IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i15p6468-d1204766.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Mathilde Schwartz

    (Working Life Department, French National Research and Safety Institute for the Prevention of Occupational Accidents and Diseases (INRS), 54500 Vandœuvre-les-Nancy, France)

  • Kévin Desbrosses

    (Working Life Department, French National Research and Safety Institute for the Prevention of Occupational Accidents and Diseases (INRS), 54500 Vandœuvre-les-Nancy, France)

  • Jean Theurel

    (Working Life Department, French National Research and Safety Institute for the Prevention of Occupational Accidents and Diseases (INRS), 54500 Vandœuvre-les-Nancy, France)

  • Guillaume Mornieux

    (Développement Adaptation et Handicap (DevAH), Université de Lorraine, 54000 Nancy, France
    Faculty of Sport Sciences, Université de Lorraine, 54000 Nancy, France)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathilde Schwartz & Kévin Desbrosses & Jean Theurel & Guillaume Mornieux, 2023. "Biomechanical Consequences of Using Passive and Active Back-Support Exoskeletons during Different Manual Handling Tasks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(15), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:15:p:6468-:d:1204766
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/15/6468/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/15/6468/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fabrizio Russo & Giuseppe Francesco Papalia & Gianluca Vadalà & Luca Fontana & Sergio Iavicoli & Rocco Papalia & Vincenzo Denaro, 2021. "The Effects of Workplace Interventions on Low Back Pain in Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Mathilde Schwartz & Jean Theurel & Kévin Desbrosses, 2021. "Effectiveness of Soft versus Rigid Back-Support Exoskeletons during a Lifting Task," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-12, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura J. Elstub & Shimra J. Fine & Karl E. Zelik, 2021. "Exoskeletons and Exosuits Could Benefit from Mode-Switching Body Interfaces That Loosen/Tighten to Improve Thermal Comfort," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Rami J. Anshasi & Adi Alsyouf & Fahad Nasser Alhazmi & Abeer Taha AbuZaitoun, 2022. "A Change Management Approach to Promoting and Endorsing Ergonomics within a Dental Setting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Giorgia Petrucci & Giuseppe Francesco Papalia & Fabrizio Russo & Gianluca Vadalà & Michela Piredda & Maria Grazia De Marinis & Rocco Papalia & Vincenzo Denaro, 2021. "Psychological Approaches for the Integrative Care of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Ci-Jyun Liang & Marvin H. Cheng, 2023. "Trends in Robotics Research in Occupational Safety and Health: A Scientometric Analysis and Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(10), pages 1-21, May.
    5. Anca Radauceanu & Michel Grzebyk & Stéphanie Boini & Mathieu Dziurla & Jean-Jacques Atain-Kouadio & Agnès Aublet-Cuvelier, 2023. "Low Back Pain and Upper-Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders in French Postal Workers Driving Light-Duty Vehicles for Mail and Parcel Delivery," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Monica Unsgaard-Tøndel & Anne Lovise Nordstoga, 2022. "Are Work Demand, Support and Control Associated with Work Ability and Disability during Back Pain Treatment? A Prospective Explorative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-9, March.
    7. Giuseppe Francesco Papalia & Giorgia Petrucci & Fabrizio Russo & Luca Ambrosio & Gianluca Vadalà & Sergio Iavicoli & Rocco Papalia & Vincenzo Denaro, 2022. "COVID-19 Pandemic Increases the Impact of Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-11, April.
    8. Elizabeth Shaw & Michael Nunns & Stuart G. Spicer & Hassanat Lawal & Simon Briscoe & G. J. Melendez‐Torres & Ruth Garside & Kristin Liabo & Jo Thompson Coon, 2024. "What is the volume, quality and characteristics of evidence relating to the effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of multi‐disciplinary occupational health interventions aiming to improve work‐related ," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:15:p:6468-:d:1204766. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.