Wang Zhenglun, Wu Lei, Sun Jingzhi, He Lihua, Wang Sheng, Yang Lei
Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
School of Public Health, Beijing University, Beijing, 100191, China.
J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2012 Aug;32(4):630-636. doi: 10.1007/s11596-012-1009-3. Epub 2012 Aug 11.
There are actually no sufficient data for lifting technique assessment. A laboratory study was undertaken to determine the effect of 3 regular lifting techniques on erector muscle activation, cardiovascular strain and subjective response. Thirty student volunteers participated in the study, and were required to lift a weight with different techniques. Stoop-, squat-, semi-squat-lifting resulted in 3, 2 and 1 time of the highest percentage of the maximum voluntary electrical activation (MVE%) respectively. In the same order, the lowest median frequency (MF) existed 1, 1 and 2 times. Muscle fatigue was 4 times in squat, 36 in semi-squat and 43 in stoop lifting. Heart rate was the highest in squat and lowest in stoop respectively, with a middle level in semi-squat lifting. It may be recommended to adopt mainly the semi-squat technique for daily lifting works. For heavy lifting, it should use the squat technique. Stoop lifting may also be used alternatively but for light things.
实际上，目前尚无足够的数据用于评估提升技术。因此进行了一项实验室研究，以确定三种常规提升技术对竖脊肌激活、心血管应变和主观反应的影响。30名学生志愿者参与了该研究，并被要求用不同的技术举起一个重物。弯腰、深蹲、半深蹲提升分别导致最大自主电激活百分比（MVE%）最高值出现3次、2次和1次。按相同顺序，最低中位频率（MF）分别出现1次、1次和2次。肌肉疲劳程度在深蹲时为4次，半深蹲时为36次，弯腰提升时为43次。心率在深蹲时最高，弯腰时最低，半深蹲提升时处于中间水平。建议日常提升工作主要采用半深蹲技术。对于重物提升，应采用深蹲技术。弯腰提升也可作为替代方法，但仅适用于轻物。
