Toward a Quantitative Definition of Manual Lifting Postures

Manual lifting techniques are commonly defined in terms of the postures adopted at the start of the lift. Quantitative definition is problematic, however, because the absolute joint angles adopted to lift an object are influenced by task parameters, such as the initial height of the load. We present an argument for the use of a postural index (the ratio of knee flexion from normal standing to the sum of ankle, hip, and lumbar vertebral flexion) to define the postures adopted at the start of lifting. Stooped postures adopted at the start of a lift correspond to postural indices close to 0, whereas full squat postures correspond to postural indices close to 1. We use angular kinematic data gathered from 71 individuals lifting loads of varying mass from a range of starting heights to illustrate the utility of this index. Although average absolute joint angles were influenced by load mass and initial load height, the average postural index remained unchanged. For example, changes in starting height from 9 cm to 63 cm accounted for between 19% and 67% of the variance in joint positions at the start of the lift but only 1% of the variance in average postural index. This suggests that the postural index provides a method of defining lifting posture that is independent of specific joint positions

[1]  B Abernethy,et al.  Relative phase quantifies interjoint coordination. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  T P Leskinen,et al.  A dynamic analysis of spinal compression with different lifting techniques. , 1983, Ergonomics.

[3]  R. J. Whitney.  THE STRENGTH OF THE LIFTING ACTION IN MAN , 1958 .

[4]  J Malchaire,et al.  Relation between intra-abdominal pressure and lumbar stress: effect of trunk posture. , 1988, Ergonomics.

[5]  M. Gessaroli,et al.  The Analysis of Repeated Measures Designs Involving Multiple Dependent Variables , 1987 .

[6]  D B Chaffin,et al.  A biomechanical evaluation of five lifting techniques. , 1986, Applied ergonomics.

[7]  K. Harms-Ringdahl,et al.  Influence of weight and frequency on thigh and lower-trunk motion during repetitive lifting employing stoop and squat techniques. , 1995, Clinical biomechanics.

[8]  H. Pokorny,et al.  Spinal load at various lifting techniques , 1987 .

[9]  D. W. Grieve.  Dynamic characteristics of man during crouch- and stoop-lifting , 1974 .

[10]  W S Marras,et al.  Lumbar Motion Response to a Constant Load Velocity Lift , 1990, Human factors.

[11]  L Lindbeck,et al.  Inertial effects from single body segments in dynamic analysis of lifting. , 1991, Ergonomics.

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

[13]  Arun Garg,et al.  Stoop or Squat: A Biomechanical and Metabolic Evaluation , 1979 .

[14]  G. Németh,et al.  A biomechanical analysis of hip compression loading during lifting. , 1985, Ergonomics.

[15]  Royal,et al.  MOVEMENTS OF THE THORACIC AND LUMBAR SPINE WHEN LIFTING: A CHRONO-CYCLOPHOTOGRAPHIC STUDY. , 1965, Journal of anatomy.

[16]  Bruce Abernethy,et al.  Self-Selected Manual Lifting Technique: Functional Consequences of the Interjoint Coordination , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[17]  A W Parker,et al.  Validation of single-segment and three-segment spinal models used to represent lumbar flexion. , 1989, Journal of biomechanics.

[18]  S Kumar,et al.  The physiological cost of three different methods of lifting in sagittal and lateral planes. , 1984, Ergonomics.

[19]  J H van Dieën,et al.  Coordination of the leg muscles in backlift and leglift. , 1992, Journal of biomechanics.

[20]  Park KyungS.,et al.  A Biomechanical Evaluation of Two Methods of Manual Load Lifting , 1974 .

[21]  J D Troup,et al.  Dynamic factors in the analysis of stoop and crouch lifting methods: a methodological approach to the development of safe materials handling standards. , 1977, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[22]  M Gagnon,et al.  Biomechanical exploration on dynamic modes of lifting. , 1992, Ergonomics.