Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) pose a significant risk to construction and industrial workers and can result in serious costs for both individuals and businesses. Exoskeletons are one potential occupational intervention being explored to help mitigate risk of WMSDs in construction and industrial domains. However, more research is needed on worker acceptance and adoption, as the usefulness and benefits of an effective exoskeleton intervention will be lost if the workers fail to embrace it. To address this gap, this scoping review synthesizes the current literature on worker acceptance and adoption of occupational exoskeletons using PRISMA's methodology. The results present assessments; acceptance factors using a Work Systems Model framework. Information about the main barrier to adoption, discomfort, other barriers, and other key considerations and implications for future exoskeleton development and research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmandelsS.het EyndtH. O.DaenenL.HermansV. (2019). Introduction and testing of a passive exoskeleton in an industrial working environment. 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, IEA 2018, August 26, 2018 - August 30, 2018, 820, 387-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96083-8_51
2.
Antwi-AfariM. F.LiH.AnwerS.LiD.YuY.MiH.-Y.WuniI. Y. (2021). Assessment of a passive exoskeleton system on spinal biomechanics and subjective responses during manual repetitive handling tasks among construction workers. Safety Science, 142, 105382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105382
3.
BaltruschS. J.HoudijkH.van DieenJ. H.KruifJ. T. C. M. (2021). Passive Trunk Exoskeleton Acceptability and Effects on Self-efficacy in Employees with Low-Back Pain: A Mixed Method Approach. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 31(1), 129-141. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09891-1
De BockS.GhillebertJ.GovaertsR.ElpramaS.MarusicU.SerrienB.JacobsA.GeeromsJ.MeeusenR.De PauwK. (2021). Passive Shoulder Exoskeletons: More Effective in the Lab Than in the Field?IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL SYSTEMS AND REHABILITATION ENGINEERING, 29, 173-183. Https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2020.3041906
6.
de LoozeM. P.BoschT.KrauseF.StadlerK. S.O'SullivanL. W. (2016). Exoskeletons for industrial application and their potential effects on physical work load. Ergonomics, 59(5), 671-681. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1081988
7.
ElpramaS. A.VannieuwenhuyzeJ. T. A.De BockS.VanderborghtB.De PauwK.MeeusenR.JacobsA. (2020). Social processes: What determines industrial workers' intention to use exoskeletons?Human Factors, 62(3), 337-350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819889534
8.
FerreiraG.GasparJ.FujaoC.NunesI. L. (2020). Piloting the Use of an Upper Limb Passive Exoskeleton in Automotive Industry: Assessing User Acceptance and Intention of Use. AHFE Virtual Conference on Human Factors and Systems Interaction, 2020, July 16, 2020 - July 20, 2020, 1207 AISC, 342-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51369-6_46
9.
FlorR.GasparJ.FujaoC.NunesI. L. (2021). How Workers Perceive
10.
LAEVO Exoskeleton Use in Non-cyclic Tasks. AHFE2021Virtual Conference on Human Factors and Systems Interaction, 25-29 July2021, 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79816-1_19
11.
GilottaS.SpadaS.GhibaudoL.IsoardiM.MossoC. O. (2019). Acceptability beyond usability: A manufacturing case study. 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, IEA 2018, August 26, 2018 - August 30, 2018, 824, 922-934. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96071-5_95
12.
HenselR.KeilM. (2019). Subjective Evaluation of a Passive Industrial Exoskeleton for Lower-back Support: A Field Study in the Automotive Sector. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 213-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2019.1573770
13.
KimS.MooreA.SrinivasanD.AkanmuA.BarrA.Harris-AdamsonC.RempelD. M.NussbaumM. A. (2019). Potential of Exoskeleton Technologies to Enhance Safety, Health, and Performance in Construction: Industry Perspectives and Future Research Directions. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 185191. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2018.1561557
14.
McFarlandT.FischerS. (2019). Considerations for Industrial Use: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Active and Passive Upper Limb Exoskel-etons on Physical Exposures. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 322-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2019.1684399
15.
MoyonA.PoirsonE.PetiotJ.-F. (2018). Experimental study of the physical impact of a passive exoskeleton on manual sanding operations. 28th CIRP Design Conference 2018, 23-25 May 2018, Nantes, France, 70, 284-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.04.028
16.
MoyonA.PoirsonE.PetiotJ.-F. (2019). Development of an Acceptance Model for Occupational Exoskeletons and Application for a Passive Upper Limb Device. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 291-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2019.1662516
17.
NussbaumM. A.LoweB. D.de LoozeM.Harris-AdamsonC.SmetsM. (2019). An Introduction to the Special Issue on Occupational Exoskel-etons. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2019.1709695
PappE.WolfelC.KrzywinskiJ. (2020). ACCEPTANCE and USER EXPERIENCE of WEARABLE ASSISTIVE DEVICES for INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES. 16th International Design Conference, DESIGN 2020, October 26, 2020 - October 29, 2020, 1, 1515-1520. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsd.2020.319
20.
SchwerhaD. J.McNamaraN.KimSunwookNussbaumM. A. (2020). Benefits and Barriers to Passive Occupational Exoskeleton Adoption in Manufacturing Companies. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 64(1), 885. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181320641209
21.
SchwerhaD.McNamaraN.NussbaumM.KimS. (2021). Adoption potential of occupational exoskeletons in diverse enterprises engaged in manufacturing tasks INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ERGONOMICS, 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2021.103103
22.
SmetsM. (2019). A Field Evaluation of Arm-Support Exoskeletons for Overhead Work Applications in Automotive Assembly. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 7(3-4), 192-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725838.2018.1563010
23.
SmithM. J.SainfortP. C. (1989). A balance theory of job design for stress reduction. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 4(1), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(89)90051-6
24.
SpadaS.GhibaudoL.CarnazzoC.GastaldiL.CavatortaM. P. (2019). Passive Upper Limb Exoskeletons: An Experimental Campaign with Workers. In BagnaraS.TartagliaR.AlbolinoS.AlexanderT.FujitaY. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018) (pp. 230-239). Springer International Publishinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96068-5_26
25.
SpadaS.GhibaudoL.GilottaS.GastaldiL.CavatortaM. P. (2017).Investigation into the Applicability of a Passive Upper-limb Exoskeleton in Automotive Industry. Procedia Manufacturing, 11, 1255-1262. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96068-5_26
26.
SpadaS.GhibaudoL.GilottaS.GastaldiL.CavatortaM. P. (2018). Analysis of exoskeleton introduction in industrial reality: Main issues and EAWS risk assessment. AHFE 2017 International Conference on Physical Ergonomics and Human Factors, 2017, July 17, 2017 - July 21, 2017, 602, 236-244. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60825-9_26
27.
TriccoACLillieEZarinWO’BrienKKColquhounHLevacDMoherDPetersMDHorsleyTWeeksLHempelS, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018,169(7):467-473. doi:10.7326/M18-0850. [Digital Image]. https://www.sicurlivegroup.it/en/skelex
