Thirty males and thirty females performed lifting tasks while being exposed to varying levels of physical (box weight, task asymmetry), psychosocial (social support and mental concentration), and combination (lift rate, box placement) workplace factors. The study investigated the impact of these variables as well as individual factors (gender, personality) on trunk kinematics and kinetics, muscle activity, and the three-dimensional spinal loads. The study results indicate box weight, placement control, individual's anthropometry, and to a lesser extent gender and personality directly impact the loads on the spine as well as the trunk kinematics, kinetics, and muscle activity. Both the physical and mental aspects of the workplace must then be considered when developing ergonomic interventions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BongersP. M.De WinterC.R.KompierM.A.J.WildebrandtV.H., 1993, Psychosocial factors at work and musculoskeletal disease. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 19, 297–312.
2.
BurdorfA.SorockG., 1997, Positive and negative evidence of risk factors for back disorders. Scandinavian Journal Work, Environment and Health, 23, 243–256.
3.
DavisK. G.HeaneyC. A., 2000, The relationship between psychosocial work characteristics and low back pain: Underlying methodological issues. Clinical Biomechanics, 15(6), 389–406.
4.
DavisK. G.MarrasW. S.WatersT. R., 1998, Evaluation of the spine loading during lowering and lifting, Clinical Biomechanics. 13(3), 141–152.
5.
De LoozeM.P.VisserB.HoutingI.Van RooyM.A.G.Van DieenJ.H.ToussaintH.M., 1996, Weight and frequency effect on spine loading in a bricklaying task. Journal of Biomechanics, 29(11), 1425–1433.
6.
DolanP.KingmaI.Van DieenJ.De LoozeM.P.ToussaintH.M.BatenC.T.M.AdamsM.A., 1999, Dynamic forces acting on the lumbar spine during manual handling- can they be estimated using electromyographic techniques alone? Spine, 24 (7), 698–703.
7.
DruryC. G.DeebJ. M.HartmanB.WooleyS.DruryC. E.GallagherS., 1989, Symmetric and asymmetric manual materials handling Part 2: Biomechanics. Ergonomics, 32(6), 565–583.
8.
FathallahF. A.MarrasW. S.ParnianpourM.GranataK. P., 1997, A method for measuring external loads during unconstrained free-dynamic lifting, Journal of Biomechanics, 30(9), 975–978.
9.
FathallahF. A.MarrasW. S.ParnianpourM., 1998, An assessment of complex spine loads during dynamic lifting tasks. Spine, 23(6), 706–716.
10.
FergusonS. A.MarrasW. S., 1997, A literature review of low back disorder surveillance measures and risk factors. Clinical Biomechanics, 12(4), 211–226.
11.
GranataK. P.MarrasW. S., 1995, An EMG-assisted model of trunk loading during free-dynamic lifting. Journal of Biomechanics, 28(11), 1309–1317.
12.
GranataK. P.MarrasW. S.DavisK. G., 1999, Variation in spine load and trunk dynamics during repeated lifting exertions. Clinical Biomechanics, 14(6), 367–375.
13.
HanJ. S.GoelV. K.AhnJ. Y.WinterbottomJ.McGowanD.WeinsteinJ.CookT., 1995, Loads in the spine structures during lifting: Development of a three-dimensional comprehensive biomechanical model. European Spine Journal, 4: 153–168.
14.
LeskinenT. P. J.StalhammarH. R.RautanenM. T., 1992, Biomechanically and electromyographically assessed load on the spine in self-paced and force-paced lifting work. Ergonomics, 35(7/8), 881–888.
15.
MarrasW. S., 1990, Industrial electromyography, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 6, 89–93.
16.
MarrasW. S.DavisK. G., 1998, Spine loading during asymmetric lifting using one vs. two hands. Ergonomics, 41(6), 817–834.
17.
MarrasW. S.DavisK. G.HeaneyC. A.MaronitisA. B.AllreadW. G., 2000, The influence of psychosocial stress, gender, and personality on mechanical loading of the lumbar spine. Spine, 25(23), 3045–3054.
18.
MarrasW. S.DavisK. G.JorgensenM. J., 2002, Spine Loading as a Function of Gender. Spine, (in press).
19.
MarrasW. S.GranataK. P., 1995, A biomechanical assessment and model of axial twisting in the thoraco-lumbar spine, Spine, 20(13), 1440–1451.
20.
MarrasW. S.FathallahF. A.MillerR. J.DavisS. W.MirkaG. A., 1992, Accuracy of a three dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 9, 75–87.
21.
MarrasW. S.GranataK. P.DavisK. G.AllreadW. G.JorgensenM. J., 1999, The effects of box features on spine loading during warehouse order selecting. Ergonomics, 42(7), 980–996.
22.
MarrasW. S.MirkaG. A., 1993, Electromyographic studies of the lumbar trunk musculature during the generation of low-level trunk acceleration. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 11, 811–817.
23.
MarrasW. S.SommerichC. M., 1991, A three dimensional motion model of loads on the lumbar spine: II. Model validation. Human Factors, 33(2), 139–149.
24.
McGillS. M., 1997, The biomechanics of low back injury: Implications on current practice in industry and the clinic, Journal of Biomechanics, 30(5), 465–475.
25.
MirkaG. A.MarrasW. S., 1993, A stochastic model of trunk muscle coactivation during trunk bending. Spine, 18(11), 1396–1409.
26.
MyersP. B.MyersK. D., 1998, Mvers-Briggs type indicator form M. (Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc, Palo Alto, CA).
