The distance between the load and the body with three bi-manual lifting techniques.

Studies were made of two different techniques of bi-manual lifting with bent legs (A and B) and a technique of lifting with the back bent and the Knees almost extended (C). With technique A, the trunk was almost vertical, while with B it was erect and more forward inclined and the heel of the front foot kept in contact with the support. Two healthy subject samples (n = 18 and n = 16 respectively) were studied, both employing a force platform; with the second sample the back muscles were also evaluated by electromyography. The distance Delta L between the lines of gravity of the body and the load at the start of the lifts was shortest with technique A and longest with C. This was true whether the position of the feet was chosen spontaneously or was identical for all three techniques. The distance of the load from the body during the lifting movement was directly related to the distance at the start of the lift: the further away the load was at initiation of the lift, the further away it remained throughout the rest of the lift. A request to lift as close to the load as possible had a positive effect in shortening Delta L , but the amount of previously received instruction in lifting technique did not correlate with the spontaneously chosen Delta L.

[1]  B. Bresler,et al.  Role of the Trunk in Stability of the Spine , 1961 .

[2]  D B Chaffin,et al.  A longitudinal study of low-back pain as associated with occupational weight lifting factors. , 1973, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[3]  M. Nordin,et al.  Basic biomechanics of the skeletal system , 1980 .

[4]  Er Tichauer,et al.  A pilot study of the biomechanics of lifting in simulated industrial work situations , 1971 .

[5]  J V Basmajian,et al.  Electromyography of deep back muscles in man. , 1972, The American journal of anatomy.

[6]  P R DAVIS Posture of the Trunk During the Lifting of Weights* , 1959, British medical journal.

[7]  N. Eie Load capacity of the low back. , 1966, Journal of the Oslo city hospitals.

[8]  M. Adams,et al.  The Resistance to Flexion of the Lumbar Intervertebral Joint , 1980, Spine.

[9]  P. Rissanen,et al.  The surgical anatomy and pathology of the supraspinous and interspinous ligaments of the lumbar spine with special reference to ligament ruptures. , 1960, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[10]  S Gracovetsky,et al.  The Mechanism of the Lumbar Spine , 1981, Spine.

[11]  G. Andersson,et al.  Quantitative Studies of Back Loads in Lifting , 1976 .

[12]  W. Floyd,et al.  The function of the erectores spinae muscles in certain movements and postures in man * , 1955, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  C. E. Allen,et al.  Muscle action potentials used in the study of dynamic anatomy. , 1948, The British journal of physical medicine : including its application to industry.

[14]  J R Brown,et al.  Lifting as an industrial hazard. , 1973, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[15]  A Magora,et al.  Investigation of the relation between low back pain and occupation. , 1970, IMS, Industrial medicine and surgery.

[16]  B. Åkerblom Standing and sitting posture , 1948 .

[17]  Etienne Grandjean Fitting the task to the man , 1969 .

[18]  Troup Jd,et al.  Biomechanics of the vertebral column. Its application to prevention of back pain in the population and to assessment of working capacity in patients with lumbar spinal disability. , 1979 .

[19]  P R DAVIS,et al.  The causation of herniae by weight-lifting. , 1959, Lancet.

[20]  A Magora,et al.  Investigation of the relation between low back pain and occupation. 3. Physical requirements: sitting, standing and weight lifting. , 1972, IMS, Industrial medicine and surgery.

[21]  M Edgar,et al.  Pathologies associated with lifting. , 1979, Physiotherapy.