Original Article

Changes in Back Compressive Force When Measuring Maximum Acceptable Weight of Lift in Iranian Male Students

Abstract

Background: Low back pain caused by work, ranked the second after cardiovascular diseases, are among the most common reasons of patients’ referral to the physicians in Iran. This study aimed to determine the changes in back compressive force when measuring maximum acceptable weight of lift in Iranian male students.

Methods: This experimental study was conducted in 2015 on 15 young male students were recruited from Tehran University of Medical Science. Each participant performed 18 different lifting tasks involving three lifting frequencies, with three lifting heights, and two box sizes. Each set of experiments was conducted during the 20 min work period using free-style lifting technique. The back compressive force evaluated with hand-calculation back compressive force method. Finally, Pearson correlation test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t-test were used for data analysis.

Results: The mean of back compressive force (BCF) for the small and large boxes at a frequency of 1lift/min at heights of F - K height, were 1001.02 (±86.74), 1210.57 (±93.77) Ib, respectively. There was a significant difference between mean BCF in terms of frequencies of lifts (P=0.02). The result revealed significant difference between frequencies of 1 lift/min and 6.67 lift/min (P=0.01). There was a significant difference between mean BCF in terms of the sizes of the two boxes (P=0.001). There was a significant relationship between the BCF and maximum acceptable weight of lift in all test conditions (P=0.001).

Conclusion: BCF is affected by box size, lifting frequency and weight of load.

 

Gnaidy AM, Waly SM, Khalil TM, Hi-dalgo J (1993). Spinal compression tolerance limits for the design of man-ual material handling operations in the workplace. Ergonomics, 36(4):415-34.

Industrial Accident Prevention Associa-tion (2008). A Health and Safety Guideline for Your Workplace for manual material handling, Toll-free: 1-800-406-IAPA (4272). Available from: www.iapa.ca

Ghaffari M, Alipour A, Farshad AA, Yensen I, Vingard E(2006). Incidence and recurrence of disabling low back pain and neck-shoulder pain. Spine, 31(21):2500-6.

Abdoli-Eramaki M, Stevenson JM, Reid SA, Bryant TJ (2007). Mathematical and empirical proof of principle for an on-body personal lift augmentation device. J Biomech, 40(8): 1694-1700.

Li JY, Wang S, He LH, Wu SS, Yang L, Yu SF, et al (2012). Risk Factors of Low Back Pain among the Chinese Occupational Population: A Case-control Study. Biomed Environ Sci, 25(4):421-9.

Hoy D, Brooks P, Blyth F, Buchbinder R (2010). The epidemiology of low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol, 24(6):769-81.

Mehrparvar AH, Ranjbar S, Mostaghaci M, Salehi M (2011). Risk assessment of musculoskeletal disorders by QEC method in a food production factory. J Occup Med, 3(2):54-60.

Klein BP, Jensen RC, Sanderson LM (1984). Assessment of workers' com-pensation claims for back sprain/strains. J Occup Med, 26(6): 443-448.

Graham RB, Agnew MJ, Stevenson JM (2009). Effectiveness of an on-body lifting aid at reducing low back physi-cal demands during an automotive as-sembly task: Assessment of EMG re-sponse and user acceptability. Appl Ergon, 40(5):936-942.

Bush-Joseph C, Schipplein O, Andersson GB, Andriacchi TP (1988). Influence of dynamic factors on the lumbar spine moment in lifting. Ergonomics, 31 (2): 211-216.

Buseck M, Schipplein OD, Andersson GB, Andriacchi TP (1988). Influence of dynamic factors and external loads on the moment at the lumbar spine in lifting. Spine, 13 (8): 918-921.

Gracovetsky S (1990). Musculoskeletal Function of the Spine. In: Multiple Muscle Systems. Ed, winters J M, Woo S L. Springer-Verlag, New York, PP. 410-437.

Marras WS (2005). The future of re-search in understanding and control-ling work-related low back disorders. Ergonomics, 48(5): 464-77.

Bloswick DS and Villnave T (2000). Er-gonomics. In: Patty's Industrial Hygiene. Ed, Harris RL. New York, John Wiley and Sons, PP .2531-2638.

Elfeituri FE, Taboun SM (2002). An Evaluation of the NIOSH Lifting Equation: A Psychophysical and Bio-mechanical Investigation. Int J Occup Saf Ergon, 8(2): 243-258.

Leskinen TP (1985). Comparison of stat-ic and dynamic biomechanical models. Ergonomics, 28 (1):285-291.

Gary S. Nelson, Henry Wickes, Jason T (1981). NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting. N. http://www.hazardcontrol.com/factsheets/pdfs/NIOSH-1981.pdf.

Ciriello VM, Snook SH (1983). A study of size distance height, and frequency effects on manual handling tasks. Hum Factors, 25 (5): 473-83.

Ciriello VM, Snook SH, Hashemi L, Cotnam J (1999). Distributions of manual materials handling task pa-rameters. Int J Ind Ergon, 24(4): 379-88.

Karwowski W and Yates JW (1986). Re-liability of the Psychophysical Ap-proach to Manual Lifting of Licjuids by Females. Ergonomics, 29(2): 237-248.

Snook SH, Vaillancourt DR, Ciriello VM, Webster BS (1995). Psychophys-ical studies of repetitive wrist fexion and extension. Ergonomics, 38(7): 1488-507.

Snook SH, Ciriello VM (1991). The de-sign of manual tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics, 34(9): 1197-213.

Ciriello VM, Snook SH, Hughes GJ (1993). Further studies of psychophys-ically determined maximum accepta-ble weights and forces. Hum Factors, 35 (1): 175-186.

Chen YL (2000). Changes in lifting dy-namics after localized arm fatigue. Int J Ind Ergon, 25: 611-619.

Iwan Budihardjo. Studies of compressive forces on L5/S1 during dynamic man-ual lifting [PhD thesis]. School of In-dustrial Engineering, Iowa State Uni-versity, United States; 2002.

Panjali Z, Mazloumi A, Ahsani H, Re-zaee E (2014). Evaluation of the risks factors for manual material handling in a metal casting industry in Iran. Iran Occupational Health, 11(1):13-22.

Asadi N, Choobineh A, Keshavarzi S, Daneshmandi H (2015). Estimation of forces exerted on the lower back in manual load lifting using 3DSSPP software. J Ergon, 2015, 2(4):25-31.

Files
IssueVol 45 No 9 (2016) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
Keywords
Back compressive force Maximum acceptable weight of lift Psychophysical methodology
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
SALEHI SAHL ABADI A, NASL SARAJI G, MAZLOUMI A, ZERAATI H, HADIAN MR, JAFARI AH. Changes in Back Compressive Force When Measuring Maximum Acceptable Weight of Lift in Iranian Male Students. Iran J Public Health. 2016;45(9):1199-1207.