Motor variability during a repetitive lifting task is impaired by wearing a passive back-support exoskeleton |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Design, Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland;2. TNO, Schipholweg 77, 2316ZL Leiden, The Netherlands;3. Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Department of Advanced Robotics, Via Morego 30, 16163 Genova, Italy;1. Spine Research Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA;2. Department of Integrated Systems Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA;1. Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Netherlands;2. TNO, Leiden, Netherlands;3. Department of Advanced Robotics, Instituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Genoa, Italy;4. School of Design/Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland;1. INSERM UMR 1093-CAPS, Bourgogne Franche-Comté University, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Burgundy, Dijon, France;2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital Dijon, Burgundy, Dijon, France;3. INSERM CIC 1432, Clinical Investigation Center P Module, Technological Investigation Platform University Hospital Dijon, Burgundy, Dijon, France;4. Kinesiology Laboratory, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland;5. Clinical Investigation Center, INSERM CIC-EC 1432, University Hospital Dijon, Burgundy, Dijon, France;6. Division of Rheumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland |
| |
| Abstract: | PurposeEvaluate whether wearing a passive back-support exoskeleton during repetitive lifting impairs motor variability of erector spinae muscle and spine movement and whether this association is influenced by lifting style.Scope: Thirty-six healthy males performed ten lifts in four randomized conditions with exoskeleton (without, with) and lifting style (squat, stoop) as dependent variables. One lifting cycle contained four phases: bending/straighten without/with load. Erector spinae muscular activity, thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis were measured with surface electromyography and gravimetric position sensors, respectively. Absolute and relative cycle-to-cycle variability were calculated. The effects of exoskeleton and exoskeleton × lifting style were assessed on outcomes during the complete lifting cycle and its four phases.ResultsFor the complete lifting cycle, muscular variability and thoracic kyphosis variability decreased whereas lumbar lordosis variability increased with exoskeleton. For lifting phases, effects of exoskeleton were mixed. Absolute and relative muscular variability showed a significant interaction effect for the phase straighten with load; variability decreased with exoskeleton during squat lifting.ConclusionUsing the exoskeleton impaired several motor variability parameters during lifting, supporting previous findings that exoskeletons may limit freedom of movement. The impact of this result on longer-term development of muscular fatigue or musculoskeletal disorders cannot yet be estimated. |
| |
| Keywords: | Movement variability Squat lifting Stoop lifting Assistive device Electromyography Kinematics Spine |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
