Workplace design guidelines for asymptomatic vs. low-back-injured workers

Ferguson, Sue A.; Marras, William S.; Burr, Deborah

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2004.07.002

Cited by 39 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous studies have identified various motion parameters (ROM, velocity, acceleration), spinal loading measures (compression, shear forces) and task variables (load, asymmetry, horizontal reach) that increase the risk of suffering a low back injury Ferguson et al, 2005;Marras et al, 1993Marras et al, , 1995Marras et al, , 2003Marras et al, , 2004Marras and Davis, 1998). Examination of the neuromuscular response during these activities indicates that increased agonist and antagonist activation amplitudes also occur Ferguson et al, 2005;Granata and Marras, 2000;Sparto et al, 1997). Because injury risk is influenced by modulators of muscle force production that occur during dynamic motion, it is unclear if the changes in neuromuscular response reflect the dynamic effects of trunk motion or is related to the task variables (external load perturbation).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electromyographic assessment of trunk muscle activation amplitudes during a simulated lifting task using pattern recognition techniques

Butler

Hubley‐Kozey

Kozey

2009

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electromyographic assessment of trunk muscle activation amplitudes during a simulated lifting task using pattern recognition techniques

Butler

Hubley‐Kozey

Kozey

2009

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…According to Sue et al the limit value of 3,400 N is acceptable for 75% of women workers and 99% of men workers, while the value of 6,400 N is acceptable only for 1% of women and 25% of men. The work activities causing the compressive forces on the L4/L5 disc below 3,400 N are considered as low risk, compressive forces between 3,400 N and 6,400 N as medium risk, and above 6,400 N as high risk for damage to the lumbar spine (15).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Lumbar Spine Load by Computational Method in Order to Acknowledge Low-back Disorders as Occupational Diseases

Hlávková

Lebeda

Tichý

et al. 2016

Cent Eur J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYAim: The aim of the study was to develop a computational module for the prediction of compressive force on the L4/L5 disc suitable for use in field settings.Method: The value of compressive force is intended to be used as a proxy measure of the mechanical burden of low-back when performing work activities. The compressive force predicted by the module in a particular worker should be compared with the NIOSH limit value of 3,400 N for the assessment of lumbar spine load during manual lifting tasks. Exceeding the limit will be considered as the fulfilment of "hygienic criterion" that should be met to acknowledge low-back disorder as an occupational disease. To develop the computational module we used the ergonomic software TECNOMATIX Classic Jack taking into account the anthropometric parameters of a worker and ergonomic parameters of his/her work activity.Results: We calculated compressive forces on the L4/L5 disc in about 1,300 simulated combinations of various factors influencing compressive force. Parameters which turned out to be crucial for the compression of L4/L5 disc were included in the computational algorithm.Conclusion: Our study was primarily aimed at the assessment of lumbar disorders as occupational diseases. Moreover, the study can contribute to the recommendation of preventive measures to decrease health risks in occupations associated with the overload of low-back region. The graphic maps generated by the computational module enable a fast and exact analysis of particular job.

show abstract

“…1,12-14 Bending moments between 60 and 120 N m have been shown to cause damage to the ligaments of the spine and anterior shear forces between 700 and 1000 N are considered hazardous to the spine. 15,[20][21][22] The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) suggests a compressive force 'action limit' of 3400 N and a 'maximum permissible limit' of 6400 N for the prevention of low back injury. 23 It would also appear that sustained or repeated trunk flexion increases the potential failure tolerance of spinal structures and the likelihood of low back injury.…”

Section: Why Is Lumbar Posture So Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lumbar posture biomechanics and its influence on the functional anatomy of the erector spinae and multifidus

Mawston

Boocock

2015

Physical Therapy Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Lumbar posture has a significant impact on the functional biomechanics of the erector spinae and multifidus muscles, which has implications for the loads placed on the tissues of the lumbar spine. Objectives: The objective of this review is to discuss the effects of lumbar posture on the functional biomechanics of the different divisions of the erector spinae and the multifidus muscle and its importance when developing clinical interventions.Methods: This review used the search engines PubMed, EBSCO, CINAHL and SCOPUS to identify studies investigating erector spinae and multifidus muscle architecture and the influence of lumbar posture on the biomechanical properties of these muscles and the resulting impact on spinal loading. Results: Changes in lumbar curvature alter muscle fascicle obliquity, lever arm distances, the length-tension relationships and muscle volume of the different divisions of erector spinae and multifidus, which impact on the spine's ability to resist moments and shear forces. Conclusion: Changes in lumbar posture influence the functional biomechanics of the different divisions of erector spinae and the multifidus muscles. Therapists should develop low back interventions that avoid end range of lumbar postures and optimise the functional biomechanics of the erector spinae and multifidus muscles and minimise loading on the lumbar spine.

show abstract

Workplace design guidelines for asymptomatic vs. low-back-injured workers

Cited by 39 publications

References 30 publications

Electromyographic assessment of trunk muscle activation amplitudes during a simulated lifting task using pattern recognition techniques

Electromyographic assessment of trunk muscle activation amplitudes during a simulated lifting task using pattern recognition techniques

Evaluation of Lumbar Spine Load by Computational Method in Order to Acknowledge Low-back Disorders as Occupational Diseases

Lumbar posture biomechanics and its influence on the functional anatomy of the erector spinae and multifidus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About