Assessment of the relationship between box weight and trunk kinematics: Does a reduction in box weight necessarily correspond to a decrease in spinal loading?

被引:35
作者
Davis, KG [1 ]
Marras, WS [1 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Inst Ergon, Biodynam Lab, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1518/001872000779656499
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Typically, the simplest and most cost-efficient ergonomic solution to offset the rising casts of low back injuries is to reduce the box weight that is lifted. However, there is limited research on how a worker interacts with the box. In the present study, we quantify the utility of reducing the weight that is lifted - specifically, how changes in the box weight affect trunk kinematics, trunk moments, and ultimately, spinal loads. In the experiment, 15 participants lifted a variety of box weights (from 9.1 to 41.7 kg) from knee height, carried it a distance of 5 feet (1.5 m), and placed it on a shelf at elbow height. For the lower weights, small increases in box weight (3-9 kg) were offset by the trunk dynamics (sagittal velocity), resulting in no difference in spinal loads. At the same time, spinal loads were found to be significantly higher for weights above 25 kg. Thus, when making ergonomic changes (reduction of box weight), it is important to consider how workers will interact with the box. These results indicate that purely weight-based ergonomic controls might not sufficiently reduce the risk of low back disorders. Furthermore, this study provides additional evidence of the utility of using more complex spinal load models (dynamic, multiple muscle models) when evaluating highly dynamic and complex tasks.
引用
收藏
页码:195 / 208
页数:14
相关论文
共 48 条
[11]   An assessment of complex spinal loads during dynamic lifting tasks [J].
Fathallah, FA ;
Marras, WS ;
Parnianpour, M .
SPINE, 1998, 23 (06) :706-716
[12]   QUANTIFICATION OF BACK MOTION DURING ASYMMETRIC LIFTING [J].
FERGUSON, SA ;
MARRAS, WS ;
WATERS, TR .
ERGONOMICS, 1992, 35 (7-8) :845-859
[13]   Variation in spinal load and trunk dynamics during repeated lifting exertions [J].
Granata, KP ;
Marras, WS ;
Davis, KG .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 1999, 14 (06) :367-375
[14]   AN EMG-ASSISTED MODEL OF TRUNK LOADING DURING FREE-DYNAMIC LIFTING [J].
GRANATA, KP ;
MARRAS, WS .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1995, 28 (11) :1309-1317
[15]   THE INFLUENCE OF TRUNK MUSCLE COACTIVITY ON DYNAMIC SPINAL LOADS [J].
GRANATA, KP ;
MARRAS, WS .
SPINE, 1995, 20 (08) :913-919
[16]   AN EMG-ASSISTED MODEL OF LOADS ON THE LUMBAR SPINE DURING ASYMMETRIC TRUNK EXTENSIONS [J].
GRANATA, KP ;
MARRAS, WS .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1993, 26 (12) :1429-1438
[17]   Significance of biomechanical and physiological variables during the determination of maximum acceptable weight of lift [J].
Jorgensen, MJ ;
Davis, KG ;
Kirking, BC ;
Lewis, KEK ;
Marras, WS .
ERGONOMICS, 1999, 42 (09) :1216-1232
[18]  
JORGENSEN MJ, 2000, UNPUB FEMALE MALE TR
[19]  
KELSEY J L, 1984, Journal of Orthopaedic Research, V2, P61, DOI 10.1002/jor.1100020110
[20]  
Kim J. Y., 1987, INT J IND ERGONOM, V1, P219, DOI DOI 10.1016/0169-8141(87)90016-3