Instrumentation for measuring dynamic spinal load moment exposures in the workplace

Marras, William S.; Lavender, Steven A.; Ferguson, Sue A.; Splittstoesser, Riley E.; Yang, Gang; Schabo, Pete

doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.12.001

Cited by 28 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many lifting tasks can thus be simulated with little effort using four input variables. The required input data on trunk rotation (from upright), lumbar curvature (or pelvic rotation from upright) and load position in different tasks should be estimated either accurately (by proper equipments such as video camera motion analysis systems, inclinometers, sensors) (Marras et al, 2010) or based on simple measurement devices (e.g., bathroom scale and tape measure) and experienced guess followed by some parametric sensitivity studies within reasonable input limits. In case the pelvic rotation (P) is not known in a lifting activity, one may evaluate the L/P ratio exploiting available in vivo data (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive equations to estimate spinal loads in symmetric lifting tasks

Arjmand¹,

Plamondon²,

Shirazi‐Adl³

et al. 2011

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive equations to estimate spinal loads in symmetric lifting tasks

Arjmand¹,

Plamondon²,

Shirazi‐Adl³

et al. 2011

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Detailed descriptions of the instrumentation and performance can be found elsewhere. 11 Force measurement accuracy is within 0.5 kg (1.1 lb. ), and position accuracy (average absolute error) is within 3.0 cm (1.2 in.).…”

Section: Health Effects Samplingmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In this study, a state-of-the art moment monitor capable of quantifying numerous physical exposure variables over the course of a workday 11 was used to assess exposure in distribution center environments. The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between exposures to physical factors in such environments and changes in low back function over time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative Dynamic Measures of Physical Exposure Predict Low Back Functional Impairment

Marras

Lavender

Ferguson

et al. 2010

Spine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design. Prospective field study of work exposure and changes in back function.Objective. Quantify dynamic physical exposures in the workplace and their association with decreases in kinematic back function (indicative of low back pain [LBP]).Summary of Background Data. Previous epidemiologic studies of work have measured gross categories of exposure and found moderate relationships with LBP. More precise quantitative measures of exposure and spine function were hypothesized to increase the chances of identifying any significant associations.Methods. Three hundred and ninety real-time physical exposure measures were collected from distribution center workers performing repetitive manual materials handling tasks. Low back health effect measures were quantitatively measured prospectively for workers performing each of the jobs using a kinematic measure of function.Results. Significant decreases in spine function were observed in workers associated with 40% of the jobs sampled. Numerous significant univariate odds ratios were identified that indicated an association between physical exposure and decreased function. A multivariate model including right lateral trunk velocity, timing of the maximum dynamic asymmetric load moment exposure, and the magnitude of the dynamic sagittal bending moment predicted reduced spine function well. The model resulted in excellent sensitivity (85%) and specificity (87.5%) as well as excellent positive predictive value (89.5%) and negative predictive value (82.4%).Conclusion. This study suggests that with proper quantification of job exposure and spine function, it is possible to identify which dynamic physical exposures are associated with reduced spine function and increases in LBP.Key words: low back pain, low back disorder, biomechanics, spine motion, kinematics, kinetics, ergonomics, workplace, occupation, functional impairment, epidemiology, load moment, spine mechanics, lumbar spine. Spine 2010;35:914 -923It has been well recognized that low back pain (LBP) risk is associated with a combination of personal factors (e.g., genetics), psychological or psychosocial factors, and physical exposures.1 Currently, it is difficult, if not impossible, to modify most individual or psychological factors. However, it is possible to mediate exposure to many of the physical factors encountered in the workplace. In an attempt to control the high cost of LBP, it has been demonstrated that it is possible to influence LBP rates in the workplace by minimizing physical risk factor exposure. 2The relationship between occupational LBP and physical risk factors has been previously investigated primarily in field surveillance studies.3-9 However, the majority of these studies have categorized physical risk factors in gross terms, such as lifting and forceful movements, heavy physical work, awkward postures, and static postures. When risk has been categorized in such a gross manner, significant but low odds ratios (ORs) between risk factors and LBP occurrence have been reported. On the other hand, w...

show abstract

“…The provision of constant exposure tracking system, 26 the Lumbar Motion Monitor (BioDynamic Solutions, Inc, Columbus, OH), 24,25,28 and computerassisted recording and long-term analysis of musculoskeletal load measurement 14 are all relatively complex and cumbersome and achieve measurement accuracy at the expense of reduced portability and simplicity.…”

Section: T T Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%