Determining the interactions between postural variability structure and discomfort development using nonlinear analysis techniques during prolonged standing work

Effect of muscular fatigue on the cumulative lumbar damage during repetitive lifting task: a comparative study of damage calculation methods

Several methods have been put forward to quantify cumulative loads; however, limited evidence exists as to the subsequent damages and the role of muscular fatigue. The present study assessed whether muscular fatigue could affect cumulative damage imposed on the L5-S1 joint. Trunk muscle electromyographic (EMG) activities and kinematics/kinetics of 18 healthy male individuals were evaluated during a simulated repetitive lifting task. A traditional EMG-assisted model of the lumbar spine was modified to account for the effect of erector spinae fatigue. L5-S1 compressive loads for each lifting cycle were estimated based on varying (i.e. actual), fatigue-modified, and constant Gain factors. The corresponding damages were integrated to calculate the cumulative damage. Moreover, the damage calculated for one lifting cycle was multiplied by the lifting frequency, as the traditional approach. Compressive loads and the damages obtained through the fatigue-modified model were predicted in close agreement with the actual values. Similarly, the difference between actual damages and those driven by the traditional approach was not statistically significant (p = 0.219). However, damages based on a constant Gain factor were significantly greater than those based on the actual (p = 0.012), fatigue-modified (p = 0.017), and traditional (p = 0.007) approaches.Practitioner summary: In this study, we managed to include the effect of muscular fatigue on cumulative lumbar damage calculations. Including the effect of muscular fatigue leads to an accurate estimation of cumulative damages while eliminating computational complexity. However, using the traditional approach also appears to provide acceptable estimates for ergonomic assessments.

Nonlinear analysis of postural changes related to the movement interventions during prolonged standing task

This study assessed the effects of movement-based interventions on the complexity of postural changes during prolonged standing. Twenty participants, equally distributed in gender and standing work experience (SWE), completed three simulated prolonged standing sessions: without movement (control), leg exercise and footrest. The amount and complexity of variability in the centre of pressure (COP) and lumbar curvature angle were quantified using linear and nonlinear tools. Lower leg swelling and back/leg discomfort were also monitored. Participants in the SWE group showed significantly greater postural complexity during the standing. Regular leg exercise resulted in significantly higher postural complexity and lower leg discomfort and swelling. The footrest led to significant changes in amount of COP variability. Both interventions significantly reduced back discomfort. Overall, the nonlinear analysis of postural changes provided different findings compared to linear ones, considering the standing time, interventions and standing job experience. Nonlinear results were consistent with leg discomfort and swelling. Practitioner summary: The effect of movement-based interventions on dynamics of postural alterations over prolonged standing were characterised using nonlinear techniques. The effect of standing work experience was also considered. Previous experience of standing jobs and leg movements increase the complexity of postural behaviour over standing period.

Immediate Effect of Lumbosacral Orthosis and Abdominal Drawing-In Maneuver on Postural Control in Adults With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the immediate effects of lumbosacral orthosis and the abdominal drawing-in maneuver on the trunk postural control of adults with chronic low back pain compared with asymptomatic controls during 1-legged and semi-tandem stances.

METHODS

An experimental and comparative study (cross-sectional design) was conducted in a laboratory setting. Twenty adults with chronic low back pain and 20 asymptomatic controls randomly performed 2 postural balance tasks over a force platform, considering 3 experimental conditions: (1) natural posture (baseline-control), (2) lumbosacral orthosis, and (3) abdominal drawing-in maneuver. Linear variables (mean amplitude, ellipse area, and sway velocity) derived from the center of pressure were computed, and 2-way analysis of variance (group × condition) for repeated measures were conducted.

RESULTS

No group × condition interactions (.139 ≤ P ≤.938) were detected in any center of pressure parameters. No condition effect was detected, but a group effect (P = .042) was observed for 1 center of pressure parameter. The chronic low back pain group presented with a lower mean anteroposterior center of pressure amplitude than asymptomatic controls (∆ = 0.31 ± 0.66 cm [95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.56], P = .019) during the semi-tandem stance balance task.

CONCLUSION

Neither lumbosacral orthosis nor the abdominal drawing-in maneuver showed immediate improvement in trunk postural control in any group. Thus, clinicians should not expect immediate benefits or improvements yielded by lumbosacral orthosis or the abdominal drawing-in maneuver when patients with chronic low back pain undergo these interventions.