Biomechanical analysis of two patient handling tasks

Lindbeck, Lars; Engkvist, I-L

doi:10.1016/0169-8141(93)90043-d

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three studies that included analysis of turning patients are not shown in the table above because they did not estimate spine compression or shear (Gagnon et al, 1987;Lindbeck & Engkvist, 1993) or did not directly measure the external forces on the caregiver at two of the three external points of contact with the environment (i.e., floor, bed, hands) to allow for accurate determination of all external loads on the body (Daynard et al, 2001;Lindbeck & Engkvist, 1993).…”

Section: Lateral Repositioning Vs Turningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Bed Feature to Assist in Turning and Laterally Repositioning Patients

Wiggermann

2015

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Lateral Repositioning Vs Turningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Bed Feature to Assist in Turning and Laterally Repositioning Patients

Wiggermann

2015

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nine took the role of caregiver (mean age, 22.0 AE 1.6 years; mean height, 171.2 AE 5.7 cm; mean weight, 63.6 AE 5.3 kg) and one simulated a patient (age, 21 years; height, 167 cm; weight, 62 kg). The decision to use only one simulated patient was made according to previous studies [7,9,11,12]. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects before undertaking the experiments.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As one of the approaches, biomechanical analysis has been used in several studies to understand low back load during patient-handling tasks [7][8][9][10][11]. Most of these studies used a static or dynamic 2D model to calculate low back load.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of low back joint moment using a dynamic 3D biomechanical model in different transferring tasks wearing low back belt

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Individual net moments up to 253 Nm was found, which supports the finding that the mechanical load may be high during tasks performed during personal handling. Other studies (Gagnon et al 1986;Gag et al 1991;Lindbeck and Engkvist 1993;de Looze et al 1994;de Looze et al 1998) have found compression forces in the lumbar spine during different patient handling tasks between 3600 and 4750 N, whereas Marras et al 1999(Marras et al 1999 found much higher values between 4500 and 6800 N by use of an EMG model. The compression during patient handling is thus often beyond the "safety limit" (3400N) proposed by NIOSH (Waters et al 1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

The Mechanical Loads on the Low Back during Different Patient Handling Tasks

Schibye

Skotte

Hye-Knudsen

et al. 2000

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High prevalence rate of low back disorders (LBD) is found among nursing personnel. To get a more detailed knowledge concerning the risk factor in the health care sector, the working postures and the mechanical load of the low back were measured during nine commonly used patient handling tasks. Further the variation in the load between the different tasks was compared with the variation between subjects when they perform the same tasks. The study includes 10 female nurses with no special education or course in patient handling technique and a male stroke patient. The load during the different tasks were quantified from the net moment at L4/L5 joint calculated by use of a 3D biomechanical dynamic multi-segment model, the measured muscle activity (EMG) in erector spinae muscles and the kinematics of the low back. Significant differences in the mean values for all the dependent variable both between tasks and between subjects were found. The highest moment was found during the two tasks typically involving a lifting procedure of the whole bodyweight of the patient. High moment was however also found during tasks where the patient is “only” being repositioned in the bed. The position data measured for the low back are more difficult to interpret since no recommendations for limits are available in the literature. A high intersubject variation is found for all the outcome variables for a given task. This emphasizes the importance of an exposure assessment including individual measures. Otherwise, the risk for misclassification may be high and a detailed task description less effective for recommending prevention strategy.

show abstract

Biomechanical analysis of two patient handling tasks

Cited by 15 publications

References 10 publications

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Bed Feature to Assist in Turning and Laterally Repositioning Patients

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Bed Feature to Assist in Turning and Laterally Repositioning Patients

Comparison of low back joint moment using a dynamic 3D biomechanical model in different transferring tasks wearing low back belt

The Mechanical Loads on the Low Back during Different Patient Handling Tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About