Different driving postures may alter the impact of vibrations on the lumbar spine. This study explores the influence of posture on the lumbar spine by analyzing the risk of intervertebral disc vibration injury. Initially, Python language was utilized to develop code to obtain 48 different postural three-dimensional finite element models of the human-chair system. Subsequently, these models underwent harmonic response analyses at frequencies of 5, 7, and 9 Hz, with the maximum Von Mises stress on the L4–L5 intervertebral disc used to calculate the risk factor. Finally, a neural network model was trained using the frequency and posture angles as input values and the risk factor as the output values, enabling prediction of intervertebral disc risk factors in more precise sitting postures. The findings reveal that the posture of the upper body plays a primary role in influencing the lumbar spine, with the thigh posture having a greater impact when the upper body is closer to a vertical position, while the influence of the lower leg posture is minimal. Across all three frequencies, the optimal angle for the upper body is 109°, 109°, 115°, and for the thighs, it is 90°, 90°, 100°. A higher risk factor is observed when the upper body is angled between 90° and 100°. Conversely, an upper body angle between 110° and 120° is deemed acceptable. Vibration at 9 Hz had the greatest impact on the risk of lumbar injury when the upper body is in or close to a vertical sitting position.
FerreiraMLde LucaKHaileLM, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990–2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet Rheumatol2023; 5(6): E316–E29.
2.
GallaisLGriffinMJ.Low back pain in car drivers: a review of studies published 1975 to 2005. J Sound Vib2006; 298(3): 499–513.
3.
Rufa’iAASa’iduIAAhmadRY, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for low back pain among professional drivers in Kano, Nigeria. Arch Environ Occup Health2015; 70(5): 251–255.
4.
AndrusaitisSFOliveiraRPBarros FilhoTE.Study of the prevalence and risk factors for low back pain in truck drivers in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2006; 61(6): 503–510.
5.
OkunribidoOOMagnussonMPopeM.Delivery drivers and low–back pain: a study of the exposures to posture demands, manual materials handling and whole-body vibration. Int J Ind Ergon2006; 36(3): 265–273.
6.
LingsSLeboeufYC.Whole-body vibration and low back pain: a systematic, critical review of the epidemiological literature 1992–1999. Int Arch Occup Environ Health2000; 73(5): 290–297.
7.
BovenziMHulshofCT.An updated review of epidemiologic studies on the relationship between exposure to whole-body vibration and low back pain (1986–1997). Int Arch Occup Environ Health1999; 72(6): 351–365.
8.
BovenziMBettaA.Low-back disorders in agricultural tractor drivers exposed to whole-body vibration and postural stress. Appl Ergon1994; 25(4): 231–241.
9.
BovenziMRuiFNegroC, et al. An epidemiological study of low back pain in professional drivers. J Sound Vib2006; 298(3): 514–539.
10.
MendesHGOTomazBDCoelho-OliveiraAC, et al. The consequences of mechanical vibration exposure on the lower back of bus drivers: a systematic review. Appl Sci Basel2021; 11(21): 9986.
11.
AmariMCaruelEDonatiP.Inter-individual postural variability in seated drivers exposed to whole-body vibration. Ergonomics2015; 58(7): 1162–1174.
12.
MaradeiFQuintanaLCastellanosJ.Influence of seat tilt motion on discomfort perception during a simulated driving activity. Work2017; 56(1): 99–110.
13.
DemićMLukićJ.Investigation of the transmission of fore and aft vibration through the human body. Appl Ergon2009; 40(4): 622–629.
14.
DemicdMLukicdJMilićŽ.Some aspects of the investigation of random vibration influence on ride comfort. J Sound Vib2002; 253(1): 109–128.
15.
DongRCTangSJChengX, et al. Influence of foot excitation and shin posture on the vibration behavior of the entire spine inside a seated human body. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2023; 27(12): 1664–1679.
16.
SimonJMcAuliffeMShamimF, et al. Discogenic low back pain. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am2014; 25(2): 305–317.
17.
de UlloaJLGonzálezJEBeltránAM, et al. Biomechanical behavior of customized scaffolds: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Mater Des2022; 223: 111173.
18.
RützelSHinzBWölfelHP.Modal description—A better way of characterizing human vibration behavior. J Sound Vib2006; 298(3): 810–823.
19.
MansurHLucasPPAVitorinoRC, et al. Biomechanical comparison of four different posterior malleolus fixation techniques: a finite element analysis. Foot Ankle Surg2022; 28(5): 570–577.
20.
MeekaewPPaholpakPWisanuyotinT, et al. Biomechanics comparison between endobutton fixation and syndesmotic screw fixation for syndesmotic injury ankle fracture; a finite element analysis and cadaveric validation study. J Orthop2022; 34: 207–214.
21.
ZhuSDongRLiuZ, et al. A finite element method study of the effect of vibration on the dynamic biomechanical response of the lumbar spine. Clin Biomech2024; 111: 106164.
22.
YuSHDongRCLiuZ, et al. Impact of sacroiliac interosseous ligament tension and laxity on the biomechanics of the lumbar spine: a finite element study. World Neurosurg2024; 185: e431–e441.
23.
LiuYTDongRCLiuZ, et al. Finite element analysis of the cervical spine: dynamic characteristics and material property sensitivity study. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. Epub ahead of print 2024. DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2024.2304285.
24.
DongRZhuSChengX, et al. Study on the biodynamic characteristics and internal vibration behaviors of a seated human body under biomechanical characteristics. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. Epub ahead of print 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-024-01849-z.
25.
DongRCLuZQChengX, et al. Detailed development and validation of a finite element model for studying the entire spinal vibration behavior within a seated human body. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science. Epub ahead of print 2024. DOI: 10.1177/09544062241253504.
26.
DongRCHeLDuW, et al. Effect of sitting posture and seat on biodynamic responses of internal human body simulated by finite element modeling of body-seat system. J Sound Vib2019; 438: 543–554.
SeidelHBlüthnerRHinzB, et al. On the health risk of the lumbar spine due to whole-body vibration—theoretical approach, experimental data and evaluation of whole-body vibration. J Sound Vib1998; 215(4): 723–741.
29.
SunCLiuCZhengX, et al. An analytical model of seated human body exposed to combined fore-aft, lateral, and vertical vibration verified with experimental modal analysis. Mech Syst Signal Process2023; 200: 17.
30.
GaoKZZhangZFLuHW, et al. Finite element modelling and biodynamic response prediction of the seated human body exposed to whole-body vibration. Ergonomics2023; 66(12): 1854–1867.
31.
GaoKZLiCYXiaoY, et al. Finite element modeling and parameter identification of the seated human body exposed to vertical vibration. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2021; 20(5): 1789–1803.
32.
Somovilla-GómezFLostado-LorzaRCorral-BobadillaM, et al. Improvement in determining the risk of damage to the human lumbar functional spinal unit considering age, height, weight and sex using a combination of FEM and RSM. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2020; 19(1): 351–387.
33.
KimEFardMKatoK.A seated human model for predicting the coupled human-seat transmissibility exposed to fore-aft whole-body vibration. Appl Ergon2020; 84: 9.
34.
ShibataNMaedaS.Determination of backrest inclination based on biodynamic response study for prevention of low back pain. Med Eng Phys2010; 32(6): 577–583.
35.
PanjabiMMAnderssonGBJorneusL, et al. In vivo measurements of spinal column vibrations. J Bone Joint Surg Am1986; 68(5): 695–702.
36.
PopeMHWilderDGJorneusL, et al. The response of the seated human to sinusoidal vibration and impact. J Biomech Eng1987; 109(4): 279–284.
37.
KongWZGoelVK.Ability of the finite element models to predict response of the human spine to sinusoidal vertical vibration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)2003; 28(17): 1961–1967.
38.
CheungKMKarppinenJChanD, et al. Prevalence and pattern of lumbar magnetic resonance imaging changes in a population study of one thousand forty-three individuals. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)2009; 34(9): 934–940.
39.
GuanYYoganandanNZhangJ, et al. Validation of a clinical finite element model of the human lumbosacral spine. Med Biol Eng Comput2006; 44(8): 633–641.
40.
LostadoRMartinezRFMac DonaldBJ, et al. Combining soft computing techniques and the finite element method to design and optimize complex welded products. Integr Comput Aid Eng2015; 22(2): 153–170.
41.
HarrisonDDHarrisonSOCroftAC, et al. Sitting biomechanics, part II: optimal car driver’s seat and optimal driver’s spinal model. J Manip Physiol Ther2000; 23(1): 37–47.
42.
GaoKDuJDingR, et al. Lumbar spinal loads and lumbar muscle forces evaluation with various lumbar supports and backrest inclination angles in driving posture. Eur Spine J2023; 32(2): 408–419.
43.
NamHSHanMChoiHY, et al. Effect of reclining angle on lumbar lordosis at driving posture: a radiological evaluation. J Back Musculoskelet Rehab2018; 31(5): 923–930.
44.
DongRGWelcomeDEMcDowellTW, et al. Theoretical foundation, methods, and criteria for calibrating human vibration models using frequency response functions. J Sound Vib2015; 356: 195–216.
45.
AmiriSNaserkhakiSParnianpourM.Effect of whole-body vibration and sitting configurations on lumbar spinal loads of vehicle occupants. Comput Biol Med2019; 107: 292–301.
46.
GómezFSLorzaRLBobadillaMC, et al. Improving the process of adjusting the parameters of finite element models of healthy human intervertebral discs by the multi-response surface method. Materials2017; 10(10): 1116.
