The effects of load magnitude and lifting speed on the kinematic data of load and human posture

• Autorzy: Lee T. H.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study examined the effects of load magnitude and lifting speed on the kinematic data of load and human posture in a lifting task. Three load magnitudes (10, 20 and 30 kg) and three lifting speeds (fast, normal and slow) were examined in this study. This study showed that participants shortened the load acceleration period on lifting a lighter load than on lifting a heavier load. For normal and slow lifting speeds, participants moved and lifted the load closer to their body when lifting a heavy load. Participants tended to maintain their postures by using an ankle strategy when in heavier load or faster lifting conditions. The profiles of angle velocity of knee and ankle joints demonstrated the important role of the lower extremities in the acceleration of the load in the initial stage of fast lifting. In addition, participants could not easily control the momentum transmitted to the ankle joint for lifting the heavy load.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

manual lifting; strategy; low back injury

PL

dźwiganie ciężarów; nerwoból okolicy grzbietowej; kręgosłup lędźwiowy

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: Vol. 21, No. 1
• Strony: 55--61
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Lee T. H.

• Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan

Bibliografia

• 1. Martin BI, Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Turner JA, Comstock BA, Hollingworth W, Sullivan SD. Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems. J Am Med Assoc (JAMA). 2008;299:656-664. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.6.656
• 2. Ricci JA, Stewart WF, Chee E, Leotta C, Foley K, Hochberg MC. Back pain exacerbations and lost productive time costs in United States workers. Spine. 2006;31:3052–3060. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000249521.61813.aa
• 3. Lavender SA, Andersson GBJ, Schippleinb OD, Fuentes HJ. The effects of initial lifting height, load magnitude, and lifting speed on the peak dynamic L5/S1 moments. Int J Ind Ergon. 2003;31:51-59. doi: 10.1016/S0169-8141(02)00174-9
• 4. NIOSH. Work practices guide for manual lifting. Cincinnati (OH): US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 1981. (NIOSH Technical Report No. 81-122).
• 5. Waters TR, Putz-Andersson V, Garg A, Fine LJ. Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics. 1994;36:749-776. doi: 10.1080/00140139308967940
• 6. Sanders MS, McCormick EJ. Human factors in engineering and design. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993.
• 7. Frievalds A, Chaffin DB, Garg A, Lee KS. A dynamic biomechanical evaluation of lifting acceptable loads. J Biomech. 1984;17:251-262. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(84)90136-2
• 8. Hall SJ. Effect of attempted lifting speed on forces and torque exerted on the lumbar spine. Med Sci Sport Exer. 1985;17:440-444. doi: 10.1249/00005768-198508000-00006
• 9. McGill SM, Norman RW. Dynamically and statically determined low back moments during lifting. J Biomech. 1985;18:877-885. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(85)90032-6
• 10. Bush-Joseph C, Schipplein OD, Andersson GBJ, Andriacchi TP. Influence of dynamic factors on the lumbar spine moment in lifting. Ergonomics. 1988;31:211-216. doi: 10.1080/00140138808966662
• 11. Schipplein OD, Trafimow JH, Andersson GBJ, Andriacchi TP. Relationship between moments at the L5/S1 level, hip and knee joint when lifting. J Biomech. 1990;23:907-912. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(90)90355-7
• 12. Leskinen TPJ, Stalhammar HR, Rautanen MT. Biomechanically and electromyographically assessed load on the spine in self-paced and force-paced lifting work. Ergonomics. 1992;35:881-888. doi: 10.1080/00140139208967368
• 13. Tsuang YH, Schipplein OD, Trafimow JH, Andersson GBJ. Influence of body segment dynamics on loads at the lumbar spine during lifting. Ergonomics. 1992;35:437-444. doi: 10.1080/00140139208967824
• 14. De Looze MP, Kingma I, Thunnissen W, Van Wijk MJ, Toussaint, H.M. The evaluation of a practical biomechanical model estimating lumbar moments in occupational activities. Ergonomics. 1994;37:1495-1502. doi: 10.1080/00140139408964929
• 15. Bernard TM, Ayoub MM, Lin CJ. Effects of speed of lift on static and inertial moments at the joints. Int J Ind Ergon. 1999;24:39-47. doi: 10.1016/S0169-8141(98)00086-9
• 16. Abdoli-E M, Stevenson JM. The effect of on-body lift assistive device on the lumbar 3D dynamic moments and EMG during asymmetric freestyle lifting. Clin Biomech. 2008;23:372–380. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.10.012
• 17. Faber GS, Kingma I, Bakker AJM, van Dieen JP. Low-back loading in lifting two loads beside the body compared to lifting one load in front of the body. J Biomech. 2009;42:35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.10.013
• 18. Arjmand N, Gagnon D, Plamondon A, Shirazi-Adl A, Lariviere C. Comparison of trunk muscle forces and spinal loads estimated by two biomechanical models. Clin Biomech. 2009;24:533-541. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2009.05.008
• 19. Parkinson RJ, Bezaire M, Callaghan JP. A comparison of low back kinetic estimates obtained through posture matching, rigid link modeling and an EMG-assisted model. Appl Ergon. 2011;42:644-651. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2010.09.012
• 20. Granata K, Marras W. An EMG assisted model of biomechanical trunk loading during free dynamic lifting. J Biomech. 1995;28:1309-1317. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(95)00003-Z
• 21. Adams MA, Dolan P. Time-dependent changes in the lumbar spine's resistance to bending. Clin Biomech. 1996;11:194-200. doi: 10.1016/0268-0033(96)00002-2
• 22. Marras WS, Lavender SA, Leurgans SE, Fathallah FA, Ferguson SA, Allread WG, Rajulu SL. Biomechanical risk factors for occupationally related low back disorders. Ergonomics. 1995;38:377-410. doi: 10.1080/00140139508925111
• 23. Chaffin DB, Andersson GBJ, Martin BJ. Occupational biomechanics. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley; 1999.
• 24. Woods C, Hawkins RD, Maltby S, Hulse M, Thomas A, Hodson A. The football association medical research programme: an audit of injuries in professional football - analysis of hamstring injuries. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38:36–41. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2002.002352
• 25. Gabbe BJ, Finch CF, Bennel KL, Wajswelner H. Risk factors for hamstring injuries in community level Australian football. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:106-110. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.011197
• 26. Grandjean E. Fitting the task to the man. 4th ed. New York: Taylor and Francis;1988.
• 27. Adams MA, Hutton WC. The effect of posture on the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg. 1985;67B:625–629.
• 28. Dolan P, Adams MA, Hutton WC. Commonly adopted postures and their effect on the lumbar spine. Spine. 1988;13:197–201. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198802000-00012
• 29. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor control – theory and practical applications, 1st ed. Baltimore (MD): Williams & Wilkins; 1995.

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.