Quantitative trunk muscle electromyography during lifting at different speeds

This study was designed to investigate the effects of trunk motion under lifting conditions described by the Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting (NIOSH, 1981). Eight male volunteers were used as subjects in this study. Three independent variables; lift style, load location and subjective lift velocity, were controlled under sagittally symmetric lifting conditions. Dependent variables consisted of trunk muscle electromyographic (EMG) activity, actual trunk velocity and load acceleration. There was no effect of lift style. However, as the trunk velocity increased, EMG activity increased within the lastissimus dorsi and rectus abdominus muscles but not within the erector spinae muscles. The erector spinae muscles, unlike the other muscles, was also unaffected by load location and load acceleration. These findings suggest ways in which lifting guides should be adjusted to account for the effects of dynamic motion.     

An electromyographic investigation of asymmetric lifting and moving of a load: II. Effects of load lift from knuckle to target shelves

The range of normalized electromyography (EMG) values when lifting and moving a 5.84 kg box was between 0.08 and 0.63. The right iliocostalis and the left erector spinae showed decreased muscle activity with increasing asymmetry. The right erector spinae and the left and the right external obliques showed significant increases in muscle activity at 90° asymmetry. The left and the right iliocostalis, the left erector spinae, and the right external oblique showed significant reductions in muscle activity for the sternum height when compared to the knuckle height. The right erector spinae exhibited a significant increase at reach height when compared to the knuckle height. The muscle activity for the knuckle lift was significantly lower than the floor lift. The average decrease in muscle activity was approximately 68%. Consequently, asymmetric lifting and moving tasks should be performed from a knuckle height to sternum height. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The muscular load on the lower back and shoulders due to lifting at different lifting heights and frequencies

The aim of the study was to investigate the muscular load on the lower back and shoulders and the circulatory load on employees at a post center during repetitive lifting of mail transport boxes. A mock-up was designed in the laboratory, a total of nine combinations of lifting height and frequency were studied. Surface EMG was recorded bisymmetrically from m. erector spinae (L3-level) and m. trapezius. The circulatory load was evaluated by measuring the heart rate. The results show a trade off between the low back and shoulders. The maximum load on the low back occurred at the low lifting height (36.3 and 54.4 cm) whereas the maximum load on the shoulders occurred at the high lifting height (144.9 and 163.0 cm).     

The psychophysical lifting capacities of Chinese subjects

The psychophysical lifting capacity (MAWL) of twelve subjects was determined in this study. The subjects were all young Chinese males who performed lifting tasks in three lifting ranges (floor to knuckle, floor to shoulder, and knuckle to shoulder) and four lifting frequencies (one-time maximum, 1 lift/min, 4 lifts/min, and 6 lifts/min). The oxygen uptake (1/min) and heart rate (beats/min) were recorded while subjects were lifting. Upon completion of each lifting task, the subjects were required to rate their perceived exertion levels. The statistical analyses results indicated the following. Chinese subjects have smaller body size and MAWLs compared with past studies using the US population. The MAWLs decreased with an increase in lifting frequencies. The decrements of MAWL due to lifting frequencies were in agreement with the results of past studies. However, there were larger decreases due to lifting ranges. The MAWLs of the floor to knuckle height lift were the largest, followed by the MAWLs of the floor to shoulder height lift, and the MAWLs of the knuckle to shoulder height lift. The measured physiological responses were considered similar to those obtained in past studies. Subjects' perceived stress levels increased with the lifting frequency and the upper extremities received the most stress for the total range of lifting tasks. The comparisons of the Chinese MAWLs with the NIOSH lifting guidelines for limits (AL and MPL) indicated that the vertical discounting factor in the guidelines should be modified before the NIOSH limits can be applied to non-Western populations.     

基于柔性气压驱动器的可穿戴式腰部助力机器人研究

针对老龄化社会对于康复和看护助力搬运的需要,提出了用气压驱动器实现轻量、柔性助力、穿戴舒适的可穿戴式腰部助力机器人.机器人采用无外骨骼的结构设计,可以给护理人员在提升重物和静态保持作业时输出腰部所需助力,降低下腰痛（Low back pain,LBP）致病风险.通过对重物搬运作业中穿戴者竖脊肌表面肌电信号（Surface electromyography,sEMG）评估、基于测力平台最大搬举重量测试、静态弯腰负重作业下人体重心（Center of gravity,COG）移动轨迹等相关实验,验证了助力有效性.     

The distance between the load and the body with three bi-manual lifting techniques

Studies were made of two different techniques of bi-manual lifting with bent legs (A and B) and a technique of lifting with the back bent and the Knees almost extended (C). With technique A, the trunk was almost vertical, while with B it was erect and more forward inclined and the heel of the front foot kept in contact with the support. Two healthy subject samples (n = 18 and n = 16 respectively) were studied, both employing a force platform; with the second sample the back muscles were also evaluated by electromyography. The distance Delta L between the lines of gravity of the body and the load at the start of the lifts was shortest with technique A and longest with C. This was true whether the position of the feet was chosen spontaneously or was identical for all three techniques. The distance of the load from the body during the lifting movement was directly related to the distance at the start of the lift: the further away the load was at initiation of the lift, the further away it remained throughout the rest of the lift. A request to lift as close to the load as possible had a positive effect in shortening Delta L , but the amount of previously received instruction in lifting technique did not correlate with the spontaneously chosen Delta L.     

Effect of lifting belts on trunk muscle activation during a suddenly applied load

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health suggests there is insufficient biomechanical or epidemiological evidence to recommend the use of back belts in industry. From a biomechanical perspective, previous work suggests that lifting belts stiffen the torso, particularly in the frontal and transverse planes. To determine whether lifting belts stiffen the torso and alter the trunk muscle response during a sudden loading event, we tested the hypotheses that (a) lifting belts alter peak muscle activity recorded with electromyography (EMG) during sudden loading and (b) lifting belts have a larger impact on trunk muscle response when sudden loads are applied asymmetric to the torso's midsagittal plane. A sudden load was delivered to 10 men and 10 women without history of low back disorder via a cable attached to a thoracic harness; motion was restricted to the lumbar spine. Results indicate that gender was not a significant factor in this study. The lifting belt reduced the peak normalized EMG of the erector spinae muscles on average by 3% during asymmetric loading, though peak normalized EMG was increased by 2% during symmetric loading. Lifting belts have been shown to slightly reduce peak erector spinae activity during asymmetric sudden loading events in a constrained paradigm; however, the effects of lifting belts are too small to provide effective protection of workers. Actual or potential applications include the assessment of lifting belts as protective devices in workers based on the effects of lifting belts on the trunk muscle activity.     

An investigation of perceived exertion via whole body exertion and direct muscle force indicators during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift

The objective of this study was to identify the perceived exertion mechanisms (direct muscle force and whole body exertion) associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL). Fifteen males lifted a box of unknown weight at a rate of 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as the predicted muscle forces and heart rate were measured during the lifting exertion, as well as the predicted spinal loading in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques were used to identify variables that were associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that the force in the left erector spinae, right internal oblique, and left latissimus dorsi muscles as well as heart rate were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. It appears that a combination of local factors (muscle force) and whole body exertion factors (heart rate) provide the feedback for the perceived exertion when decreasing the weight. The up-change model indicated that the forces of the right erector spinae, left internal oblique, and the right latissimus dorsi muscles were associated with the decision to increase the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, local factors provide feedback during the decision to increase the weight when starting from light weights. Collectively, these findings indicate that psychophysically determined weight limits may be more sensitive to muscular strain rather than spinal loading.     

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.     

An investigation of perceived exertion via whole body exertion and direct muscle force indicators during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift

The objective of this study was to identify the perceived exertion mechanisms (direct muscle force and whole body exertion) associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL). Fifteen males lifted a box of unknown weight at a rate of 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as the predicted muscle forces and heart rate were measured during the lifting exertion, as well as the predicted spinal loading in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques were used to identify variables that were associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that the force in the left erector spinae, right internal oblique, and left latissimus dorsi muscles as well as heart rate were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. It appears that a combination of local factors (muscle force) and whole body exertion factors (heart rate) provide the feedback for the perceived exertion when decreasing the weight. The up-change model indicated that the forces of the right erector spinae, left internal oblique, and the right latissimus dorsi muscles were associated with the decision to increase the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, local factors provide feedback during the decision to increase the weight when starting from light weights. Collectively, these findings indicate that psychophysically determined weight limits may be more sensitive to muscular strain rather than spinal loading.     

A back and lift test

In addition to the standard medical examination, a back and lift test has been introduced in the hiring of new employees. 100 men have been tested to date. Only people with no history of back trouble were tested. Body height and weight were measured and the isometric capacity of the back extensors and the strength of abdominal musculature were measured with a Darcus dynamometer. A series of lifts with gradually increasing weight were performed in order to find the subject's 'acceptable weight'. The correlation coefficients for these different test variables was consistently poor, and thus it is not possible to predict a person's true lifting capacity from knowledge of muscle strength, height and body weight. The subjects stood upon a force plate during the lifts, which recorded the vertical and horizontal forces, and the force of inertia exerted by the subject during the lift could be calculated. The activity in the back extensors, rectus abdominis and external oblique muscle was recorded. The flexibility of the lumbar spine was calculated.     

The effects of release height on center of pressure and trunk muscle response following sudden release of stoop lifting tasks

Background and objectives: Sudden release of load during lifting threatens postural stability and is countered by trunk muscle response, which can generate high loads on the spine, and may be a cause of tissue injury. The postural threat following sudden release and the consequent muscular response are likely to depend on the posture at the time of release. This study investigates the effects of sudden release of load at two release heights of one- and three-quarters of the knee to shoulder distance during stoop lifting.

Methods: Ten normal southern Chinese male volunteers were subject to sudden release of 20, 40, 60 and 80 N loads during stoop lifting trials. The release was randomly selected to be on the third, fourth or fifth cycle of a trial and was triggered at heights of one- and three-quarters of the total knee to shoulder lifting distance. The subjects stood on a force platform to allow the postural disturbance to be recorded by monitoring the center of pressure (COP), and electromyographic (EMG) data were collected from the rectus abdominus, internal oblique, external oblique, erector spinae and latissimus dorsi muscle groups.

Results: The COP excursion moved closer to the posterior limit of stability with increasing release load, and this effect was significantly more marked for release from the lower of the two heights. The minimum posterior COP separation from the posterior limit of stability was significantly less for the lower release height at all loads (p<0.001 in all cases). EMG data showed that the agonist–antagonist co-contraction durations were higher for the lower release height, and unlike sudden release from the higher level, showed a significant increase with increasing load.

Conclusions: Sudden release at lower release height during stoop lifting results in significantly greater postural disturbance and spinal loading. The mean load predicted to result in fall or stumble at the lower release height (133 N) is significantly less than that predicted at the higher of the two release heights (245 N). A more marked effect of release load is also seen in the postural disturbance and trunk muscle co-contraction time for the lower release height, and particular care should therefore be taken when handling potentially unstable loads under these conditions. If the security of the load cannot be guaranteed, storage at a higher level may reduce the risk of injury due to sudden release of the load.     

Effect of an on-body ergonomic aid on oxygen consumption during a repetitive lifting task

The purpose of this study was to determine if an on-body personal lift assistive device (PLAD)¹ affected oxygen consumption during a continuous lifting task and to investigate if any effect could be explained by differences in muscle activity or lifting technique. The PLAD, worn like a back-pack, contains a spring-cable mechanism that assists the back musculature during lifting, lowering, and forward bending tasks. Males (n = 15) lifted and lowered a box loaded to 10% of their maximum back strength at 6 times/minute for 15-minutes using a free-style technique under two conditions: wearing and not wearing the PLAD. Oxygen consumption was collected continuously for the first condition; then the participants rested until their heart rates returned to resting levels before repeating the protocol for the second condition. Knee flexion was monitored using Liberty sensors at the hip, knee, and ankle. EMG of the thoracic and lumbar erector spinae (TES, LES), biceps femoris, rectus femoris and gluteus maximus were gathered using a Bortec AMT-8 channel system. VO2 measures were averaged across the duration (15 min) for each condition. Results showed no differences between oxygen consumption during the PLAD and no PLAD conditions. When wearing the PLAD, the TES demonstrated an 8.4% EMG reduction when lowering the box while the biceps femoris showed a 14% reduction while lifting the box. Knee angles, used as a proxy for stoop or squat lifts, were highly variable for both conditions. In conclusion, the PLAD had no effect on oxygen consumption and, therefore, neither workers nor employers should increase the tasks demands when wearing this ergonomic aid.     

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.     

Task rotation effects on upper extremity and back muscle activity

Job rotation is an intuitive approach to distributing work to minimize muscular fatigue. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate rotation between lifting and gripping on muscle activity and effort. Ten male participants performed all 4 combinations of two 15 min tasks in 30 min trials split between separate days to prevent fatigue. The tasks of lifting a 12 kg box and gripping at 20% of maximum were performed 6 times per minute (5 s work: 5 s rest). Muscle activity (percentiles, gaps) and perceived effort were significantly affected by the task combinations. The forearm and upper erector spinae muscles did not benefit as greatly from rotating between lifting and gripping tasks as the lower erector spinae, deltoid or trapezius. In addition to gross task differences, overlaps in muscle activity between “low back” and “upper extremity” tasks must be considered when creating effective job rotation schemes.     

The effect of stance width on trunk kinematics and trunk kinetics during sagitally symmetric lifting

Lifting technique can have a significant impact on spine loading during lifting. The sports biomechanics literature has documented changes in trunk and lower extremity kinematics and muscle coactivation patterns as a function of stance width during high force dead lift and squat exercises. The focus of the current study was to explore whether these lifting stance width effects might translate into the occupational setting under more moderate load level conditions. Twelve subjects performed repetitions of a sagittally symmetric lifting and lowering task (10 kg load) under three stance width conditions: narrow (feet together), moderate (feet shoulder width) and wide (feet 150% of shoulder width). As they performed these exertions, trunk kinematics were captured using the lumbar motion monitor while the activity of the trunk muscles (erector spinae, rectus abdominis) and lower extremity muscles (gluteus maximus, vastus lateralis and vastus medialis) were evaluated using normalized electromyography. The results showed that both the range of motion and peak acceleration in the sagittal plane were significantly affected by the stance width. The muscle activation levels, however, were not significantly affected by the stance width. These results collectively would indicate that the stance width effects seen in power lifting activities do not translate well into the occupational environment where more moderate loads are typically lifted.

Relevance to industry

Exploring alternative lifting strategies may provide an opportunity to reduce the incidence of low back disorders. Lifting stance width is one variable that has not been explored in the ergonomics literature.     

Effect of wearing jeans on the back muscle flexion-relaxation phenomenon

The flexion–relaxation phenomenon (FRP) in back muscles is related to the lower back load. Although the FRP has been widely discussed, the effect of wearing jeans—a common attire in workplaces—on the FRP is unexplored. This study recruited 20 male participants with high and low flexibilities (10 each) and measured the related muscle activity and lumbopelvic movement at five trunk flexion angles (0°–90°) when wearing two types of bottom wears (swim trunks and fit jeans). Results revealed that the bottom wear type and trunk angle significantly affected all responses, whereas flexibility affected only erector spinae and hamstring activities. Participants with high flexibility and wearing swim trunks exhibited greater erector spinae activity than did those with low flexibility and wearing jeans. Thus, those who have low flexibility or are wearing jeans are likely to experience more activity reductions in erector spinae. However, the result with hamstring activity was the opposite. Wearing jeans limited participants’ pelvic rotation, forcing them to bend their lumbar spine further to complete trunk flexion, thus reducing erector spinae activity. A looser attire should be chosen to avoid constraining the pelvic rotation when work involves a deep trunk flexion.Relevance to industryPeople wearing jeans have limited pelvic movement and decreased erector spinae activity during deep trunk flexion, and this may further strain their interspinous ligaments. Thus, people should not wear fit jeans when in workplaces where their work involves stooping or trunk flexion exceeding 45° to minimize the load on their lower back.     

A psychophysical study of manual lifting in hot environments

A study was conducted to assess the lifting capabilities of acclimatized individuals in hot environments. Six male subjects were selected for the study. The subjects were heat acclimatized for ten days prior to participation in the experiment. A psychophysical experiment was then carried out using three temperature levels (22, 27, and 32°C Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT), three frequencies of lift (0.1, 3 and 6 lifts/min), and one height of lift (floor to knuckle height). The results indicated that the maximum acceptable weights of lift selected by the subjects at 27°C WBGT were not significantly different from the weights selected at 22°C WBGT. On the other hand, the maximum acceptable weights selected at 32°C WBGT were reduced by approximately 13 percent.     

An electromyographic investigation of asymmetric lifting and moving of a load: I. Effects of load lift from floor to target shelves

The range of normalized electromyography (EMG) values when lifting and moving a 5.84 kg box was between 0.12 and 0.77. The right iliocostalis and the right and the left external obliques showed significant increases in muscle activity at 90° of asymmetry. The average percentage increase for the stated muscles was 62.3% when compared to muscle activity at 0°. The left external oblique also responded significantly at 60° of asymmetry when compared to 0°. The knuckle, sternum, and reach heights significantly affected the left iliocostalis and the left and right erector spinae muscles. The average percentage increases in the stated muscles were 74.4% at knuckle height, 126.1% at sternum height, and 143.3% at reach height, when compared to floor level. Significant increases in muscle activity for the right iliocostalis and the right external oblique were registered only at the sternum and at the reach heights. For manual materials handling (MMH), an endeavor should be made to avoid asymmetric lifting and moving at 90° and from the floor level and to the reach height. To minimize the risk of back injury, the MMH task should be performed preferably within an asymmetry of 30° but not exceeding 60° asymmetry. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A biomechanical and ergonomic evaluation of patient transferring tasks: wheelchair to shower chair and shower chair to wheelchair.

A laboratory study was conducted to evaluate five different manual techniques (two-person manual lifting; rocking and pulling the patient using a gait belt with two persons; walking belt with one and two persons) and three different mechanical hoists (Hoyer lift, Trans-Aid and Ambulift) for transferring patients from wheelchair to shower chair and shower chair to wheelchair. Six female nursing students with prior patient transfer experience served both as nurses and as passive patients. Static biomechanical evaluation showed that the mean trunk flexion moments, erector spinae muscle forces and compressive and shear forces at the L5S1 disc for the four pulling methods ranged from 92 to 125 Nm, 1845 to 2507 N, 1973 to 2641 N and 442 to 580 N, respectively, as compared to about 213 Nm, 4260 N, 5050 N and 926 N for two-person manual lifting. Perceived stress ratings for the shoulder, upper back, lower back and whole body were significantly lower for pulling methods than those for lifting the patient (p less than or equal to 0.01). Patients found pulling techniques, except the gait belt, to be more comfortable and secure than the lifting method (p less than or equal to 0.01). However, most of the nurses believed that Medesign and the one-person walking belt would not work on those patients who cannot bear weight and those who are heavy, contracted or combative. A two-person walking belt was the most preferred method. Two out of three hoists (Hoyer lift and Trans-Aid) were perceived by the nurses to be more stressful than one- and two-person walking belts. The patients found these two hoists to be more uncomfortable and less secure than with three of the five manual methods (one- and two-person walking belts and Medesign). Pulling techniques and hoists took significantly longer amounts of time to make the transfer than manually lifting the patient (p less than or equal to 0.01). The two-person walking belt, using a gentle rocking motion to utilize momentum and a pulling technique, and Ambulift are recommended for transferring patients from wheelchair to shower chair and shower chair to wheelchair.