatigued to 60% of their unfatigued isometric maximum voluntary exertion force then stability was re-measured. Independent variables included fatigue, task asymmetry and lower-limb constraint. λ_max values increased with fatigue suggesting poorer dynamic stability when fatigued. Embedding dimension declined with fatigue indicating reduced dynamic complexity when fatigued. Fatigue-related changes in spinal stability may contribute to the risk of low-back injury during fatiguing occupational lifting tasks. The findings reported here indicate that one mechanism by which fatigue contributes to low back disorders may be spinal instability. This information may contribute to the development of ergonomic countermeasures to help prevent low back disorders.     

A history of low back pain affects pelvis and trunk mechanics during a sustained lift/lower task

This study compared three-dimensional trunk and pelvis range of motion (ROM) during a sustained asymmetric box lift/lower task between a group with a history of low back pain (HBP, n = 9) and a group with no history of low back pain (NBP, n = 9). Participants lifted an 11-kg box for 10 min at 12 cycles/min from ankle height in front to shelves 45 deg off-centre at waist height. Kinematic data were collected at the beginning (min1), middle (min5) and end of the bout (min9). Two-way analyses of variance were performed for all variables. Pelvis and trunk transverse ROM were similar at min1. By min9, HBP group did not change (31.9 ± 9 deg); however, ROM decreased in NBP group (21.6 ± 6 deg, p < 0.05). Therefore, despite no current pain, the HBP group demonstrated protective lifting mechanics compared to controls. Also discussed are implications for studying lifting paradigms at sub-maximal effort over longer periods of time.

Practitioner summary: Differences between groups over time demonstrate residual consequences of low back pain (LBP) in a manual materials handling scenario. Individuals with a history of LBP (pain free for 6 months) demonstrated more conservative lifting mechanics towards the end of the bout compared to controls with no history of LBP.     

Effect of foot movement and an elastic lumbar back support on spinal loading during free-dynamic symmetric and asymmetric lifting exertions

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of an elastic lumbar back support on spinal loading and trunk, hip and knee kinematics while allowing subjects to move their feet during lifting exertions. Predicted spinal forces and moments about the L5/S1 intervertebral disc from a three-dimensional EMG-assisted biomechanical model, trunk position, velocities and accelerations, and hip and knee angles were evaluated as a function of wearing an elastic lumbar back support, while lifting two different box weights (13.6 and 22.7 kg) from two different heights (knee and 10 cm above knee height), and from two different asymmetries at the start of the lift (sagittally symmetric and 60 degrees asymmetry). Subjects were allowed to lift using any lifting style they preferred, and were allowed to move their feet during the lifting exertion. Wearing a lumbar back support resulted in no significant differences for any measure of spinal loading as compared with the no-back support condition. However, wearing a lumbar back support resulted in a modest but significant decrease in the maximum sagittal flexion angle (36.5 to 32.7 degrees), as well as reduction in the sagittal trunk extension velocity (47.2 to 40.2 degrees s(-1)). Thus, the use of the elastic lumbar back support provided no protective effect regarding spinal loading when individuals were allowed to move their feet during a lifting exertion.     

The changes of lumbar muscle flexion–relaxation response due to laterally slanted ground surfaces

Lifting tasks performed on uneven ground surfaces are common in outdoor industries. Previous studies have demonstrated that lifting tasks performed on laterally slanted ground surfaces influence lumbar muscle activation and trunk kinematics. In this study, the effect of laterally slanted ground surfaces on the lumbar muscle flexion–relaxation responses was investigated. Fourteen participants performed sagittal plane, trunk flexion–extension tasks on three laterally slanted ground surfaces (0° (flat ground), 15° and 30°), while lumbar muscle activities and trunk kinematics were recorded. Results showed that flexion–relaxation occurred up to 6.2° earlier among ipsilateral lumbar muscles with an increase in laterally slanted ground angle; however, the contralateral side was not affected as much. Our findings suggest that uneven ground alters the lumbar tissue load-sharing mechanism and creates unbalanced lumbar muscle activity, which may increase the risk of low back pain with repeated exposure to lifting on variable surfaces.

Practitioner Summary: Uneven ground surfaces are ubiquitous in agriculture, construction, fishing and other outdoor industries. A better understanding of the effects of laterally slanted ground surfaces on the interaction between passive and active lumbar tissues during lifting tasks could provide valuable knowledge in the design of preventive strategies for low back injuries.     

Trunk postural demands of occupational activities of some merchant pregnant women in Benin,West Africa

Strenuous physical work puts expectant mothers at risk of experiencing back pain during the gestational months. Pregnant women in Benin perform physically demanding occupational tasks that include the lifting and carriage of heavy loads on their heads for commercial activities. A large percentage of pregnant subjects (58%) reported having back pain episodes since the start of their pregnancy. However, the mean Oswestry score of the affected participants was relatively low with a mean score of 0.2 (SD: 0.12), on a scale form 0 to 1. An evaluation of the postural demands of the occupational activities of these women revealed that they performed on average 328 trunk flexions at angles exceeding 60°, with 66 of these flexions sustained for more than 4 s, during the average 7.9 h where trunk postures were recorded. They also spent on average 36% of the recording time at trunk flexion angles larger than 20°. These results show that the merchant pregnant women in the Porto-Novo area in Benin are at great risk for developing back disorders during pregnancy.

Practitioner Summary: Results will make a first contribution to the literature by identifying the stressful postures adopted during a typical day. The findings of this study can help in the development of preventative concepts and postural modification techniques to decrease the occurrence of back pain during pregnancy for women in Benin.     

Physiological and biomechanical responses to a prolonged repetitive asymmetric lifting activity

This study investigated the effects of a prolonged repetitive asymmetric lifting task on behavioural adaptations during repetitive lifting activity, measures of tissue oxygenation and spine kinematics. Seventeen volunteers repeatedly lifted a box, normalised to 15% of the participant's maximum lifting strength, at the rate of 10 lifts/min for a period of 60 min. The lifts originated in front of the participants at ankle level and terminated on their left side at waist level. Overall, perceived workload increased during the repetitive lifting task. Erector spinae oxygenation levels, assessed using near-infrared spectroscopy, decreased significantly over time. Behavioural changes observed during the repetitive lifting task included increases in the amount of forward bending, the extension velocity and the lateral bending velocity, and a reduced lateral bending moment on the spine. These changes, with the exception of the reduced lateral bending moment, are associated with increased risk of low back disorder.     

The effects of a sloped ground surface on trunk kinematics and L5/S1 moment during lifting

There are many work environments that require workers to perform manual materials handling tasks on ground surfaces that are not perfectly flat (e.g. in agriculture, construction, and maritime workplaces). These sloped ground surfaces may have an impact on the lifting strategy/technique employed by the lifter, which may, in turn, alter the biomechanical loading of the spine. Describing the changes in kinematics and kinetics of the torso is the first step in assessing the impact of these changes and is the focus of the current research. Subjects' whole-body motions were recorded as they lifted a 10 kg box while standing on two inclined surfaces (facing an upward slope: 10 degrees and 20 degrees), two declined surfaces (facing a downward slope: -10 degrees and -20 degrees), and a flat surface (0 degrees) using three lifting techniques (leg lift, back lift and freestyle lift). These data were then used in a two-dimensional, five-segment dynamic biomechanical model (top-down) to evaluate the effect of these slopes on the net moment about the L5/S1 joint. The results of this study showed an interesting interaction effect wherein the net L5/S1 moment was relatively insensitive to changes in slope angle under the back lift condition, but showed a significant effect during the leg lift and freestyle lifting conditions. The results show that under the freestyle lifting condition the peak L5/S1 moment was significantly higher for the inclined surfaces as compared to the flat surfaces (6.8% greater) or declined surfaces (10.0% greater). Subsequent component analysis revealed that both trunk flexion angle and angular trunk acceleration were driving this response. Collectively, the results of this study indicate that ground slope angle does influence the lifting kinematics and kinetics and therefore needs to be considered when evaluating risk of low back injury in these working conditions.     

Development of Human Posture Simulation Method for Assessing Posture Angles and Spinal Loads

Video‐based posture analysis employing a biomechanical model is gaining a growing popularity for ergonomic assessments. A human posture simulation method of estimating multiple body postural angles and spinal loads from a video record was developed to expedite ergonomic assessments. The method was evaluated by a repeated measures study design with three trunk flexion levels, two lift asymmetry levels, three viewing angles, and three trial repetitions as experimental factors. The study comprised two phases evaluating the accuracy of simulating self‐ and other people's lifting posture via a proxy of a computer‐generated humanoid. The mean values of the accuracy of simulating self‐ and humanoid postures were 12° and 15°, respectively. The repeatability of the method for the same lifting condition was excellent (～2°). The least simulation error was associated with side viewing angle. The estimated back compressive force and moment, calculated by a three‐dimensional biomechanical model, exhibited a range of 5% underestimation. The posture simulation method enables researchers to quantify simultaneously body posture angles and spinal loading variables with accuracy and precision comparable to on‐screen posture‐matching methods.     

Hand-hold location and trunk kinematics during box handling

Trunk kinematics variables have been shown to be related to low back injury risk during lifting tasks and it was hypothesised that changes in hand-hold positions could influence trunk kinematics and thereby risk. Fourteen subjects lifted a 5 or 10 kg box using four different hand placement locations (two symmetric and two asymmetric) while their trunk kinematics (position, velocity and acceleration in the sagittal, coronal and transverse planes) were captured using the lumbar motion monitor (LMM). These kinematics data were then used to calculate the probability of high risk group membership (PHRGM) as defined in the LMM risk assessment model. The results showed significant effects of hand placement on trunk kinematics, resulting in significant changes in the PHRGM variable ranging from a low of 20% in a the symmetric low load condition to a high of 38% under the asymmetric, 10 kg condition.

Statement of Relevance: Manual materials handlers use a variety of hand-hold positions on boxes during lifting. Where a lifter grabs the box can influence the trunk kinematics during the lifting task and these kinematics have been shown to provide some insight into risk of low back injury. This study documents the trunk postures and kinematics as a function of hand-hold position.     

Trunk kinematics of one-handed lifting,and the effects of asymmetry and load weight

Abstract

This study investigated trunk kinematic differences between lifts performed using either one hand (unsupported) or two hands. These effects were studied while beginning the lifts from different asymmetric starting positions and while lifting different load weights. Each subject lifted a box from a lower to an upper platform under one- and two-handed lifting conditions. Subjects wore a lumbar spine electrogoniometer, from which relative motion components were calculated in the trunk's three cardinal planes. Results of this study showed that one-handed lifting resulted in significantly higher ranges of motion in the lateral and transverse planes and greater flexion in the sagittal plane. Back motion characteristics previously found to be associated with low back disorders were all significantly higher for one-handed lifts. The two-handed lift technique, on the other hand, produced overall faster trunk motions in the sagittal plane and equal or larger acceleration and deceleration magnitudes in all planes of motion. Increases in load asymmetry affected trunk kinematics, in that magnitude values for range of motion, velocity and acceleration became much greater with increasingly asymmetric load positions. Increasing the load weight appeared to have less of an effect on trunk kinematics, with increases in position mostly occurring during sagittal and lateral bending. These results suggest that unsupported one-handed lifting loads the spine more than two-handed lifts, due to the added coupling. Applying these results to a previously developed model, one-handed lifting was also found to increase one's risk of suffering a low back disorder.     

The effects of ergonomic interventions on low back moments are attenuated by changes in lifting behaviour

This study investigated the effects of ergonomic interventions involving a reduction of the mass (from 16 to 11 and 6 kg) and an increase in the initial lifting height (from pallet height to 90 cm above the ground) of building blocks in a mock-up of an industrial depalletizing task, investigating lifting behaviour as well as low back moments (calculated using a 3-D linked segment model). Nine experienced construction workers participated in the experiment, in which they removed building blocks from a pallet in the way they normally did during their work. Most of the changes in lifting behaviour that were found would attenuate the effect of the investigated interventions on low back moments. When block mass was reduced from 16 to 6 kg, subjects chose to lift the building block from a 10 (SD 10) cm greater distance from the front edge of the pallet and with a 100 (SD 66) degrees/s² higher trunk angular acceleration. When initial lifting height was increased, subjects chose to shift the building blocks less before actually lifting them, resulting in a 10.7 (SD 10) cm increase in horizontal distance of the building blocks relative to the body at the instant of peak net total moment. Despite these changes in lifting behaviour, the investigated ergonomic interventions still reduced the net total low back moment (by 4.9 (SD 2.0) Nm/kg when block mass was reduced and 53.6 (SD 41.0) Nm when initial lifting height was increased).     

Effect of lifting height and load mass on low back loading

The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of lifting height and mass lifted on the peak low back load in terms of net moments, compression forces and anterior-posterior shear forces. Ten participants had to lift a box using four handle heights. Low back loading was quantified using a dynamic 3-D linked segment model and a detailed electromyographic driven model of the trunk musculature. The effects of lifting height and lifting mass were quantified using a regression technique (GEE) for correlated data. Results indicate that an increase in lifting height and a decrease in lifting mass were related to a decrease in low back load. It is argued that trunk flexion is a major contributor to low back load. For ergonomic interventions it can be advised to prioritise optimisation of the vertical location of the load to be lifted rather than decreasing the mass of the load for handle heights between 32 cm and 155 cm, and for load masses between 7.5 and 15 kg. Lifting height and load mass are important determinants of low back load during manual materials handling. This paper provides the quantitative effect of lifting height and mass lifted, the results of which can be used by ergonomists at the workplace to evaluate interventions regarding lifting height and load mass.