Workplace design guidelines for asymptomatic vs. low-back-injured workers.
While numerous efforts have attempted to provide quantitative guidelines for the prevention of initial low back disorders during material handling tasks, none have appeared in the literature that address the issue of recurrent low back disorders due to materials handling when returning to the workplace. A study comparing the spine loads of low back pain patients and asymptomatic controls was conducted. Subjects lifted weights varying from 4.5-11.4 kg at four vertical heights, two horizontal distances and five task asymmetries collectively representing common industrial lifting situations. Spine loading was calculated using a validated EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Spine loads observed during lifting tasks were compared to spine tolerance values believed to initiate low back injuries. In addition, the percentage of patients successfully performing the lift was noted and used as an indication of the willingness of the subject to perform the task. These evaluations are summarized in a series of three lifting guidelines indicating safe, medium risk and high risk lifting tasks for low back patients as well as asymptomatic workers. It is believed that adherence to these guidelines can minimize the risk of recurrent low back disorders due to occupational lifting.
Ferguson
Sue A
SA
Biodynamics Laboratory, Institute for Ergonomics, The Ohio State University, 210 Baker Systems, 1971 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. ferguson.4@osu.edu
Marras
William S
WS
Burr
Deborah
D
D019567:Back Injuries / Q000503:physiopathology*; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D004576:Electromyography; D006804:Ergonomics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017770:Lifting; D017116:Low Back Pain / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008297:Male; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000503:physiopathology; D055502:Secondary Prevention; D013131:Spine / Q000503:physiopathology*; D016474:Weight-Bearing / Q000502:physiology*; D017132:Workplace