Search

Objective: To determine whether (i) low back loads and/or (ii) kinematic coordination patterns differed across theoretical expert, contextual expert and novice groups when completing both generic and occupation-specific lifts. Background: Experience has been proposed as a factor that could reduce biomechanical exposures in lifting, but the literature reports mixed effects. The inconsistent relationship between experience and exposures may be partially attributable to the broad classification of experience and experimental lifting protocols not replicating the environment where experience was gained. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to recruit 72 participants including theoretical experts (formal training on lifting mechanics), contextual experts (paramedics), and novices. Participants performed 10 barbell and crate (generic) lifts, as well as backboard and stretcher (occupation-specific) lifts while whole-body kinematics and ground reaction forces were collected. Peak low back compression and anteroposterior shear loads normalized to body mass, as well as kinematic coordination patterns, were calculated as dependent variables. Results: No significant differences in low back loads were observed across expertise groups. However, significant differences were seen in kinematic coordination patterns across expertise groups in occupation-specific lifts, but not in generic lifts. Conclusion: Increasing expertise is unlikely to minimize low back loads in lifting. However, contextual expertise did influence lifting kinematics, but only when performing occupationally specific lifts. Application: Contextual expertise may help lifters adopt lifting kinematics that enhance the tolerance of their musculoskeletal system to withstand applied loads, but does not seem to reduce the applied low back loads relative to noncontextual expert groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is disagreement regarding the efficacy of 'safe' lifting recommendations for reducing low back disorder risk. These recommendations commonly focus on minimising lumbar spine flexion, which limits the range of allowable starting lift positions for that person. This study evaluated whether starting postural adaptations could allow a person to reach down further without rounding their lumbar spine before beginning a lift. Reach displacement was measured as participants performed a series of maximal reach tasks under different combinations of stance width, foot orientation and trunk inclination, with their lumbar spine motion restricted. There were no interactions between any of the three postural adaptations or any effect of stance width or trunk inclination. Seventy-nine percent of participants achieved their greatest reach displacement with their feet externally rotated, which contributed to a 4 cm greater reach displacement compared to a neutral foot orientation (p < 0.001). Practitioner summary: This study examined whether aspects of initial posture could influence the ability to adhere to 'safe' lifting recommendations across a range of lift heights. As a component of lifting (re)training interventions, practitioners should consider starting lift posture adaptations (e.g. manipulating foot external rotation) to improve capacity to adhere to recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is unknown how structural (sex, stature, body mass) and functional (strength, flexibility) personal factors influence lifting strategy in paramedic work. We explored whether variance in peak low back forces and kinematic coordination patterns could be explained by structural and functional personal factors in paramedic lifting tasks. Seventy-two participants performed backboard and stretcher lifts. Peak low back forces normalised to body mass, as well as kinematic coordination patterns, were calculated as dependent variables. Being female, stronger, shorter, having higher body mass, and/or having greater lower body range of motion (ROM) were all independently associated with lower normalised low back forces across backboard and stretcher lifting. Females and stronger individuals seemed to define a movement objective to consistently minimise compressive forces, while individuals with greater hip ROM consistently minimised anteroposterior shear forces. The efficacy of improving strength and hip ROM to reduce low back forces in paramedic lifting should be investigated. Practitioner summary: Females, stronger individuals, and individuals with greater hip range of motion consistently exhibited lower normalised low back forces in paramedic lifting. Improving strength and hip range of motion via training is a potential proactive ergonomics approach to reduce peak low back forces in paramedic lifting tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]