4.5 Article

Changes in kinematics and work physiology during progressive lifting in healthy adults

期刊

APPLIED ERGONOMICS
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103396

关键词

Functional capacity evaluation; Observation; Motion analyses; Electromyography; Heart rate. WorkWell functional capacity evaluation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed the changes in kinematics and work physiology during progressive lifting in healthy adults. The results showed significant differences in muscle use, heart rate, base of support, and movement pattern with increasing loads, while posture changes were not significant. These findings were objectively quantified using lab technology and aligned with existing observation criteria.
Purpose: To analyze progression of changes in kinematics and work physiology during progressive lifting in healthy adults. Methods: Healthy participants were recruited. A standardized lifting test from the WorkWell Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) was administered, with five progressive lifting low series of five repetitions. The criteria of the WorkWell observation protocol were studied: changes in muscle use (EMG), heart rate (heart rate monitor), base of support, posture and movement pattern (motion capture system). Repeated measures ANOVA's were used to analyze changes during progressive workloads. Results: 18 healthy young adults participated (8 men, 10 women; mean age 22 years). Mean maximum weight lifted was 66 (+/- 3.2) and 44 (+/- 7.4) kg for men and women, respectively. With progressive loads, statistically significant (p < 0.01) differences were observed: increase in secondary muscle use at moderate lifting, increase of heart rate, increase of base of support and movement pattern changes were observed; differences in posture were not significant. Conclusions: Changes in 4 out of 5 kinematic and work physiology parameters were objectively quantified using lab technology during progressive lifting in healthy adults. These changes appear in line with existing observation criteria.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据