You are here

Home » Content

Metabolic and Psychophysical Comparison of a One-Handed Lifting Task with Different Coupling Factors

Journal Name:

  • International Journal of Science and Engineering Investigations

Publication Year:

  • 2015

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In lifting tasks involving manual material handling the coupling component relates to the quality of the hand-to-object interface (grip). Good coupling is theorized to reduce lifting and grip stress, whereas poor coupling is theorized to increase lifting and grip stress. Choosing to lift with one hand is a decision often made by the worker. Understanding the metabolic demand of one-handed lifting tasks is important in job design strategies related to productivity and injury prevention. This study compared the metabolic cost and perceived exertion between a one-handed lifting task performed with identical weight but different coupling and container factors. Twenty volunteers participated (13 M, 7 F; mean 26 + 6 yr; 178 + 8 cm; 74 + 11 kg; grip strength, R = 45 + 13 kg, L = 43 + 14 kg. Participants transferred either a 12.5 kg milk crate or 12.5 kg bag of dog food individually back and forth from the floor to a table by gripping with their dominant hand. Participants performed two, 5 minute work bouts with either the milk crate or dog food bag in random order. Three minutes of rest were allowed between the bouts. Pace was constant at 8 lifts per minute. Metabolic and psychophysical parameters were monitored throughout the work bouts. Steady state data from minutes 2 – 5 was used for analysis with paired T-Test. Results: mc = milk crate; df = dog food; oxygen cost (ml.kg-1.min-1): mc = 15.0 + 3.1, df = 13.1 + 1.9; l.min-1: mc = 1.1 + 0.2, df = 1.0 + 0.2; kcal.min-1: mc = 5.3 + 1.2, df = 5.1 + 1.1; RER: mc = 0.9 + 0.0, df = 0.9 + 0.1; HR (bpm): mc = 104.1 + 10.3, df = 100.3 + 9.9; RPE: mc = 9.7 + 2.0, df = 9.3 + 1.7. Significant difference (p<0.05) occurred in oxygen cost (ml.kg-1.min-1) and heart rate (bpm) between the two conditions. No difference was observed in rating of perceived exertion (RPE). In conclusion, a significantly higher oxygen cost and heart rate were observed when participants performed a paced, 12.5 kg one-handed lifting task with good coupling factors (milk crate), than when lifting a 12.5 kg dog food bag with poor coupling factors. When lifting stress is measured by relative oxygen consumption and heart rate, these results are in contrast to expectations that poor coupling factors would increase stress of a lifting task.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon ijsei-44015-05.pdf
  • 5
26
30
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

[1] Waters, T.R. (2004). National efforts to identify research issues related to prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. J Electromyography and Kinesiology, 14, 7-12.
[2] Waters, T.R., Baron, S.L., Piacitelli, L.A., Anderson, V.P., Skov, T., Haring-Sweeney, M., Wall, D.K., Fine, L.J. (1999). Evaluation of the revised NIOSH lifting equation: a cross-sectional epidemiologic study. Spine 24, 386-394.
[3] Adams, K.J., DeBeliso, M., Sevene-Adams, P.G., Berning, J.M., Miller, T., Tollerud, D.J. (2010). Physiological and psycophysical comparison between a lifting task with identical weight but different coupling factors. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24, 307-312.
[4] Sevene, T.G., DeBeliso, M., Berning, J.M., Harris, C., Adams, K.J. (2012). Phsyiological and psychophysical comparison between a one and two-handed identical lifting task. Int J Sci Eng Investig, 1, 86-89.
[5] Sevene, T.G., DeBeliso, M., Harris, C., Berning, J.M., Climstein, M., Adams, K.J. (2013). Metabolic response to repetitive lifting tasks: predetermined vs. self-selected pace. Int J Sci Eng Investig, 2, 68-71.
[6] DeBeliso, M., Sevene, T., Adams, K.J., Harris, C., Climstein, M., Berning, J.M. (2013). The effects of a back-belt on lumbar disc deformation during stoop type lifting. Int J Sci Eng Investig, 2, 1-10.
[7] Kingma, I., van Dieen, J.H. (2004). Lifting over an obstacle: effects of one-handed lifting and hand support on trunk kinematics and low back loading. Journal of Biomechanics, 27, 249-255.
[8] DeBeliso, M., O’Shea, J.P., Harris, C., Adams, K.J., Climstein, M. (2004). The relation between trunk strength measures and lumbar disc deformation during stoop type lifting. JEPonline 7, 16-26.
[9] DeBeliso, M., Boham, M., Harris, C., Carson, C., Berning, J.M., Sevene, T., Adams, K.J. (2015). Grip and body strength measures in the mature adult: a brief report. Int J Sci Eng Investig, 4, 83-86.
[10] McChesney, J.W., DeBeliso, M., Murdock, L.E. (2012). The Hand Grip ForceMapTM System. Int J Sci Engineering Invest , 8, 76-78.
[11] Fan, Z.J., Silerstein, B.A., Bao, S., Bonauto, D.K., Howard, N.L., Smith, C.K. (2014). The association between combination of hand force and forearm posture and incidence of lateral epicondylitis in a working population. Hum Factors, 56, 151-165.
[12] Waters, T.R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., Fine, L.J. (1993). Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 36, 749-776.
[13] Dempsey, P.G. (2002). Usability of the revised NIOSH lifting equation. Ergonomics 45, 817-828.
[14] Waters, T.R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A. (1994). Applications manual for the revised NIOSH lifting equation. DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. No. 94-110, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH.
[15] Gerr, F., Fethke, N.B., Merlino, L., Anton, D., Rosecrane, J., Jones, M.P., Marcus, M., Meyers, A.B. (2014). A prospective study of musculoskeletal outcomes among manufacturing workers: 1. Effects of physical risk factors. Hum Factors, 56, 112-130.
[16] Gerr, F., Fethke, N.B., Anton, D., Merlino, L., Rosecrane, J., Marcus, M., Jones, M.P. (2014). A prospective study of musculoskeletal outcomes among manufacturing workers: II. Effects of psychosocial stress and work organization factors. Hum Factors, 56, 112-130.
[17] Vincent, R., Hocking, C. (2013). Factors that might give rise to musculoskeletal disorders when mothers lift children in the home. Physiother Res Int. 18, 81-90.
[18] Singh, S., Sinwal, N., Rathore, H. (2012). Gender involvement in manual material handling (mmh) tasks in agriculture and technology intervention to mitigate the resulting musculoskeletal disorders. Work, 41, Suppl1, 4333-41.
[19] Young, J.G., Woolley, C., Armstrong, T.J., Ashton-Miller, J.A. (2009). Hand-handhold coupling: effect of handle shape, orientation, and friction on breakaway strength. Hum Factors, 51, 705-717.
[20] Kuijer et al: (2014). An evidence-based multidisciplinary practice guideline to reduce the workload due to lifting for preventing work-related low back pain. Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 26, 16.
[21] Chung, H., Wang, M.J. (2001). The effects of container design and stair climbing on maximal acceptable lift weight, wrist posture, psychophysical, and physiological responses in wafer-handling tasks. Applied Ergonomics 32, 593-598.
[22] Dempsey, P.G., Mathiassen, S.E. (2006). On the evolution of task-based analysis of manual materials handling, and its applicability in contemporary ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics 37, 33-43.
[23] Arimand, N., Plamondon, A., Shirazi-Adi, A., Panianpour, M., Lariviere, C. (2012). Predictive equations for lumbar spine loads in load-dependent asymmetric one- and two-handed lifting activities. Clinical Biomechanics, 27, 537-544.
[24] Faber, G.S., Kingma, I., Kuijer, P.P., van der Molen, H.F., Hoozemans, M.J., Frings-Dresen, M.H., van Dieen, J.H. (2009). Working height, block mass and one- vs. two-handed block handling: the contribution to low back and shoulder loading during masonry work. Ergonomics, 52, 1104-1118.
[25] Ferguson, S.A., Gaudes-MacLaren, I.,I., Marras, W.S., Waters, T.R., Davis, K.G., (2002). Spinal loading when lifting industrial storage bins. Ergonomics, 45, 399-414.
[26] Marras, W.S., Davis, K.G. (1998). Spine loading during asymmetric lifting tasks using one versus two hands. Ergonomics, 41, 817-834.
[27] American College of Sports Medicine (2014). ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, 9th Ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Maryland.
[28] Borg, G.A.V. (1982). Psychophysical basis of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 14, 377-387.
[29] Kraemer, W.J., Mazzetti, S.A., Nindl, B.C., Gotshalk, L.A., Volek, J.S., Bush, J.A., Mars, J.O., Dohi, K., Gomez, A.L., Miles, M., Fleck, S.J., Newton, R.U., Hakkinen, K. (2001). Effect of resistance training on women’s strength/power and occupational performances. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33, 1011-1025.
[30] Nindl, B.C., Sharp, M.A., Mello, R.P., Rice, V.J., Murphy, N.M., & Patton, J.F. (1998). Gender comparison of peak oxygen uptake: repetitive box lifting versus treadmill running. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 77, 112-117.
[31] Sharp, M.A., Harman, E., Vogel, J.A., Knapik, J.J., Legg, S.J. (1988). Maximal aerobic capacity for repetitive lifting: comparison with three standard exercise testing modes. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 57, 753-760.
[32] Bassett, D.R., Howley, E.T., Thompson, D.L., King, G.A., Strath, S.J., McLaughlin, J.E., Parr, B.B. (2001). Validation of a computerized metabolic measurement system. J Applied Physiology, 91, 218-224.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com