ARM LIFT STRENGTH IN WORK SPACE

被引:37
作者
KUMAR, S
机构
[1] Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton
关键词
HUMAN PERFORMANCE; LIFTING; PHYSICAL EXERTION;
D O I
10.1016/0003-6870(91)90388-X
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
This study was conducted to determine arm strength values for isometric and isokinetic efforts around the human trunk. Thirty-eight normal young adults (20 male and 18 female) performed a total of 19 tasks. These consisted of one self-selected optimum posture with upright stance and elbows bent at 900, designated as standard posture for isometric test. In addition, isometric testing was done sagittally symmetrical 30-degrees and 60-degrees lateral planes at half-, three-quarters- and full-reach distances at knuckle height. The isokinetic tests were done between knuckle height and shoulder height in postures identical to isometric tests. The sequence of these tasks was randomised. The peak strength in standard posture was invariably lower than the peak strength at half-reach in isometric condition in all three planes for both sexes with the exception of one condition among females (60-degrees lateral plane, half-reach isometric). Peak and average arm lift strengths of males were significantly higher than those of females (p < 0.01) and ranged between 44% and 71%. For both sexes isometric strength was significantly higher than isokinetic strength (p < 0.01 ). The peak and average strengths in the sagittal plane were invariably higher than those of asymmetric postures, with one exception among females. With increasing reach distance the strength declined significantly for all conditions among both genders (p < 0.01). The ANOVA showed that the gender, mode of lifting, postural symmetry and reach of lifting, in addition to affecting the peak and average strength individually (p < 0.01), had significant 2-way and 3-way interactions (p < 0.01). All strength values were inter-correlated (p < 0.01). The regressions predicting peak and average strengths from anthropometric characteristics and sagittal plane strengths accounted for 63% to 89% of all variance and were highly significant (p < 0.01).
引用
收藏
页码:317 / 328
页数:12
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]   A COMPARISON OF DYNAMIC-STRENGTH AND STATIC-STRENGTH MODELS FOR PREDICTION OF LIFTING CAPACITY [J].
AGHAZADEH, F ;
AYOUB, MM .
ERGONOMICS, 1985, 28 (10) :1409-1417
[2]   Disposition of a novel and potent αvβ3 antagonist in animals, and extrapolation to man [J].
Prueksaritanont, T ;
Fernandez-Metzler, C ;
Meng, Y ;
Barrish, A ;
Halczenko, W ;
Rodan, SB ;
Hutchinson, JH ;
Duggan, ME ;
Lint, JH .
XENOBIOTICA, 2004, 34 (01) :103-115
[3]   PROPOSED STANDARD PROCEDURE FOR STATIC MUSCLE STRENGTH TESTING [J].
CALDWELL, LS ;
CHAFFIN, DB ;
DUKESDOB.FN ;
KROEMER, KHE ;
LAUBACH, LL ;
SNOOK, SH ;
WASSERMAN, DE .
AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 1974, 35 (04) :201-206
[4]   ERGONOMICS GUIDE FOR ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN STATIC STRENGTH [J].
CHAFFIN, DB .
AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 1975, 36 (07) :505-511
[5]  
CHAFFIN DB, 1978, J OCCUP ENVIRON MED, V20, P403
[6]  
CHAFFIN DB, 1977, DHEW77163 NIOSH TECH
[7]   THE LIFTEST STRENGTH TEST - AN ACCURATE METHOD OF DYNAMIC STRENGTH ASSESSMENT [J].
DALES, JL ;
MACDONALD, EB ;
ANDERSON, JAD .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 1986, 1 (01) :11-13
[8]  
DAVIS PR, 1980, FORCE LIMITS MANUAL
[9]  
DRURY CG, 1986, 30TH P HUMAN FACTORS, P968
[10]   A COMPARISON OF ISOMETRIC STRENGTH AND DYNAMIC LIFTING CAPABILITY [J].
GARG, A ;
MITAL, A ;
ASFOUR, SS .
ERGONOMICS, 1980, 23 (01) :13-27