Trunk muscle activity in different modes of carrying schoolbags

The daily load of carrying schoolbags is influenced by the mode of carriage. Electromyographic (EMG) activity from rectus abdominis and erector spinae was recorded bilaterally in five static conditions: no bag; shoulder bag; backpack; front pack; double pack. Nineteen students carried a load of 15% of their body weight. A double pack, with the load equally distributed in a front and a backpack, showed no significant differences in EMG activity compared with unloaded standing. The activity levels of erector spinae significantly decreased while carrying a backpack and increased with a shoulder bag and a front pack. Rectus abdominis revealed significantly higher EMG levels in the backpack trial. Asymmetrical activity between the right and the left part of the back muscles was clearly observed while carrying a shoulder bag with the weight at the right side of the body. The abdominal muscles revealed a slightly significant asymmetry for the shoulder bag and, surprisingly, also for the backpack. These findings suggest that the physical stresses associated with carrying book bags can be minimized by the design of a double pack. Asymmetry in muscle activity may indicate a failure of trunk stabilization and contribute to the development back pain.     

Load carriage using packs: a review of physiological, biomechanical and medical aspects

This paper reviews the biomedical aspects of transporting loads in packs and offers suggestions for improving load-carriage capability. Locating the load mass as close as possible to the body center of gravity appears to result in the lowest energy cost when carrying a pack. Thus, the double pack (half the load on the front of the body and half the load on the back) has a lower energy cost than the backpack. However, backpacks provide greater versatility in most situations. The energy cost of walking with backpack loads increases progressively with increases in load mass, body mass, walking speed or grade; type of terrain also influences energy cost. Predictive equations have been developed for estimating the energy cost of carrying loads during locomotion but these may not be accurate for prolonged (>2 h) or downhill carriage. Training with loads can result in greater energy efficiency since walking with backpack loads over several weeks decreases energy cost. Load-carriage speed can be increased with physical training that involves regular running and resistance training. Erector spinae electrical activity (EMG) is lower during load carriage than in unloaded walking until loads exceed 30-40 kg, at which point erector spinae EMG activity is higher than during unloaded walking. EMGs of the quadriceps and gastrocnemius, but not the tibialis anterior or hamstrings, increase with load. Framed packs with hip belts reduce the electrical activity of the trapezius muscles, presumably by shifting forces from the shoulders to the hips. Increases in the backpack load mass result in increases in forces exerted on the grounds, amount of knee flexion and the forward inclination of the trunk. Compared to backpacks, double packs produce fewer deviations from normal walking. Common injuries associated with prolonged load carriage include foot blisters, stress fractures, back strains, metatarsalgia (foot pain), rucksack palsy (shoulder traction injury) and knee pain. Closed-cell neoprene insoles and use of an acrylic or nylon sock, combined with a wool sock, reduce blister incidence. A framed pack with a hip belt reduces the incidence of rucksack palsy. Backpack load carriage can be facilitated by lightening loads, optimizing equipment, improving load distribution and by preventive action aimed at reducing the incidence of injury.     

Changes in neck muscle electromyography and forward head posture of children when carrying schoolbags

This study tested the effects of three alternative types of backpack on head posture and neck muscle electromyography (EMG) in children. Four loading conditions were tested: no pack; a backpack; a double pack; a modified double pack (designed with a backpack and a front pack weighing 10% and 5% of body weight, respectively). Dependent variables were neck muscle activity, forward head angle and forward head distance (the perpendicular distance from C7 to a vertical line through the tragus of the ear). Fifteen children were asked to walk at a speed of 0.8 m/s on a treadmill. The EMG activity of upper trapezius, sternocleidomastoid and midcervical paraspinals muscles and the forward head angle and forward head distance were all significantly higher when carrying a backpack than for the other conditions. When carrying a double pack, there was a backward head posture characterised by an increased negative forward head angle, decreased forward head distance, increased sternocleidomastoid EMG signal and decreased midcervical paraspinals EMG signal, compared to carrying no pack. When carrying a modified double pack, the forward head angle and forward head distance decreased when compared to carrying a backpack. These findings indicate that the modified double pack minimises postural deviation.     

Evaluation of the effect of backpack load and position during standing and walking using biomechanical,physiological and subjective measures

Recommendations on backpack loading advice restricting the load to 10% of body weight and carrying the load high on the spine. The effects of increasing load (0%–5%–10%–15% of body weight) and changing the placement of the load on the spine, thoracic vs. lumbar placement, during standing and gait were analysed in 20 college-aged students by studying physiological, biomechanical and subjective data. Significant changes were: (1) increased thorax flexion; (2) reduced activity of M. erector spinae vs. increased activation of abdominals; (3) increased heart rate and Borg scores for the heaviest loads. A trend towards increased spinal flexion, reduced pelvic anteversion and rectus abdominis muscle activity was observed for the lumbar placement. The subjective scores indicate a preference for the lumbar placement. These findings suggest that carrying loads of 10% of body weight and above should be avoided, since these loads induce significant changes in electromyography, kinematics and subjective scores. Conclusions on the benefits of the thoracic placement for backpack loads could not be drawn based on the parameter set studied.     

Evaluation of the effect of backpack load and position during standing and walking using biomechanical, physiological and subjective measures

Recommendations on backpack loading advice restricting the load to 10% of body weight and carrying the load high on the spine. The effects of increasing load (0%-5%-10%-15% of body weight) and changing the placement of the load on the spine, thoracic vs. lumbar placement, during standing and gait were analysed in 20 college-aged students by studying physiological, biomechanical and subjective data. Significant changes were: (1) increased thorax flexion; (2) reduced activity of M. erector spinae vs. increased activation of abdominals; (3) increased heart rate and Borg scores for the heaviest loads. A trend towards increased spinal flexion, reduced pelvic anteversion and rectus abdominis muscle activity was observed for the lumbar placement. The subjective scores indicate a preference for the lumbar placement. These findings suggest that carrying loads of 10% of body weight and above should be avoided, since these loads induce significant changes in electromyography, kinematics and subjective scores. Conclusions on the benefits of the thoracic placement for backpack loads could not be drawn based on the parameter set studied.     

An evaluation of backpack harness systems in non-neutral torso postures

Much of the research on backpack design has been focused on spinal loading/biomechanics while the wearer is in a neutral/upright trunk posture, such as those employed by outdoor enthusiasts and schoolchildren. This research has led to some important harness design improvements that reduce trunk muscle exertions, fatigue and improve overall comfort. There are number of occupations, however, wherein workers wear back-mounted packs/devices (e.g. air tanks) while working in non-neutral trunk postures. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effects of these non-neutral postures on biomechanical loading and then reconsider the backpack system design recommendations. Fifteen participants were asked to support a 18.2 kg load on their back while assuming static forward flexed postures of the torso (15 degrees , 30 degrees , 45 degrees , and 60 degrees of sagittal bend). The mass on the back was attached to the participant through two different harness mechanisms: a basic harness design (as seen on college student backpacks) and a more advanced design containing lateral stiffness rods and a weight-bearing hip belt (as seen on backpacks for hikers). While performing these static, posture maintenance tasks, the activation levels of the bilateral trapezius, erector spinae, and rectus abdominis were collected. Participants also provided subjective ratings of comfort. The results showed that there was a significant interaction between harness type and forward flexion angle for the trapezius and the erector spinae muscles. The normalized EMG for the trapezius muscles showed a 14% and 11% reduction in muscle activity at 15 degrees and 30 degrees , respectively, with the advanced design but these positive effects of the advanced design were not found at the greater flexion angles. Likewise the erector spinae muscles showed a 24% and 14% reduction in muscle activity at 15 degrees and 30 degrees , respectively, with the advanced design harness but these effects of the advanced design were not found at the greater forward flexion angles. The level of forward flexion angle affected the rectus abdominis muscle activity, but neither the harness type main effect nor the interaction of harness type and forward flexion angle was significant. The subjective survey results agreed with the EMG results and showed the advanced design harness was generally more comfortable with respect to the shoulder and low back areas. Collectively, the subjective and objective results show a significant improvement with the advanced harness system but also note an interesting interaction with degree of sagittal flexion, indicating a diminished effectiveness of the design improvements at forward flexed postures. Design criteria for harness systems in these forward flexed postures are discussed.     

The effects of load placement on the EMG activity of the low back muscles during load carrying by men and women

An electromyographic (EMG) study of the lumbar paraspinal muscles during load carrying was undertaken in a group of 24 healthy subjects, 12 male and 12 female. Two different magnitude loads (10% and 20% of the subject's body weight) and four different carrying positions were compared with walking without an external load. Results indicated changes in back muscle activity showing a significant interaction between load magnitude and carrying position. Compared to walking without an external load, lumbar paraspinal EMG activity showed slight decreases when loads were carried in a backpack position or in the hand ipsilateral to the muscle. EMG activity contralateral to the hand carrying the load was significantly increased. Significant increases occurred when loads were carried anterior to the chest with the arms and a significant difference was found between male and female subjects for this carrying position. These findings have implications for the selection of carrying methods.     

A biomechanical analysis of anterior load carriage

Front load carriage is a common occupational task in some industries (e.g. agriculture, construction), but, as compared to lifting tasks, relatively little research has been conducted on the biomechanical loading during these activities. The focus of this study was to explore the low back biomechanics during these activities and, specifically, to examine the effects of load height and walking speed on trunk muscle activity and trunk posture. Eleven male participants participated in two separate front load-carriage experiments. The first experiment called for carrying a barbell (with weight corresponding to 20% of elbow flexion strength) at three heights (knuckle height, elbow height and shoulder height) at a constant horizontal distance from the spine. The second experiment called for participants to carry a bucket of potatoes weighing 14 kg at the same three heights, but with no further restrictions in technique. In both experiments, the participants performed this task while either standing still or walking at a self-selected speed. As they performed these tasks, the activity levels of the right-side muscle of the rectus abdominis, external oblique, biceps brachii, anterior deltoid and three levels (T9, T12 and L3) of the erector spinae were sampled. Mid-sagittal plane trunk posture was also quantified using three magnetic field-based motion sensors at T9, T12 and L3. The results showed a significant effect of both walking speed and load height on trunk posture and trunk muscle activity levels in both the barbell and bucket experiments. In the barbell experiment, the walking trials generated 43% more trunk muscle activity than the standing trials. Trials at shoulder height produced 11% more muscle activity than trials at elbow height in the T9 erector spinae muscles and 71% more muscle activity in the anterior deltoid. In the bucket experiment, trunk muscle activity responded in a similar fashion, but the key result here was the quantification of the natural hyperextension posture of the spine used to balance the bucket of potatoes. These results provide insight into muscle activation patterns in dynamic settings, especially (load) carrying biomechanics, and have implications in industrial settings that require workers to carry loads in front of their bodies.     

A biomechanical analysis of anterior load carriage

Front load carriage is a common occupational task in some industries (e.g. agriculture, construction), but, as compared to lifting tasks, relatively little research has been conducted on the biomechanical loading during these activities. The focus of this study was to explore the low back biomechanics during these activities and, specifically, to examine the effects of load height and walking speed on trunk muscle activity and trunk posture. Eleven male participants participated in two separate front load-carriage experiments. The first experiment called for carrying a barbell (with weight corresponding to 20% of elbow flexion strength) at three heights (knuckle height, elbow height and shoulder height) at a constant horizontal distance from the spine. The second experiment called for participants to carry a bucket of potatoes weighing 14 kg at the same three heights, but with no further restrictions in technique. In both experiments, the participants performed this task while either standing still or walking at a self-selected speed. As they performed these tasks, the activity levels of the right-side muscle of the rectus abdominis, external oblique, biceps brachii, anterior deltoid and three levels (T9, T12 and L3) of the erector spinae were sampled. Mid-sagittal plane trunk posture was also quantified using three magnetic field-based motion sensors at T9, T12 and L3. The results showed a significant effect of both walking speed and load height on trunk posture and trunk muscle activity levels in both the barbell and bucket experiments. In the barbell experiment, the walking trials generated 43% more trunk muscle activity than the standing trials. Trials at shoulder height produced 11% more muscle activity than trials at elbow height in the T9 erector spinae muscles and 71% more muscle activity in the anterior deltoid. In the bucket experiment, trunk muscle activity responded in a similar fashion, but the key result here was the quantification of the natural hyperextension posture of the spine used to balance the bucket of potatoes. These results provide insight into muscle activation patterns in dynamic settings, especially (load) carrying biomechanics, and have implications in industrial settings that require workers to carry loads in front of their bodies.     

A modified backpack design for male school children

The purpose of this paper is to test the suitability of a modified backpack that distributes the carrying loads on the school children's chest and back. Sixty one (7.4 yr ± 0.97), sixty (11.7 yr ± 1.05), fifty eight (15.7 yr ± 1.18) and fifty nine (18.9 yr ± 1.45) school children were participated in the study representing the first, second, third and fourth group, respectively. They carried 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 25% of body weight in both commercial and modified backpacks while walking for 5 min. Main response measures were normalized rectus abdominus and erector spinae muscular activities, exertion ratings and cardiac cost, which is defined as the difference between heart rate of last walking minute and standing heart rate. The stresses on rectus abdominus and erector spinae muscles while wearing commercial backpack were significantly higher than those when participants worn modified backpack. Cardiac costs were significantly less in the case of the modified backpack compared to the commercial backpack case. Also, participants felt more comfortable while wearing the modified backpack compared to wearing commercial backpack. This paper showed that modified backpack was superior to commercial backpack in terms of less muscular activities, less cardiac costs and less exertion ratings. Moreover, the proposed design prevents the students from carrying their loads in one side. This study provides the community with a modified backpack that increases comfort and decreases pain. The student's preference of backpack may change when they use it.     

Biomechanical assessment of lateral stiffness elements in the suspension system of a backpack

The purpose of this study was to examine the change in load distribution characteristics associated with adding lateral stiffness elements (rods) to a rucksack (backpack). A load distribution mannequin was instrumented with two 3D load cells to allow determination of the load applied to the shoulders and upper torso independent of the load applied to the hips and lower trunk. Position and mass of the payload (25 kg) were fixed at the centre of the volume of the rucksack and held constant during all testing. It was hypothesized that lateral rods would provide a force bridge that transfers part of the vertical load of the pack from the upper back and shoulders to the hip belt thereby reducing the vertical load on the torso, and possibly reducing the horizontal reaction force that produces a shear load on the spine. Results showed that these active stiffness elements shifted 14% of the vertical load from the upper torso to the pelvic region with lumbar shear load remaining relatively unchanged for all combinations of shoulder strap and waist belt tension. The lateral rods also provided a mean increase of 12% in the extensor moment at the L3-L4 level, thus reducing some demand on the erector spinae muscles.     

Biomechanical assessment of lateral stiffness elements in the suspension system of a backpack

The purpose of this study was to examine the change in load distribution characteristics associated with adding lateral stiffness elements (rods) to a rucksack (backpack). A load distribution mannequin was instrumented with two 3D load cells to allow determination of the load applied to the shoulders and upper torso independent of the load applied to the hips and lower trunk. Position and mass of the payload (25?kg) were fixed at the centre of the volume of the rucksack and held constant during all testing. It was hypothesized that lateral rods would provide a force bridge that transfers part of the vertical load of the pack from the upper back and shoulders to the hip belt thereby reducing the vertical load on the torso, and possibly reducing the horizontal reaction force that produces a shear load on the spine. Results showed that these active stiffness elements shifted 14% of the vertical load from the upper torso to the pelvic region with lumbar shear load remaining relatively unchanged for all combinations of shoulder strap and waist belt tension. The lateral rods also provided a mean increase of 12% in the extensor moment at the L3?–?L4 level, thus reducing some demand on the erector spinae muscles.     

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.     

Muscle activity during patient transfers: a preliminary study on the influence of lift assists and experience

The purpose of this study was to examine muscle activity patterns during patient handling during manual transfers, and transfers using floor and ceiling lifts. EMG patterns during transfers from bed to wheelchair and wheelchair to bed as well as patient repositioning in novices and experienced participants were examined. Surface EMG was recorded from the upper and lower erector spinae, latissimus dorsi and trapezius muscles bilaterally. Overall, normalized mean and peak muscle activity were lowest using the ceiling lift, increasing with the floor lift, which were lower than manual transfers (novices: all p < 0.01). Experienced patient handlers demonstrated approximately two times greater trapezius and latissimus dorsi activity than novices, combined with lower mean erector spinae activity (p < 0.05, for most tasks). Integrated EMG for all muscles was directly proportional to the transfer time and was lowest during the manual transfer followed by the ceiling lift, with the floor lift being highest. The difference between the muscle activity patterns between the experienced and novice patient handlers may suggest a learned behaviour to protect the spine by distributing load to the shoulder. Further examination of the muscle activation patterns differences between experience levels could improve training techniques to develop better patient handling strategies.     

Effects of natural posture imbalance on posture deviation caused by load carriage

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to explore posture deviation variability caused by load carriages depending on natural posture imbalance to provide information about a carrying habit exaggerating an individual's posture imbalance. All people exhibit some imbalance from the standard anatomical pose which assumes alignment with the frontal and median planes. In this study natural posture imbalance is the starting point for determining posture deviation which is posture imbalance resulting from an activity, carrying an item.MethodsSeventeen female participants, 19–37 years old, were recruited from university staff, faculty members, and students. Participants were each scanned wearing their own underwear (bra and panties) in: (a) the anatomical pose (P1) face forward and feet placed at shoulder width without carrying an item, (b) carrying a backpack (P2), (c) carrying a shoulder bag on the right shoulder (P3R) and the left shoulder (P3L), (d) carrying a bag cross-body with a strap placed on the left shoulder to place the weight at the hip level on the right side (P4R) and the strap and handbag placed in the opposite direction (P4L), and (e) carrying a bag with the right hand (P5R) and the left hand (P5L). The bag weight was approximately 10% of a participant's body weight. Five body angles were obtained in each scanning position (eight positions total) for all participants and statistical analyses were conducted for posture assessment. Three statistical test methods were used: (a) Paired t-test to determine posture changes in each loaded position compared to natural posture in P1. (b) Paired t-test to identify differences of the degree of posture changes between right-side load (R) and left-side load (L) positions to determine a posture deviation tendency with asymmetrical load carriages. (c) Bivariate (Pearson) correlation test to examine how natural posture imbalance and posture deviation co-vary.Results(a) Asymmetrical load positions exhibited greater changes on shoulder and spine posture than a symmetrical load position, exhibiting obvious changes in P3 and P4 rather than P5. (b) The degrees and directions of posture deviation resulting from an asymmetrical load carriage varied depending on those of an individual's natural posture imbalance. When a participant exhibited great posture imbalance in P1, significant differences of posture deviation on the shoulder and spine between R and L positions were observed in P3 and P4. (c) Significant correlations between natural posture imbalance and posture deviation resulting from load carriages were found for most body angles.ConclusionsPeople need to be aware of their natural posture imbalance and try to avoid carrying heavy handbags or any type of carriages making their posture imbalance worse to prevent possible further distortion.Relevance to IndustryAlthough this study used handbags and a backpack as the load carrying devices, the way a person carries a load of any type is relevant in many industries and in the military.     

Muscle activity during patient transfers: a preliminary study on the influence of lift assists and experience

The purpose of this study was to examine muscle activity patterns during patient handling during manual transfers, and transfers using floor and ceiling lifts. EMG patterns during transfers from bed to wheelchair and wheelchair to bed as well as patient repositioning in novices and experienced participants were examined. Surface EMG was recorded from the upper and lower erector spinae, latissimus dorsi and trapezius muscles bilaterally. Overall, normalized mean and peak muscle activity were lowest using the ceiling lift, increasing with the floor lift, which were lower than manual transfers (novices: all p?<?0.01). Experienced patient handlers demonstrated approximately two times greater trapezius and latissimus dorsi activity than novices, combined with lower mean erector spinae activity (p?<?0.05, for most tasks). Integrated EMG for all muscles was directly proportional to the transfer time and was lowest during the manual transfer followed by the ceiling lift, with the floor lift being highest. The difference between the muscle activity patterns between the experienced and novice patient handlers may suggest a learned behaviour to protect the spine by distributing load to the shoulder. Further examination of the muscle activation patterns differences between experience levels could improve training techniques to develop better patient handling strategies.     

Changes in gait kinematics and posture with the use of a front pack

The objective of this study was to determine if posture during gait can be affected by position of the load. It was hypothesized that the front pack would result in postural changes in the gait cycle, compared to a similarly loaded backpack. Thirteen healthy adults, free of any injury, volunteered to participate in this study. Two dimensional video data were collected at 50 Hz using a MacReflex video system. A backpack and a front pack were compared using loads of 10 and 15% of body weight. Markers were placed on the ear, acromion, greater trochanter and lateral joint line of the knee, lateral malleolus and fifth metatarsophalangeal joint. Data were collected while the participants walked at 0.75 stride/s. The data were used to calculate joint angles and displacements during each gait cycle. There was a significant difference noted in angles of the hip flexion, with the backpack condition demonstrating a greater flexion in each stride than either the control or front pack. Both backpack and front pack conditions demonstrated a significant change in neck motion compared to the control condition. The results of the position analysis over time also revealed an increase in the forward head position when participants were wearing the backpack compared to either the control or the front pack condition. It was concluded that the use of a front pack results in a more upright posture in gait, when compared to a backpack carrying the same load.     

Changes in gait kinematics and posture with the use of a front pack

The objective of this study was to determine if posture during gait can be affected by position of the load. It was hypothesized that the front pack would result in postural changes in the gait cycle, compared to a similarly loaded backpack. Thirteen healthy adults, free of any injury, volunteered to participate in this study. Two dimensional video data were collected at 50 Hz using a MacReflex video system. A backpack and a front pack were compared using loads of 10 and 15% of body weight. Markers were placed on the ear, acromion, greater trochanter and lateral joint line of the knee, lateral malleolus and fifth metatarsophalangeal joint. Data were collected while the participants walked at 0.75 stride/s. The data were used to calculate joint angles and displacements during each gait cycle. There was a significant difference noted in angles of the hip flexion, with the backpack condition demonstrating a greater flexion in each stride than either the control or front pack. Both backpack and front pack conditions demonstrated a significant change in neck motion compared to the control condition. The results of the position analysis over time also revealed an increase in the forward head position when participants were wearing the backpack compared to either the control or the front pack condition. It was concluded that the use of a front pack results in a more upright posture in gait, when compared to a backpack carrying the same load.     

Relationship between limb movement speed and associated contraction of the trunk muscles

Rapid shoulder movement is preceded by contraction of the abdominal muscles to prepare the body for the expected disturbance to postural equilibrium and spinal stability provoked by the reactive forces resulting from the movement. The magnitude of the reactive forces is proportional to the inertia of the limb. The aim of the study was to investigate if changes in the reaction time latency of the abdominal muscles was associated with variation in the magnitude of the reactive forces resulting from variation in limb speed. Fifteen participants performed shoulder flexion at three different speeds (fast, natural and slow). The onset of EMG of the abdominal muscles, erector spinae and anterior deltoid (AD) was recorded using a combination of fine-wire and surface electrodes. Mean and peak velocity was recorded for each limb movement speed for five participants. The onset of transversus abdominis (TrA) EMG preceded the onset of AD in only the fast movement condition. No significant difference in reaction time latency was recorded between the fast and natural speed conditions for all muscles. The reaction time of each of the abdominal muscles relative to AD was significantly delayed with the slow movement compared to the other two speeds. The results indicate that the reaction time latency of the trunk muscles is influenced by limb inertia only with limb movement below a threshold velocity.     

Effects of backpack and double pack loads on postural stability

Measurement of postural stability is crucial for identifying predictors of performance, determining the efficacy of physical training and rehabilitation techniques and evaluating and preventing injuries, particularly for heavy load carriage in hikers, mountain search and rescue personnel and soldiers. This study investigated the effect of load distribution on postural stability in an upright stance using backpack and double pack loads under conflicting or impaired somatosensory, visual and vestibular conditions. The sensory organisation tests were conducted on 20 young adults before and after a 10-min level walking exercise. Young adults’ ability to use inputs from somatosensory and visual systems to maintain postural stability was significantly reduced following a 10-min walking exercise with a heavy backpack (30% of body weight), whereas no significant changes were observed for double pack carriage. Thus, the distribution of heavy loads to the front and back provides superior balance control compared with back-only loading.

Practitioner summary: This study investigated the effects of heavy (30% of body weight) load distribution on postural stability after a 10-min walking exercise. Backpack carriage significantly reduced postural stability, whereas there was no significant effect under double pack loads. Distribution of heavy loads on the front-and-back is desirable for superior balance control.