Influence of box type and heights on movement strategies of thoracolumbar region and knee in load handling activities
Giangiardi, Vivian Farahte; Avanzi, Marina Athayde; Valente, Luciana do Socorro da Silva; Silva, Luciana Cristina da Cunha Bueno; Oliveira, Ana Beatriz; Freitas, Sandra Maria Sbeghen Ferreira de; Padula, Rosimeire Simprini
Introduction: Handling activities which includes tasks like lifting, loading, pushing and pulling heavy loads have still been used by workers, in general, this activities are characterized for theirs no corporal limits respect; where the overload in the movements herewith theirs duration and intensity may lead to musculoskeletal diseases, which mainly affect the knee joint and thoracolumbar region of the trunk. Objective: This study intends to evaluate the movement strategies of the spine and knee joint of healthy subjects during a load manual handling course verifying the frequency of these strategies and by what they are influenced (handling high and kind of box). Methods: 42 healthy subjects participated in this study, which had to perform a manual box handling task and unload it in three highs: on the level of the floor, on trochanter’s measured level and shoulder’s measured level. There were utilized four kinds of boxes with variations in: size, material, and presence or not of handles. The conditions (kind of the box and high) were randomized for the subjects. The analysis was made using the unload of the boxes as a reference. Results: the results showed that the characteristics of the boxes (size, material and kind of box, with or without handles) made little influence on the strategies of knee and spine. The principal influence on the posture changes was the difference between the removals and unloads highs. Conclusions: it seems the strategies adopted by the subjects were independent of the characteristics of the load, but dependent of the task demands (i.e., handling high).
1. Dempsey PG, Mathiassen SE. On the evolution of task-based analysis of manual materials handling, and its applicability in contemporary ergonomics. Appl Ergon. 2006; 37:33–43.
2. Zurada J. Classifying the risk of musculoskeletal low back disorders due to manual material handling tasks. Expert Systems with Application. 2012; 39:1125–134.
3. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Nonfatal Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Requiring Days Away from Work, 2012.
4. Gagnon M. Box tilt and knee motion in manual lifting: two differential factors in expert and novice workers. Clin Biomech. 1997; 12(718):419-28,
5. Coury HG, Padula RS. Trunk movements and load support strategy in simulated handling tasks carried out by workers with and without musculoskeletal symptoms. Clin Biomech. 2002; 17:309–11.
6. Madeleine P, Lundager B, Voigt M, Arendt-Nielsen L. Standardized low-load repetitive work: evidence of different motor control strategies between experienced workers and a reference group. Appl Ergon. 2003; 34:533–42.
7. Simoneau S, ST-Vincent M, Chicoine D. Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs), a better understanding for more effective prevention. Association paritari por la santé at la sécurité du travail. Institute de recherché Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail du Quebéc, 2003.
8. Davis KG, Marras WS. The effects of motion on trunk biomechanics - Clin Biomech. 2000; 15:703-17.
9. Junior MT, Fancello EA, Roesler CRM, More ADO. Simulação numérica tridimensional da mecânica do joelho humano. Acta Ortopédica Brasileira. 2008; 17( 2):18-23.
10. Keyserling WM, Brouwer M, Silverstein BA. A checklist for evaluating ergonomic risks factors resulting for awkward postures of the legs, trunk and neck. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992; 9 (4):283-301.
11. Marras WS, Lavender SA, Leurgans SE, Fathallah FA, Ferguson SA, Allread WG, Rajulu SL. Biomechanical risk factors for occupationally related low back disorders. Ergonomics. 1995; 38(2): 377–410.
12. The National Institute for Occupational Saffety and Healthy (NIOSH), 2007. Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Material Handling. Disponível em: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-131/pdfs/2007-131.pdf
13. Occupational Healthy and Safety Administration (OSHAS), 2002. Material Handling and Storage. Disponível em: http://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha2236.pdf
14. Zhou J, Dai B, Ning X. The assessment of material handling strategies in dealing with sudden loading: influences of foot placement on trunk biomechanics. Ergonomics. 2013; 56(10):1569-76.
15. Jung HS. A survey of the optimal handle position for boxes with different sizes and manual handling positions. Appl Ergon. 2010; 41:115–22.
16. Padula RS, Gil Coury HJC - Sagittal trunk movements during load carrying activities: a piloty study. Int J Ind Ergon. 2003; 32:181-8.
17. Gagnon M, Plamondon A, Gravels D, Lortie IM. Knee movement strategies differentiate expert from novice workers in asymmetrical manual materials handling. J Biomech. 1996; 29(11):1445-453.
18. Gagnon M. Ergonomic identification and biomechanical evaluation of workers strategies and their validation in a training situation: Summary of research. Clin Biomechanics. 2005, 20: 569–80
19. Simic M, Hinman RS, Wrigley TV, Bennell KL, Hunt MA. Gait Modification strategies for altering medial Knee Joint Load: A Systematic Review. Arthritis Care Res, American College of Rheumatology. 2010; 63( 3): 405-426,
20. Gagnon M, Delisle A, Desjardins P. Knee flexion and base of support in asymmetrical handling: effects on the worker’s dynamic stability and the moments of the L5/SI and knee joints. Clin Biomechanics. 1998; 13:506-514.
21. Hall SJ. Biomecânica Básica. Ed. Guanabara Koogan. 4º edição. 2005.
22. Kingma I, Faber GS, van Dieën JH.How to lift a box that is too large to fit between the knees. Ergonomics. 2010; 53(10):1228-1238.
23. Padula RS, Oliveira AB, Barela AM, Barela JA, Gil Coury HJC. Are the anticipatory trunk movements occurring during load-carrying activities protective or risky? Int J Ind Ergon. 2008; 38:298–306.
24. Zhou J, Ning X, Nimbarte AD, Dai F. The assessment of material-handling strategies in dealing with sudden loading: the effect of uneven ground surface on trunk biomechanical responses. Ergonomics. 2015; 58(2):259-267.