Gender influences on spine loads during complex lifting.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Previous research has documented differences in spine loading between genders when the imposed load is normalized relative to the size of the person. However, under realistic work conditions the magnitude of the load handled is seldom adjusted relative to worker anthropometry. Thus, there is a void in our knowledge in that we do not understand how material handling influences spine loading and potential risk of injury as a function of gender under realistic lifting situations. PURPOSE To evaluate the differences in spine loading between men and women when exposed to similar workplace demands. STUDY DESIGN A laboratory study was conducted to investigate the biomechanical responses during realistic free-dynamic lifting tasks when subjects lifted from origins and destinations that were either fixed or set relative to the subject's anthropometry. PATIENT SAMPLE Twenty men and 20 women asymptomatic for low back pain were recruited to participate in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES The three-dimensional spine loads were predicted from a well-established electromyography-assisted model. METHODS Both genders completed a series of symmetric and asymmetric (60-degree clockwise) lifts that originated from two shelf heights ("relative" to knee height and "set" at 35 cm from floor) and terminated at one of two destination heights ("relative" to waist and "set" 102 cm from the floor). Three levels of box weight were investigated (6.8, 13.6 and 22.7 kg). RESULTS Men had significantly greater compression forces than women (about 640 N). Loading differences between genders were further magnified by several of the workplace factors. The differences between men and women were even greater when lifting either of the heavier loads from the lower fixed shelf (more than 50% greater). CONCLUSIONS It is apparent that men produce the greater loads on their spines during lifting. However, engineering controls, such as adjustable workplace layout or less weight lifted, may reduce or eliminate gender-specific differences in spine loads. Furthermore, the differences in spine loads appear to be a result of kinematic trade-offs and muscle coactivity differences in combination with unequal body masses between genders. However, when the loads were put into context of the expected tolerances of the spine, women were found to be at increased risk of injury, especially when lifting heavy loads or under asymmetric lifting conditions. Collectively, the results indicate the need to account for differences between the genders when designing the workplace.

[1]  W. Marras,et al.  A Three-Dimensional Motion Model of Loads on the Lumbar Spine: II. Model Validation , 1991, Human factors.

[2]  Don B. Chaffin,et al.  A Biomechanical Model for Analysis of Symmetric Sagittal Plane Lifting , 1970 .

[3]  K P Granata,et al.  Changes in Trunk Dynamics and Spine Loading During Repeated Trunk Exertions , 1997, Spine.

[4]  T. Mayer,et al.  Quantification of Lumbar Function: Part 3: Preliminary Data on Isokinetic Torso Rotation Testing with Myoelectric Spectral Analysis in Normal and Low-Back Pain Subjects , 1985, Spine.

[5]  M. Adams,et al.  Bending and compressive stresses acting on the lumbar spine during lifting activities. , 1994, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  D. Spengler,et al.  Back Injuries in Industry: A Retrospective Study: III. Employee-related Factors , 1986, Spine.

[7]  J. Adams,et al.  Back injuries in industry. , 1947, American journal of surgery.

[8]  W. Marras,et al.  A Biomechanical Assessment and Model of Axial Twisting in the Thoracolumbar Spine , 1995, Spine.

[9]  S. McGill,et al.  Measured and modelled static and dynamic axial trunk torsion during twisting in males and females. , 1990, Journal of biomedical engineering.

[10]  W. Marras,et al.  An EMG-assisted model of trunk loading during free-dynamic lifting. , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.

[11]  W. Marras,et al.  An EMG-assisted model of loads on the lumbar spine during asymmetric trunk extensions. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[12]  S. Kumar,et al.  Cumulative Load as a Risk Factor for Back Pain , 1990, Spine.

[13]  T. Waters,et al.  Evaluation of spinal loading during lowering and lifting. , 1998, Clinical biomechanics.

[14]  K P Granata,et al.  Female and male trunk geometry: size and prediction of the spine loading trunk muscles derived from MRI. , 2001, Clinical biomechanics.

[15]  C. Richardson,et al.  Muscle fibre orientation of abdominal muscles and suggested surface EMG electrode positions. , 1998, Electromyography and clinical neurophysiology.

[16]  D. Warwick,et al.  Trunk Strengths in Attempted Flexion, Extension, and Lateral Bending in Healthy Subjects and Patients with Low‐Back Disorders , 1980, Spine.

[17]  W S Marras,et al.  Electromyographic studies of the lumbar trunk musculature during the generation of low‐level trunk acceleration , 1993, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[18]  William S Marras,et al.  Spine Loading as a Function of Gender , 2002, Spine.

[19]  C. K. Lee,et al.  Quantitative Assessment of Back Strength Using Isokinetic Testing , 1984, Spine.

[20]  J W Yates,et al.  Static lifting strength and maximal isometric voluntary contractions of back, arm and shoulder muscles. , 1980, Ergonomics.

[21]  P. Dolan,et al.  Passive tissues help the back muscles to generate extensor moments during lifting. , 1994, Journal of biomechanics.

[22]  W. Marras,et al.  The Influence of Trunk Muscle Coactivity on Dynamic Spinal Loads , 1995, Spine.

[23]  Shrawan Kumar,et al.  Human Trunk Strength Profile in Lateral Flexion and Axial Rotation , 1995, Spine.

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

[25]  Robert J. Gatchel,et al.  Quantification of Lumbar Function , 1985 .

[26]  W S Marras,et al.  A Three-Dimensional Motion Model of Loads on the Lumbar Spine: I. Model Structure , 1991, Human factors.

[27]  T. Mayer,et al.  Quantification of Lumbar Function: Part 4: Isometric and Isokinetic Lifting Simulation in Normal Subjects and Low-Back Dysfunction Patients , 1985, Spine.

[28]  W S Marras,et al.  Spine loading during asymmetric lifting using one versus two hands. , 1998, Ergonomics.

[29]  D. Chaffin,et al.  Isometric and isokinetic back and arm lifting strengths: device and measurement. , 1988, Journal of biomechanics.

[30]  P. Dolan,et al.  Repetitive lifting tasks fatigue the back muscles and increase the bending moment acting on the lumbar spine. , 1998, Journal of biomechanics.

[31]  William S. Marras,et al.  A Biomechanical Assessment of Axial Twisting Exertions , 1995 .

[32]  Alwin Luttmann,et al.  Lumbar load during one-handed bricklaying , 1991 .

[33]  W. Marras,et al.  Spine loading during trunk lateral bending motions. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[34]  S. Smith,et al.  Quantification of Lumbar Function: Part 1: Isometric and Multispeed Isokinetic Trunk Strength Measures in Sagittal and Axial Planes in Normal Subjects , 1985, Spine.

[35]  T. Gómez,et al.  Normative Database for Trunk Range of Motion, Strength, Velocity, and Endurance with the Isostation B-200 Lumbar Dynamometer , 1991, Spine.

[36]  K P Granata,et al.  MRI-derived moment-arms of the female and male spine loading muscles. , 2001, Clinical biomechanics.

[37]  W S Marras,et al.  Networks of internal trunk-loading activities under controlled trunk-motion conditions. , 1988, Spine.

[38]  Å. Kilbom,et al.  Physical work load between 1970 and 1993--did it change? , 2000, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[39]  Gary A. Mirka,et al.  Accuracy of a three-dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics , 1992 .

[40]  S Kumar,et al.  Static and dynamic lifting strength at different reach distances in symmetrical and asymmetrical planes. , 1992, Ergonomics.

[41]  G. Andersson,et al.  The epidemiology of spinal disorders , 1997 .

[42]  W. G. Allread,et al.  The Role of Dynamic Three-Dimensional Trunk Motion in Occupationally-Related Low Back Disorders: The Effects of Workplace Factors, Trunk Position, and Trunk Motion Characteristics on Risk of Injury , 1993, Spine.

[43]  K P Granata,et al.  A method for measuring external spinal loads during unconstrained free-dynamic lifting. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.