Using passive or active back-support exoskeletons during a repetitive lifting task: influence on cardiorespiratory parameters

Schwartz, Mathilde; Desbrosses, Kévin; Theurel, Jean; Mornieux, Guillaume

doi:10.1007/s00421-022-05034-x

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Integrating assistive technology into manufacturing environments is vital for optimizing human performance, safety, and well-being. Aligning these technologies with human factors and ergonomics enables targeted design modifications, fostering user acceptance and trust [14][15][16]. Tailoring technology to ergonomic principles allows for specific design enhancements, creating a more user-friendly interface.…”

Section: Relevant Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Efficacy of Passive Occupational Exoskeleton for Enhancing Ergonomic Outcomes in Manufacturing

Davoudi Kakhki,

Moghadam,

Nieto

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Manual material handling (MMH) significantly impacts worker health and productivity, often leading to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) primarily in the lower back. As a novel assistive technology, exoskeletons may serve as ergonomic tools to mitigate these work-related MSDs. It is essential to examine exoskeletons from the users’ perspectives before their widespread implementation in occupational settings. This study investigates the effectiveness of a passive back-support exoskeleton (BExo) in reducing perceived physical exertion and improving ergonomic safety in manufacturing context. Twenty-two college students were recruited to perform MMH tasks in a controlled lab environment, both with and without the BExo, followed by completing a survey questionnaire on various aspects of the BExo. Using ANOVA, the study analyzed biomechanical exertion across various body parts and tasks. The findings indicate that the BExo substantially alleviates discomfort in the low back, shoulders and knees, thereby, enhancing ergonomic posture and reducing fatigue. These results underscore the potential of passive exoskeletons to boost workers’ safety and efficiency, providing valuable insights for future ergonomic strategies in industrial setting.

show abstract

Section: Relevant Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Efficacy of Passive Occupational Exoskeleton for Enhancing Ergonomic Outcomes in Manufacturing

Davoudi Kakhki,

Moghadam,

Nieto

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One passive exoskeleton (P-EXO) and two active exoskeletons (A-EXO1 and A-EXO2) were studied (Figure 2) and compared to a control condition without any equipment (CON). These exoskeletons have already been studied by Schwartz et al (2022) [14], and additional details about these assistive devices were provided in their study.…”

Section: Exoskeletonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of active exoskeletons, the design could also have an influence on their consequences. An active back-support exoskeleton can be single-joint (Robomate, Germany), for example [13]) or multi-joint (Exoback, for example) [14]. This design characteristic could thus contribute to making the exoskeleton more or less anthropomorphic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks

Schwartz

Desbrosses

Theurel

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess, for both men and women, the consequences of using different back-support exoskeletons during various manual material tasks (MMH) on the activity of back muscles and trunk kinematics. Fifteen men and fourteen women performed MMH involving a 15 kg load (a static task, a symmetric lifting task, and an asymmetric lifting task). Four exoskeleton conditions were tested: without equipment (CON) and with three exoskeletons passive (P-EXO), and active (A-EXO1 and A-EXO2)). The electromyographic activity of the lower trapezius (TZ), latissimus dorsi (LD), erector spinae (ES), gluteus maximus (GM), and biceps femoris (BF) muscles was recorded. Trunk kinematics were evaluated to provide average thoracic, lumbar, and hip angles. The use of the P-EXO decreased the activity of LD, GM, and BF from −12 to −27% (p < 0.01) compared to CON, mostly during the static task. The A-EXO1 and A-EXO2 reduced the muscle activity of all studied muscles from −7 to −62% (p < 0.01) compared to CON and from −10 to −52% (p < 0.005) compared to the P-EXO, independently of the modalities of the experimental tasks. A statistical interaction between the sex and exoskeleton was only observed in a few rare conditions. Occupational back-support exoskeletons can reduce trunk extensor muscle activity compared to no equipment being used. However, these reductions were modulated by the exoskeleton technology (passive vs. active), design (weight and anthropomorphism), and the modalities of the task performed (static vs. dynamic). Our results also showed that the active exoskeletons could modify the trunk kinematics.

show abstract

User Assessment of Passive Exoskeleton in Manual Material Handling

Nieto,

Vora,

Davoudi

et al. 2024

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using passive or active back-support exoskeletons during a repetitive lifting task: influence on cardiorespiratory parameters

Cited by 13 publications

References 37 publications

Evaluating Efficacy of Passive Occupational Exoskeleton for Enhancing Ergonomic Outcomes in Manufacturing

Evaluating Efficacy of Passive Occupational Exoskeleton for Enhancing Ergonomic Outcomes in Manufacturing

Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks

User Assessment of Passive Exoskeleton in Manual Material Handling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About