Division of Applied Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Canada.
Division of Applied Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Canada.
J Biomech. 2020 Nov 9;112:110024. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.110024. Epub 2020 Sep 6.
Excessive loads on the human spine is recognized as a risk factor for back injuries/pain. Various lifting analysis tools such as musculoskeletal models, regression equations and NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) lifting equation (NLE) have been proposed to evaluate and mitigate associated risks during manual material handling activities. Present study aims to compare predicted spinal loads from 5 different lifting analysis tools as well as to critically evaluate the NIOSH recommended weight limit (RWL). Spinal loads were estimated under different symmetric/asymmetric lifting tasks in which hand-load mass at each task was set based on RWL from NLE. Estimated intradiscal pressures (IDPs) of various tools were also compared with in vivo measurements. We compared RWL by NLE versus our estimations of RWL calculated from our regression equations using biomechanical criteria (compression <3400 N with/without shear <1000, 1250 or 1500 N). Our regression equations followed by OpenSim, AnyBody, simple polynomial and 3DSSPP satisfactorily predicted L4-L5 IDPs. Lifting analysis tools estimated comparable spinal compression forces (mean Pearson's r = 0.80; standard deviation of relative difference = 26%) while in shear, differences were greater (mean Pearson's r = 0.68; standard deviation of relative difference = 56%). NLE estimations of RWL were conservative in comparison with our estimations for lean individuals (BMI < 25 kg/m) when compression <3400 N and shear <1250 N were considered as the biomechanical criteria. For heavier individuals, however, NLE estimations of RWL generated spinal compression >3400 N (NIOSH biomechanical safety threshold) as well as shear >1000 N. Although RWLs estimated by NLE was body weight independent, body weight substantially altered RWLs estimated from our regression equations. For improved estimation of the risk of injury, more accurate failure criteria for spinal segments are essential.
人体脊柱承受过大的负荷被认为是背部受伤/疼痛的一个风险因素。为了评估和减轻人工搬运活动中相关风险,已经提出了各种举重分析工具,如肌肉骨骼模型、回归方程和 NIOSH(美国国家职业安全与健康研究所)举重方程(NLE)。本研究旨在比较 5 种不同举重分析工具预测的脊柱负荷,并对 NIOSH 推荐的体重限制(RWL)进行严格评估。在不同的对称/不对称举重任务下,根据 NLE 中的 RWL 来设置每个任务的手载质量,以估计脊柱负荷。还比较了各种工具的椎间盘内压力(IDP)估计值与体内测量值。我们比较了 NLE 中的 RWL 与我们根据生物力学标准(压缩<3400 N 且无剪切力<1000、1250 或 1500 N)从回归方程计算的 RWL 的估计值。我们的回归方程、OpenSim、AnyBody、简单多项式和 3DSSPP 都能很好地预测 L4-L5 IDP。举重分析工具估计的脊柱压缩力相当(平均 Pearson r=0.80;相对差异标准差=26%),而在剪切力方面,差异较大(平均 Pearson r=0.68;相对差异标准差=56%)。与我们的估计值相比,NLE 对 RWL 的估计值对瘦个体(BMI<25 kg/m)较为保守,当考虑到压缩力<3400 N 和剪切力<1250 N 作为生物力学标准时。然而,对于较重的个体,NLE 对 RWL 的估计值会导致脊柱压缩力>3400 N(NIOSH 生物力学安全阈值)以及剪切力>1000 N。尽管 NLE 估计的 RWL 与体重无关,但体重会大大改变我们从回归方程中估计的 RWL。为了更准确地评估受伤风险,需要对脊柱节段的失效标准进行更精确的评估。