Cargando…

Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks

The aim of this study was to assess, for both men and women, the consequences of using different back-support exoskeletons during various manual material tasks (MMH) on the activity of back muscles and trunk kinematics. Fifteen men and fourteen women performed MMH involving a 15 kg load (a static ta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwartz, Mathilde, Desbrosses, Kévin, Theurel, Jean, Mornieux, Guillaume
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10418652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37569010
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20156468
_version_ 1785088316093235200
author Schwartz, Mathilde
Desbrosses, Kévin
Theurel, Jean
Mornieux, Guillaume
author_facet Schwartz, Mathilde
Desbrosses, Kévin
Theurel, Jean
Mornieux, Guillaume
author_sort Schwartz, Mathilde
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to assess, for both men and women, the consequences of using different back-support exoskeletons during various manual material tasks (MMH) on the activity of back muscles and trunk kinematics. Fifteen men and fourteen women performed MMH involving a 15 kg load (a static task, a symmetric lifting task, and an asymmetric lifting task). Four exoskeleton conditions were tested: without equipment (CON) and with three exoskeletons passive (P-EXO), and active (A-EXO1 and A-EXO2)). The electromyographic activity of the lower trapezius (TZ), latissimus dorsi (LD), erector spinae (ES), gluteus maximus (GM), and biceps femoris (BF) muscles was recorded. Trunk kinematics were evaluated to provide average thoracic, lumbar, and hip angles. The use of the P-EXO decreased the activity of LD, GM, and BF from −12 to −27% (p < 0.01) compared to CON, mostly during the static task. The A-EXO1 and A-EXO2 reduced the muscle activity of all studied muscles from −7 to −62% (p < 0.01) compared to CON and from −10 to −52% (p < 0.005) compared to the P-EXO, independently of the modalities of the experimental tasks. A statistical interaction between the sex and exoskeleton was only observed in a few rare conditions. Occupational back-support exoskeletons can reduce trunk extensor muscle activity compared to no equipment being used. However, these reductions were modulated by the exoskeleton technology (passive vs. active), design (weight and anthropomorphism), and the modalities of the task performed (static vs. dynamic). Our results also showed that the active exoskeletons could modify the trunk kinematics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10418652
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104186522023-08-12 Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks Schwartz, Mathilde Desbrosses, Kévin Theurel, Jean Mornieux, Guillaume Int J Environ Res Public Health Article The aim of this study was to assess, for both men and women, the consequences of using different back-support exoskeletons during various manual material tasks (MMH) on the activity of back muscles and trunk kinematics. Fifteen men and fourteen women performed MMH involving a 15 kg load (a static task, a symmetric lifting task, and an asymmetric lifting task). Four exoskeleton conditions were tested: without equipment (CON) and with three exoskeletons passive (P-EXO), and active (A-EXO1 and A-EXO2)). The electromyographic activity of the lower trapezius (TZ), latissimus dorsi (LD), erector spinae (ES), gluteus maximus (GM), and biceps femoris (BF) muscles was recorded. Trunk kinematics were evaluated to provide average thoracic, lumbar, and hip angles. The use of the P-EXO decreased the activity of LD, GM, and BF from −12 to −27% (p < 0.01) compared to CON, mostly during the static task. The A-EXO1 and A-EXO2 reduced the muscle activity of all studied muscles from −7 to −62% (p < 0.01) compared to CON and from −10 to −52% (p < 0.005) compared to the P-EXO, independently of the modalities of the experimental tasks. A statistical interaction between the sex and exoskeleton was only observed in a few rare conditions. Occupational back-support exoskeletons can reduce trunk extensor muscle activity compared to no equipment being used. However, these reductions were modulated by the exoskeleton technology (passive vs. active), design (weight and anthropomorphism), and the modalities of the task performed (static vs. dynamic). Our results also showed that the active exoskeletons could modify the trunk kinematics. MDPI 2023-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10418652/ /pubmed/37569010 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20156468 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Schwartz, Mathilde
Desbrosses, Kévin
Theurel, Jean
Mornieux, Guillaume
Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title_full Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title_fullStr Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title_short Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks
title_sort biomechanical consequences of using passive and active back-support exoskeletons during different manual handling tasks
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10418652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37569010
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20156468
work_keys_str_mv AT schwartzmathilde biomechanicalconsequencesofusingpassiveandactivebacksupportexoskeletonsduringdifferentmanualhandlingtasks
AT desbrosseskevin biomechanicalconsequencesofusingpassiveandactivebacksupportexoskeletonsduringdifferentmanualhandlingtasks
AT theureljean biomechanicalconsequencesofusingpassiveandactivebacksupportexoskeletonsduringdifferentmanualhandlingtasks
AT mornieuxguillaume biomechanicalconsequencesofusingpassiveandactivebacksupportexoskeletonsduringdifferentmanualhandlingtasks