Background: back pain is one of the most common work-related musculoskeletal disorders, associated with numerous risk factors, including prolonged static posture and manual handling of loads. Among the preventive interventions developed over the years, industrial exoskeletons have been effective in reducing lumbar biomechanical load. However, it is unclear whether they could be a hindrance in carrying out dynamic work activities for which the device is not designed, such as walking. Aim of the study: the purpose of the study is to evaluate the effects on muscle activation and fatigue in the lower limbs and trunk, resulting from the use of a passive lumbar support exoskeleton (Laevo V2.56), during brisk walking. Materials and methods: 7 healthy volunteers (23-34 years) performed 10 minutes of brisk walking in the two experimental conditions: active and inactive exoskeleton. The muscular activity of the Iliocostalis, Rectus Abdominis, Biceps Femoris and Rectus Femoris, heart rate and ventilation were acquired, as well as the perceived difficulty during the task through the Visual Analogue Scale. The electromyographic signal was processed with EMGworks Analysis to obtain the Root Mean Square (RMS) and the indices of muscle fatigue. RMS, ventilation and heart rate were analyzed through the Student t-test for matched pairs, while the perceived difficulty in the task through the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Finally, the indices of muscle fatigue were tested through a 2x2 ANCOVA analysis, using the first minute of acquisition as a covariate. Results: in the comparison between the two conditions, a statistically significant difference was found only for the VAS scale (Z = 2.17, p-value = 0.03). In the active exoskeleton condition, the only muscle to activate less is the Biceps Femoris, while fatigue was greater for the Iliocostalis, Biceps Femoris and left Rectus Femoris muscles. Conclusions: further research is needed to test the limits of lumbar support exoskeletons during dynamic activities, such as brisk walking, in order to evaluate their appropriateness in certain work contexts.
Presupposti dello studio: il mal di schiena rappresenta uno dei più comuni disturbi muscolo-scheletrici legati al lavoro, associati a numerosi fattori di rischio, tra cui posture statiche prolungate e la movimentazione manuale dei carichi. Tra gli interventi con funzione preventiva, sviluppati nel corso degli anni, gli esoscheletri industriali sono risultati efficaci nel ridurre il carico biomeccanico lombare. Non è chiaro, tuttavia, se possano risultare d’ostacolo nello svolgimento di attività lavorative dinamiche per cui il device non è predisposto, come la camminata. Scopo dello studio: lo scopo dello studio è di valutare gli effetti su attivazione e affaticamento muscolare negli arti inferiori e nel tronco, derivanti dall’utilizzo di un esoscheletro passivo di supporto lombare (Laevo V2.56), durante una camminata a velocità sostenuta. Materiali e metodi: 7 volontari sani (23-34 anni) hanno svolto 10 minuti di camminata a ritmo sostenuto nelle due condizioni sperimentali: esoscheletro attivo e disattivo. È stata acquisita l’attività muscolare di Ileocostale, Retto Addominale, Bicipite Femorale e Retto Femorale, la frequenza cardiaca e la ventilazione, ma anche la difficoltà percepita durante il compito attraverso la Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Il tracciato elettromiografico è stato elaborato con EMGworks Analysis per ricavare la Radice Quadratica Media (RQM) e gli indici di affaticamento muscolare. RQM, ventilazione e frequenza cardiaca sono stati analizzati attraverso il test t di Student per coppie appaiate, la difficoltà percepita nel compito tramite il test dei segni per ranghi di Wilcoxon e gli indici di affaticamento muscolare tramite un’analisi ANCOVA 2x2, utilizzando il primo minuto di acquisizione come covariata. Risultati: nel confronto tra le due condizioni, è risultata una differenza statisticamente significativa solo per la VAS scale (Z = 2.17, p-value = 0.03). Nella condizione con esoscheletro attivo l’unico muscolo ad attivarsi meno è il Bicipite Femorale, mentre l’affaticamento è risultato maggiore per i muscoli Ileocostale, Bicipite Femorale e Retto Femorale sinistro. Conclusioni: sono necessarie ulteriori ricerche per testare i limiti di esoscheletri di supporto lombare durante lo svolgimento di attività dinamiche, come la camminata, con il fine di valutarne l’usabilità in certi contesti lavorativi.
L'effetto di un esoscheletro passivo per supporto lombare su attivazione e affaticamento muscolare durante la camminata
TAURO, ANGELA
2024/2025
Abstract
Background: back pain is one of the most common work-related musculoskeletal disorders, associated with numerous risk factors, including prolonged static posture and manual handling of loads. Among the preventive interventions developed over the years, industrial exoskeletons have been effective in reducing lumbar biomechanical load. However, it is unclear whether they could be a hindrance in carrying out dynamic work activities for which the device is not designed, such as walking. Aim of the study: the purpose of the study is to evaluate the effects on muscle activation and fatigue in the lower limbs and trunk, resulting from the use of a passive lumbar support exoskeleton (Laevo V2.56), during brisk walking. Materials and methods: 7 healthy volunteers (23-34 years) performed 10 minutes of brisk walking in the two experimental conditions: active and inactive exoskeleton. The muscular activity of the Iliocostalis, Rectus Abdominis, Biceps Femoris and Rectus Femoris, heart rate and ventilation were acquired, as well as the perceived difficulty during the task through the Visual Analogue Scale. The electromyographic signal was processed with EMGworks Analysis to obtain the Root Mean Square (RMS) and the indices of muscle fatigue. RMS, ventilation and heart rate were analyzed through the Student t-test for matched pairs, while the perceived difficulty in the task through the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Finally, the indices of muscle fatigue were tested through a 2x2 ANCOVA analysis, using the first minute of acquisition as a covariate. Results: in the comparison between the two conditions, a statistically significant difference was found only for the VAS scale (Z = 2.17, p-value = 0.03). In the active exoskeleton condition, the only muscle to activate less is the Biceps Femoris, while fatigue was greater for the Iliocostalis, Biceps Femoris and left Rectus Femoris muscles. Conclusions: further research is needed to test the limits of lumbar support exoskeletons during dynamic activities, such as brisk walking, in order to evaluate their appropriateness in certain work contexts.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tauro_Angela.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
1.38 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.38 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/90095