Lifting Activities Assessment Using Lumbosacral Compression and Shear Forces
Source abstract
Abstract
In this study, we have analyzed the behavior of shear and compression forces at the L5-S1 joint during the execution of controlled lifting tasks designed on the basis of the revised NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) lifting equation (RNLE) with an increasing lifting index (LI = 1, LI = 2, and LI = 3). We aim to verify the sensitivity of force indices with regard to risk levels. Twenty subjects performed the tasks, and the kinematic and kinetic data of their movement were acquired by using an optoelectronic motion analysis system and platform, respectively. Lumbosacral forces were calculated using the lower and upper body models, and some indices (i.e., maximum, medium, and range values) were extracted. Our findings confirm that the kinetic-based indices extracted from shear and compression forces at the L5-S1 joint are related to risk conditions, and they could improve the quantitative tools and machine-learning approaches that can also be used in a workspace to assess risk conditions during lifting tasks.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation · Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology · Scoliosis diagnosis and treatment
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Hygiene, INAIL, Via Fontana Candida 1, Monte Porzio Catone, 00078 Rome, Italy
Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Polo Pontino, Via Franco Faggiana 1668, 04100 Latina, Italy
Funding
European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program · INAIL, Bando Ricerche in Collaborazione (BRiC) 2022 program
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. The effects of a passive exoskeleton on muscle activity, discomfort and endurance time in forward bending work10.1016/j.apergo.2015.12.003 ↗
2. A passive exoskeleton reduces peak and mean EMG during symmetric and asymmetric lifting10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.05.003 ↗
3. Flor-Unda, O., Casa, B., Fuentes, M., Solorzano, S., Narvaez-Espinoza, F., and Acosta-Vargas, P. (2023). Exoskeletons: Contribution to Occupational Health and Safety. Bioengineering, 10.10.3390/bioengineering10091039 ↗
4. Waters, T., Putz-Anderson, V., and Garg, A. (2024, February 02). Applications Manual for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation, Available online: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/5434.
5. Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks10.1080/00140139308967940 ↗
6. (2003). Ergonomics—Manual Handling—Part 1: Lifting and Carrying (Standard No. ISO/DIS 11228-1).
7. (2007). Ergonomics—Manual Handling—Part 2: Pushing and Pulling (Standard No. ISO 11228-2).
8. (2007). Ergonomics—Manual Handling—Part 3: Handling of Low Loads at High Frequency (Standard No. ISO/DIS 11228-3).
9. Ranavolo, A., Ajoudani, A., Cherubini, A., Bianchi, M., Fritzsche, L., Iavicoli, S., Sartori, M., Silvetti, A., Vanderborght, B., and Varrecchia, T. (2020). The Sensor-Based Biomechanical Risk Assessment at the Base of the Need for Revising of Standards for Human Ergonomics. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20205750 ↗
10. (2023). Guideline for Introducing and Implementing Real-Time Instrumental-Based Tools for Biomechanical Risk Assessment (Standard No. CWA 17938:2023). Available online: https://www.cencenelec.eu/media/CEN-CENELEC/CWAs/RI/2023/cwa17938_2023.pdf.
11. Scientific basis of ISO standards on biomechanical risk factors10.5271/sjweh.3718 ↗
12. Ranavolo, A., Draicchio, F., Varrecchia, T., Silvetti, A., and Iavicoli, S. (2018). Wearable Monitoring Devices for Biomechanical Risk Assessment at Work: Current Status and Future Challenges—A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 15, Erratum in Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2569.10.3390/ijerph15112569 ↗
13. Surface electromyography for risk assessment in work activities designed using the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”10.1016/j.ergon.2018.06.003 ↗
14. Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”10.2486/indhealth.2017-0075 ↗
15. Lifting activity assessment using surface electromyographic features and neural networks10.1016/j.ergon.2018.02.003 ↗
16. Varrecchia, T., De Marchis, C., Draicchio, F., Schmid, M., Conforto, S., and Alberto, R. (2020). Lifting activity assessment using kinematic features and neural networks. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10061989 ↗
17. Trunk stability in fatiguing frequency-dependent lifting activities10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.03.001 ↗
18. Ranavolo, A., Ajoudani, A., Chini, G., Lorenzini, M., and Varrecchia, T. (2024). Adaptive Lifting Index (aLI) for Real-Time Instrumental Biomechanical Risk Assessment: Concepts, Mathematics, and First Experimental Results. Sensors, 24.10.3390/s24051474 ↗
19. Standardization and Terminology Committee of the International Society of Biomechanics ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion—Part I: Ankle, hip, and spine10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00222-6 ↗
20. International Society of Biomechanics. ISB Recommendation on Definitions of Joint Coordinate Systems of Various Joints for the Reporting of Human Joint Motion. Part II.; Shoulder, Elbow, Wrist and Hand10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.042 ↗
21. Comparison and evaluation of two common methods to measure center of mass displacement in three dimensions during gait10.1016/j.humov.2005.11.001 ↗
22. A method for determination of upper extremity kinematics10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00155-2 ↗
23. A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique10.1016/0167-9457(91)90046-Z ↗
24. Validation of two 3-D segment models to calculate the net reaction forces and moments at the L5/S1 joint in lifting10.1016/0268-0033(95)00043-7 ↗
25. Chernyi, G.G., and Regirer, S.A. (1990). Methods of Determining Mass-Inertial Characteristics of Human Body Segments, Contemporary Problems of Biomechanics.
26. Adjustments to Zatsiorsky-Seluyanov’s segment inertia parameters10.1016/0021-9290(95)00178-6 ↗
27. Understanding individual differences in lifting mechanics: Do some people adopt motor control strategies that minimize biomechanical exposure10.1016/j.humov.2020.102689 ↗
28. A new muscle co-activation index for biomechanical load evaluation in work activities10.1080/00140139.2014.991764 ↗
29. Predictive equations to estimate spinal loads in symmetric lifting tasks10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.08.028 ↗
30. Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies
31. Sex, gender, and pain: A review of recent clinical and experimental findings10.1016/j.jpain.2008.12.001 ↗
32. Sex differences in human fatigability: Mechanisms and insight to physiological responses10.1111/apha.12234 ↗
33. Effect of acute resistance exercise and sex on human patellar tendon structural and regulatory mRNA expression10.1152/japplphysiol.91341.2008 ↗
34. Gender effects on the coordination of subdivisions of the trapezius muscle during a repetitive box-folding task10.1007/s00421-012-2425-6 ↗
35. Sartori, M., Reggiani, M., Farina, D., and Lloyd, D.G. (2012). EMG-Driven Forward-Dynamic Estimation of Muscle Force and Joint Moment about Multiple Degrees of Freedom in the Human Lower Extremity. PLoS ONE, 7.10.1371/journal.pone.0052618 ↗
36. Moya-Esteban, A., van der Kooij, H., and Sartori, M. (2022). Robust estimation of lumbar joint forces in symmetric and asymmetric lifting tasks via large-scale electromyography-driven musculoskeletal models. J. Biomech., 144.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111307 ↗
37. An EMG-driven musculoskeletal model to estimate muscle forces and knee joint moments in vivo10.1016/S0021-9290(03)00010-1 ↗