Trunk muscle response to lifting unbalanced loads with and without knowledge of centre of mass.

OBJECTIVE To examine the effects of lifting a bin with a variable centre of mass on muscle activity, with and without knowledge of the centre of mass. BACKGROUND Numerous parameters related to lifting have been examined yet the effects of changing the load centre of mass in two dimensions, with or without knowledge, has not been examined. METHODS Participants lifted a 6 kg industrial tote bin with a 7 and 11 kg mass randomly placed in each of nine compartments, into which the interior of the bin was partitioned. Participants were not restricted in lifting style other than using the handles, which were equipped with force gauges. Two series (9 lifts per series) were completed using the 7 kg load without knowledge of the load placement and one series with knowledge of the load placement. One series was completed using an 11 kg mass without knowledge of load placement. Electromyographic activity of the upper and lower erector spinae, latissimus dorsi and the external obliques were collected bilaterally. RESULTS Left and right muscle pairs demonstrated mirror images for all muscles with lowest activity levels when the load was placed nearer the lifter in the sagittal plane. Peak electromyographic activity of the upper erector spinae and latissimus dorsi increased with the weight in the compartments nearest the body and/or the ipsilateral handle. Conversely, peak electromyographic activity of the lower erector spinae and the obliques increased when the weight was on the contralateral side. Peak upper erector electromyographic activity reached up to 41% of maximum and the lower erectors reached 50% of maximum, while the obliques and latissimus dorsi were below 5% and 7%, respectively. No electromyographic activity differences were found between the known and unknown load placements. DISCUSSION A segmental control strategy appears to exist during lifting that works from the upper to lower torso based on peak electromyographic activity activity. When lifting a bin with a varied centre of mass, highest peak electromyographic activity for the upper and lower erector spinae occurred when the load is closest to the body, regardless of load knowledge. Based on our findings with asymmetrical loads, we conclude that the moments acting on the wrist play an important role in spinal loading and must be included in future studies. RELEVANCE Asymmetrical loads are often encountered in daily life. Regardless of the lifter's knowledge of the balance of the load, the differential and asymmetrical loading of the muscles of the back play a role in the development of low back pain.

[1]  W. Marras,et al.  Trunk loading and expectation. , 1987, Ergonomics.

[2]  G. Andersson.  Epidemiologic Aspects on Low-Back Pain in Industry , 1981, Spine.

[3]  A Garg,et al.  Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. , 1993, Ergonomics.

[4]  R. Norman,et al.  A comparison of peak vs cumulative physical work exposure risk factors for the reporting of low back pain in the automotive industry. , 1998, Clinical biomechanics.

[5]  J H van Dieën,et al.  Total trunk muscle force and spinal compression are lower in asymmetric moments as compared to pure extension moments. , 1999, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  Emma Irvin,et al.  Surfing for Back Pain Patients: The Nature and Quality of Back Pain Information on the Internet , 2001, Spine.

[7]  S H Snook,et al.  The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. , 1991, Ergonomics.

[8]  S. McGill.  Electromyographic activity of the abdominal and low back musculature during the generation of isometric and dynamic axial trunk torque: Implications for lumbar mechanics , 1991, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[9]  S. Kumar,et al.  Theories of musculoskeletal injury causation , 2001, Ergonomics.

[10]  H. Toussaint,et al.  Lifting an unexpectedly heavy object: the effects on low-back loading and balance loss. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

[11]  R D Huchingson,et al.  The effects of load knowledge on stresses at the lower back during lifting. , 1987, Ergonomics.

[12]  P. Dolan,et al.  Sudden and unexpected loading generates high forces on the lumbar spine. , 2000, Spine.

[13]  Deborah Givens Heiss,et al.  Balance loss when lifting a heavier-than-expected load: effects of lifting technique. , 2002, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  W. Marras,et al.  The effects of a temporal warning signal on the biomechanical preparations for sudden loading. , 1995, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[15]  A. Thorstensson,et al.  Interaction between voluntary and postural motor commands during perturbed lifting. , 1999, Spine.

[16]  T. Andriacchi,et al.  The influence of load knowledge on lifting technique. , 1993, Ergonomics.

[17]  Anil Mital,et al.  A guide to manual materials handling , 1993 .

[18]  J. Stevenson,et al.  Back fitness and back health assessment considerations for the Canadian Physical Activity, Fitness and Lifestyle Appraisal. , 2001, Canadian journal of applied physiology = Revue canadienne de physiologie appliquee.

[19]  J. Cholewicki,et al.  Mechanical stability of the in vivo lumbar spine: implications for injury and chronic low back pain. , 1996, Clinical biomechanics.

[20]  J. H. van Dieen,et al.  Underestimation of object mass in lifting does not increase the load on the low back. , 2001 .

[21]  H M Toussaint,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Ergonomics Load Knowledge Affects Low-back Loading and Control of Balance in Lifting Tasks Load Knowledge Affects Low-back Loading and Control of Balance in Lifting Tasks , 2022 .

[22]  W S Marras,et al.  The Development of Response Strategies in Preparation for Sudden Loading to the Torso , 1993, Spine.

[23]  J. Burg,et al.  The effect of timing of a perturbation on the execution of a lifting movement. , 2001 .

[24]  R. Norman,et al.  Disability Resulting From Occupational Low Back Pain: Part II: What Do We Know About Secondary Prevention? A Review of the Scientific Evidence on Prevention After Disability Begins , 1996, Spine.

[25]  M. de Looze,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Ergonomics Trunk Muscle Activation and Low Back Loading in Lifting in the Absence of Load Knowledge , 2022 .

[26]  W S Marras,et al.  The Effects of Preview and Task Symmetry on Trunk Muscle Response to Sudden Loading , 1989, Human factors.

[27]  M. Pope,et al.  The relationship between trunk muscle electromyography and lifting moments in the sagittal and frontal planes. , 1987, Journal of biomechanics.

[29]  A Plamondon,et al.  Effects of symmetry and load absorption of a falling load on 3D trunk muscular moments. , 1995, Ergonomics.

[30]  Manning Dp,et al.  Body movements and events contributing to accidental and nonaccidental back injuries. , 1984 .

[31]  B. Bernard,et al.  Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors: a critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back , 1997 .

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

[33]  J. H. Dieën,et al.  Directionality of anticipatory activation of trunk muscles in a lifting task depends on load knowledge , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.