4.3 Article

Upper extremity kinematic and kinetic adaptations during a fatiguing repetitive task

Journal

JOURNAL OF ELECTROMYOGRAPHY AND KINESIOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 3, Pages 404-411

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.02.001

Keywords

Repetitive work; Kinematic variability; Age; Upper extremity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Repetitive low-force contractions are common in the workplace and yet can lead to muscle fatigue and work-related musculoskeletal disorders. The current study aimed to investigate potential motion adaptations during a simulated repetitive light assembly work task designed to fatigue the shoulder region, focusing on changes over time and age-related group differences. Ten younger and ten older participants performed four 20-min task sessions separated by short breaks. Mean and variability of joint angles and scapular elevation, joint net moments for the shoulder, elbow, and wrist were calculated from upper extremity kinematics recorded by a motion tracking system. Results showed that joint angle and joint torque decreased across sessions and across multiple joints and segments. Increased kinematic variability over time was observed in the shoulder joint; however, decreased kinematic variability over time was seen in the more distal part of the upper limb. The changes of motion adaptations were sensitive to the task-break schedule. The results suggested that kinematic and kinetic adaptations occurred to reduce the biomechanical loading on the fatigued shoulder region. In addition, the kinematic and kinetic responses at the elbow and wrist joints also changed, possibly to compensate for the increased variability caused by the shoulder joint while still maintaining task requirements. These motion strategies in responses to muscle fatigue were similar between two age groups although the older group showed more effort in adaptation than the younger in terms of magnitude and affected body parts. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available