Muscular Exposures During Standardized Two-Handed Maximal Pushing and Pulling Tasks
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONS We found markedly different muscular exposures and external hand force-generating muscle efficiencies when individuals produce maximal pushing and pulling forces in several experimental conditions (e.g., 100 cm versus 150 cm handle height, horizontal verss vertical grip orientation). For the same task characteristics, females produced higher levels of muscle activation and higher ratios of normalized muscle activity to force, which were likely the result of differing anthropometry between sexes. Females thus appear to be at higher risk for muscular overload during push/pull tasks. Pulling at waist height and pushing at shoulder height are recommended when possible, for similar task conditions to those studied. The high prevalence of pushing and pulling tasks in occupational settings enables use of these findings, in concert with traditional strength-based ergonomics assessments, to help protect both males and females from potential musculoskeletal overload.TECHNICAL ABSTRACT Rationale: Pushing and pulling tasks are highly prevalent across occupational settings. Despite increased availability of push and pull strength data, scarce information exists regarding specific muscle-based exposures when performing these tasks in common work configurations, and how these exposures differ between males and females. Purpose: We evaluated the influence of sex and several workplace factors on surface electromyography (EMG)-based exposure estimates during standardized, symmetric, two-handed maximal voluntary isometric push and pull tasks. Methods: Individual muscle and mean EMG activations (i.e., bilaterally and total), as well as weighted EMG to normalized force ratios (wEMG/nForce), were evaluated for seven bilateral shoulder and trunk muscles, in eight experimental conditions. Workplace factors manipulated were exertion direction (push and pull), handle height (100 cm and 150 cm) and handle orientation (vertical and horizontal). Results: For the muscles studied, pushing resulted in nearly twice (∼1.82×) the muscle activation than pulling. Across individual muscles, the largest difference between heights existed bilaterally for the pectoralis major, with pushing at 100 cm resulting in approximately twice the EMG amplitude. When pulling, only the right triceps activity differed between heights (i.e., 40% higher when exerting at 100 cm). Females produced higher normalized muscle activations (i.e., 23% higher across all muscles), and were generally less efficient than males, as indicted by a wEMG/nForce ratio approximately 26% higher than males across all tasks. The wEMG/nForce ratio was always higher when pulling at 150 cm compared to pulling at 100 cm, but handle height did not appear to influence wEMG/nForce when pushing. Conclusions: Females appear to be at a higher risk for muscular overload in the pushing and pulling tasks examined here. Adjusting the height of handles according to the task conditions can be a useful intervention to lower muscular demands.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».