Estimation of 3-D peak L5/S1 joint moment during asymmetric lifting tasks with cubic spline interpolation of segment Euler angles

Evaluation of vertical and multi-axial suspension seats for reducing vertical-dominant and multi-axial whole body vibration and associated neck and low back joint torque and muscle activity

The primary aim of this laboratory-based human subject study was to evaluate the biomechanical loading associated with mining vehicles' multi-axial whole body vibration (WBV) by comparing joint torque and muscle activity in the neck and low back during three vibration conditions: mining vehicles' multi-axial, on-road vehicles' vertical-dominant, and no vibration. Moreover, the secondary aim was to determine the efficacy of a vertical passive air suspension and a prototype multi-axial active suspension seat in reducing WBV exposures and associated biomechanical loading measures. The peak joint torque and muscle activity in the neck and low back were higher when exposed to multi-axial vibration compared to the vertical-dominant or no vibration condition. When comparing the two suspension seats, there were limited differences in WBV, joint torque, and muscle activity. These results indicate that there is a need to develop more effective engineering controls to lower exposures to multi-axial WBV and related biomechanical loading. Practitioner Summary: This study found that mining vehicles' multi-axial WBV can increase biomechanical loading in the neck and back more so than on-road vehicles' vertical-dominant WBV. While a newly-developed multi-axial active suspension seat slightly reduced the overall WBV exposures, the results indicate that more effective engineering controls should be developed. Abbreviation: APDF: amplitude probability density function; Aw: weighted average vibration; BMI: body mass index; C7: The 7th cervical vertebra; EMG: electromyography; ES: erector spinae; IRB: institutional review board; ISO: International Organization for Standardization; L5/S1: the fifth lumbar vertebra (L5)/the first sacral vertebra(S1); MSDs: musculoskeletal disorders; MVC: maximum voluntary contraction; PSD: power spectral density; RVC: reference voluntary contraction; SCM: sternocleidomastoid; SD: standard deviation; SPL: splenius capitis; TRAP: trapezius; VDV: vibration dose value; WBV: whole body vibration.

Inter-rater reliability of a video-analysis method measuring low-back load in a field situation

Valid and reliable low-back load assessment tools that can be used in field situations are needed for epidemiologic studies and for ergonomic practice. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of a low-back load video-analysis method in a field setting. Five raters analyzed 50 work site manual material handling tasks of 14 workers. Peak and mean moments at the level of L5S1, and segment angles were obtained using the video-analysis method. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) and median standard deviations across raters were calculated. ICCs revealed excellent inter-rater reliability (>0.9) for peak and mean moments, ICCs of segment angles were variable. Median standard deviations showed relatively small inter-rater variance for moments (standard deviation <10 Nm) and segment angle variation ranging from 0° to 20°. The proposed video-analysis method, provides a reliable tool for obtaining low-back loads from occupational field tasks.

The error of L5/S1 joint moment calculation in a body-centered non-inertial reference frame when the fictitious force is ignored

In ergonomics studies, linked segment models are commonly used for estimating dynamic L5/S1 joint moments during lifting tasks. The kinematics data input to these models are with respect to an arbitrary stationary reference frame. However, a body-centered reference frame, which is defined using the position and the orientation of human body segments, is sometimes used to conveniently identify the location of the load relative to the body. When a body-centered reference frame is moving with the body, it is a non-inertial reference frame and fictitious force exists. Directly applying a linked segment model to the kinematics data with respect to a body-centered non-inertial reference frame will ignore the effect of this fictitious force and introduce errors during L5/S1 moment estimation. In the current study, various lifting tasks were performed in the laboratory environment. The L5/S1 joint moments during the lifting tasks were calculated by a linked segment model with respect to a stationary reference frame and to a body-centered non-inertial reference frame. The results indicate that applying a linked segment model with respect to a body-centered non-inertial reference frame will result in overestimating the peak L5/S1 joint moments of the coronal plane, sagittal plane, and transverse plane during lifting tasks by 78%, 2%, and 59% on average, respectively. The instant when the peak moment occurred was delayed by 0.13, 0.03, and 0.09s on average, correspondingly for the three planes. The root-mean-square errors of the L5/S1 joint moment for the three planes are 21Nm, 19Nm, and 9Nm, correspondingly.

Estimating 3-D L5/S1 moments during manual lifting using a video coding system: validity and interrater reliability

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the validity and interrater reliability of using a proposed video coding system to estimate the dynamical 3-D L5/ S1 joint moment on the basis of four key frames from video clips of asymmetric lifting tasks.

BACKGROUND

L5/S1 joint loading has been widely adopted to quantify low-back loading during lifting tasks. However, the measurement of L5/S1 joint loading usually requires a laboratory environment, which cannot be applied during field surveys.

METHOD

The validity of this system was investigated by comparing the estimated L5/S1 joint moments of various simulated lifting tasks with motion tracking system-based reference L5/S1 joint moments.

RESULTS

The comparison showed that the video coding system yielded good estimates on peak moment (r = .91, average absolute error [AAE] = 20.3 Nm) and cumulative moment (r = .88,AAE = 22.5 Nm.sec) of the sagittal plane. The interrater reliability of this system was assessed among 10 raters who used this system. The intraclass correlation ranged between .51 and .89 for the moments of different planes.

CONCLUSION

The results of the validity and interrater reliability analyses showed that the proposed video coding system could provide a good estimate of total L5/S1 joint loading on the basis of side-view video clips of the simulated lifting tasks.

APPLICATION

Although it was not as accurate as a motion tracking system for L5/S1 joint loading calculations, this approach can be an alternative for back load estimation for some lifting configurations when the use of motion tracking systems is not possible.