The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities
The supportive effect of arm-support exoskeletons has been mainly studied for single postures or movements. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of such an exoskeleton on shoulder muscle activity and perceived exertion, in six tasks of plasterers, each including multiple arm movements. The...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Ergonomics 2021-06, Vol.64 (6), p.712-721 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 721 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 712 |
| container_title | Ergonomics |
| container_volume | 64 |
| creator | de Vries, Aijse Willem Krause, Frank de Looze, Michiel Pieter |
| description | The supportive effect of arm-support exoskeletons has been mainly studied for single postures or movements. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of such an exoskeleton on shoulder muscle activity and perceived exertion, in six tasks of plasterers, each including multiple arm movements. The tasks of 'applying gypsum', 'screeding' and 'finishing' were performed at a ceiling and a wall, with exoskeleton (Exo) and without (NoExo). EMG was recorded of six muscles involved in upper arm elevation, four agonists and two antagonists, and plasterers rated their perceived exertion (RPE). In all tasks, the EMG amplitudes of three agonist muscles, Trapezius and Medial Deltoid, and Biceps Brachii, were lower in Exo vs NoExo, while the agonist, Anterior Deltoid, showed lower EMG values in Exo in most tasks. None of the antagonists (Triceps Brachii, Pectoralis Major) showed increased EMG values in the Exo condition. RPE's were lower in Exo condition for all tasks, except for 'applying gypsum to the wall'. Overall, the exoskeleton seems to reduce loads in realistic plastering tasks.
Practitioner summary: Exoskeletons are an emerging technology in the field of ergonomics. Passive arm support exoskeletons have mainly been tested in lab studies using continuous overhead work, involving one posture or movement. However, in reality, working tasks generally involve multiple movements. This study investigates the effectiveness of an arm support exoskeleton in work that requires multiple arm movements, specifically in plastering. Muscle activity, as well as perceived exertion were both reduced when working with an exoskeleton.
Abbreviations: Exo: with exoskeleton; NoExo: without exoskeleton; RPE: rated perceived exertion; EMG: electromyography; Trap: upper trapezius; AD: anterior deltoid; MD: medial deltoid; BB: biceps brachii; TB: triceps brachii; PM: pectoralis major; RPD: rated perceived discomfort; p50: 50th percentile; p90: 90th percentile; MVC: maximum voluntary contraction; GEE: generalised estimated equations |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_33402050</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2536148480</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-aa3c1b557c1dc1ff0e8442138285126a8f552c4e08f37c734237754b35b8cebf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUha0KVAbaR2hliU03Af8mnh0ItYCExIauLce5bk2TOLUdyrwAz43DDF2wYGX7-DvnXukg9IWSE0oUOSWECkL5-oQRViRVK6noB7SivK4rqUSzh1YLUy3QATpM6b48OV2zj-iAc1FckqzQ091vwOAc2OwffN7g4LDBk0nJPwA2ccBpnqYQM4bHkP5ADzmM2I84QjdbP_7Cw5xsX9AlwGRffs3Y4QmihRLRFR_EF7mb48JPvUkZXq5mO9RD-oT2nekTfN6dR-jnj-93F1fVze3l9cX5TWWFYLkyhlvaStlY2lnqHAFVdMoVU5Ky2ignJbMCiHK8sQ0XjDeNFC2XrbLQOn6Evm1zpxj-zpCyHnyy0PdmhDAnzURTEtZNrQp6_Aa9D3Mcy3aaSV5ToYQihZJbysaQUgSnp-gHEzeaEr0UpV-L0ktReldU8X3dpc_tAN1_12szBTjbAn50IQ7mX4h9p7PZ9CG6aEbrk-bvz3gGVJyj8Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2536148480</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities</title><source>Taylor & Francis Journals Complete</source><creator>de Vries, Aijse Willem ; Krause, Frank ; de Looze, Michiel Pieter</creator><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Aijse Willem ; Krause, Frank ; de Looze, Michiel Pieter</creatorcontrib><description>The supportive effect of arm-support exoskeletons has been mainly studied for single postures or movements. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of such an exoskeleton on shoulder muscle activity and perceived exertion, in six tasks of plasterers, each including multiple arm movements. The tasks of 'applying gypsum', 'screeding' and 'finishing' were performed at a ceiling and a wall, with exoskeleton (Exo) and without (NoExo). EMG was recorded of six muscles involved in upper arm elevation, four agonists and two antagonists, and plasterers rated their perceived exertion (RPE). In all tasks, the EMG amplitudes of three agonist muscles, Trapezius and Medial Deltoid, and Biceps Brachii, were lower in Exo vs NoExo, while the agonist, Anterior Deltoid, showed lower EMG values in Exo in most tasks. None of the antagonists (Triceps Brachii, Pectoralis Major) showed increased EMG values in the Exo condition. RPE's were lower in Exo condition for all tasks, except for 'applying gypsum to the wall'. Overall, the exoskeleton seems to reduce loads in realistic plastering tasks.
Practitioner summary: Exoskeletons are an emerging technology in the field of ergonomics. Passive arm support exoskeletons have mainly been tested in lab studies using continuous overhead work, involving one posture or movement. However, in reality, working tasks generally involve multiple movements. This study investigates the effectiveness of an arm support exoskeleton in work that requires multiple arm movements, specifically in plastering. Muscle activity, as well as perceived exertion were both reduced when working with an exoskeleton.
Abbreviations: Exo: with exoskeleton; NoExo: without exoskeleton; RPE: rated perceived exertion; EMG: electromyography; Trap: upper trapezius; AD: anterior deltoid; MD: medial deltoid; BB: biceps brachii; TB: triceps brachii; PM: pectoralis major; RPD: rated perceived discomfort; p50: 50th percentile; p90: 90th percentile; MVC: maximum voluntary contraction; GEE: generalised estimated equations</description><identifier>ISSN: 0014-0139</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1366-5847</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33402050</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Taylor & Francis</publisher><subject>Abbreviations ; Agonists ; Arm ; Ceilings ; construction ; Contraction ; Electromyography ; Ergonomics ; Exoskeleton ; Exoskeletons ; Gypsum ; MSD ; muscle activity ; Muscle contraction ; Muscle function ; Muscles ; New technology ; plastering ; Posture ; Screeding ; Space life sciences</subject><ispartof>Ergonomics, 2021-06, Vol.64 (6), p.712-721</ispartof><rights>2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 2021</rights><rights>2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-aa3c1b557c1dc1ff0e8442138285126a8f552c4e08f37c734237754b35b8cebf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-aa3c1b557c1dc1ff0e8442138285126a8f552c4e08f37c734237754b35b8cebf3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9547-2702 ; 0000-0001-5810-9111</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908,59628,60417</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33402050$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Aijse Willem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krause, Frank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Looze, Michiel Pieter</creatorcontrib><title>The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities</title><title>Ergonomics</title><addtitle>Ergonomics</addtitle><description>The supportive effect of arm-support exoskeletons has been mainly studied for single postures or movements. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of such an exoskeleton on shoulder muscle activity and perceived exertion, in six tasks of plasterers, each including multiple arm movements. The tasks of 'applying gypsum', 'screeding' and 'finishing' were performed at a ceiling and a wall, with exoskeleton (Exo) and without (NoExo). EMG was recorded of six muscles involved in upper arm elevation, four agonists and two antagonists, and plasterers rated their perceived exertion (RPE). In all tasks, the EMG amplitudes of three agonist muscles, Trapezius and Medial Deltoid, and Biceps Brachii, were lower in Exo vs NoExo, while the agonist, Anterior Deltoid, showed lower EMG values in Exo in most tasks. None of the antagonists (Triceps Brachii, Pectoralis Major) showed increased EMG values in the Exo condition. RPE's were lower in Exo condition for all tasks, except for 'applying gypsum to the wall'. Overall, the exoskeleton seems to reduce loads in realistic plastering tasks.
Practitioner summary: Exoskeletons are an emerging technology in the field of ergonomics. Passive arm support exoskeletons have mainly been tested in lab studies using continuous overhead work, involving one posture or movement. However, in reality, working tasks generally involve multiple movements. This study investigates the effectiveness of an arm support exoskeleton in work that requires multiple arm movements, specifically in plastering. Muscle activity, as well as perceived exertion were both reduced when working with an exoskeleton.
Abbreviations: Exo: with exoskeleton; NoExo: without exoskeleton; RPE: rated perceived exertion; EMG: electromyography; Trap: upper trapezius; AD: anterior deltoid; MD: medial deltoid; BB: biceps brachii; TB: triceps brachii; PM: pectoralis major; RPD: rated perceived discomfort; p50: 50th percentile; p90: 90th percentile; MVC: maximum voluntary contraction; GEE: generalised estimated equations</description><subject>Abbreviations</subject><subject>Agonists</subject><subject>Arm</subject><subject>Ceilings</subject><subject>construction</subject><subject>Contraction</subject><subject>Electromyography</subject><subject>Ergonomics</subject><subject>Exoskeleton</subject><subject>Exoskeletons</subject><subject>Gypsum</subject><subject>MSD</subject><subject>muscle activity</subject><subject>Muscle contraction</subject><subject>Muscle function</subject><subject>Muscles</subject><subject>New technology</subject><subject>plastering</subject><subject>Posture</subject><subject>Screeding</subject><subject>Space life sciences</subject><issn>0014-0139</issn><issn>1366-5847</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUha0KVAbaR2hliU03Af8mnh0ItYCExIauLce5bk2TOLUdyrwAz43DDF2wYGX7-DvnXukg9IWSE0oUOSWECkL5-oQRViRVK6noB7SivK4rqUSzh1YLUy3QATpM6b48OV2zj-iAc1FckqzQ091vwOAc2OwffN7g4LDBk0nJPwA2ccBpnqYQM4bHkP5ADzmM2I84QjdbP_7Cw5xsX9AlwGRffs3Y4QmihRLRFR_EF7mb48JPvUkZXq5mO9RD-oT2nekTfN6dR-jnj-93F1fVze3l9cX5TWWFYLkyhlvaStlY2lnqHAFVdMoVU5Ky2ignJbMCiHK8sQ0XjDeNFC2XrbLQOn6Evm1zpxj-zpCyHnyy0PdmhDAnzURTEtZNrQp6_Aa9D3Mcy3aaSV5ToYQihZJbysaQUgSnp-gHEzeaEr0UpV-L0ktReldU8X3dpc_tAN1_12szBTjbAn50IQ7mX4h9p7PZ9CG6aEbrk-bvz3gGVJyj8Q</recordid><startdate>20210603</startdate><enddate>20210603</enddate><creator>de Vries, Aijse Willem</creator><creator>Krause, Frank</creator><creator>de Looze, Michiel Pieter</creator><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Taylor & Francis LLC</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9547-2702</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5810-9111</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210603</creationdate><title>The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities</title><author>de Vries, Aijse Willem ; Krause, Frank ; de Looze, Michiel Pieter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-aa3c1b557c1dc1ff0e8442138285126a8f552c4e08f37c734237754b35b8cebf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Abbreviations</topic><topic>Agonists</topic><topic>Arm</topic><topic>Ceilings</topic><topic>construction</topic><topic>Contraction</topic><topic>Electromyography</topic><topic>Ergonomics</topic><topic>Exoskeleton</topic><topic>Exoskeletons</topic><topic>Gypsum</topic><topic>MSD</topic><topic>muscle activity</topic><topic>Muscle contraction</topic><topic>Muscle function</topic><topic>Muscles</topic><topic>New technology</topic><topic>plastering</topic><topic>Posture</topic><topic>Screeding</topic><topic>Space life sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Aijse Willem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krause, Frank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Looze, Michiel Pieter</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ergonomics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>de Vries, Aijse Willem</au><au>Krause, Frank</au><au>de Looze, Michiel Pieter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities</atitle><jtitle>Ergonomics</jtitle><addtitle>Ergonomics</addtitle><date>2021-06-03</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>712</spage><epage>721</epage><pages>712-721</pages><issn>0014-0139</issn><eissn>1366-5847</eissn><abstract>The supportive effect of arm-support exoskeletons has been mainly studied for single postures or movements. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of such an exoskeleton on shoulder muscle activity and perceived exertion, in six tasks of plasterers, each including multiple arm movements. The tasks of 'applying gypsum', 'screeding' and 'finishing' were performed at a ceiling and a wall, with exoskeleton (Exo) and without (NoExo). EMG was recorded of six muscles involved in upper arm elevation, four agonists and two antagonists, and plasterers rated their perceived exertion (RPE). In all tasks, the EMG amplitudes of three agonist muscles, Trapezius and Medial Deltoid, and Biceps Brachii, were lower in Exo vs NoExo, while the agonist, Anterior Deltoid, showed lower EMG values in Exo in most tasks. None of the antagonists (Triceps Brachii, Pectoralis Major) showed increased EMG values in the Exo condition. RPE's were lower in Exo condition for all tasks, except for 'applying gypsum to the wall'. Overall, the exoskeleton seems to reduce loads in realistic plastering tasks.
Practitioner summary: Exoskeletons are an emerging technology in the field of ergonomics. Passive arm support exoskeletons have mainly been tested in lab studies using continuous overhead work, involving one posture or movement. However, in reality, working tasks generally involve multiple movements. This study investigates the effectiveness of an arm support exoskeleton in work that requires multiple arm movements, specifically in plastering. Muscle activity, as well as perceived exertion were both reduced when working with an exoskeleton.
Abbreviations: Exo: with exoskeleton; NoExo: without exoskeleton; RPE: rated perceived exertion; EMG: electromyography; Trap: upper trapezius; AD: anterior deltoid; MD: medial deltoid; BB: biceps brachii; TB: triceps brachii; PM: pectoralis major; RPD: rated perceived discomfort; p50: 50th percentile; p90: 90th percentile; MVC: maximum voluntary contraction; GEE: generalised estimated equations</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis</pub><pmid>33402050</pmid><doi>10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9547-2702</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5810-9111</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0014-0139 |
| ispartof | Ergonomics, 2021-06, Vol.64 (6), p.712-721 |
| issn | 0014-0139 1366-5847 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmed_primary_33402050 |
| source | Taylor & Francis Journals Complete |
| subjects | Abbreviations Agonists Arm Ceilings construction Contraction Electromyography Ergonomics Exoskeleton Exoskeletons Gypsum MSD muscle activity Muscle contraction Muscle function Muscles New technology plastering Posture Screeding Space life sciences |
| title | The effectivity of a passive arm support exoskeleton in reducing muscle activation and perceived exertion during plastering activities |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T16%3A50%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effectivity%20of%20a%20passive%20arm%20support%20exoskeleton%20in%20reducing%20muscle%20activation%20and%20perceived%20exertion%20during%20plastering%20activities&rft.jtitle=Ergonomics&rft.au=de%20Vries,%20Aijse%20Willem&rft.date=2021-06-03&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=712&rft.epage=721&rft.pages=712-721&rft.issn=0014-0139&rft.eissn=1366-5847&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00140139.2020.1868581&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2536148480%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2536148480&rft_id=info:pmid/33402050&rfr_iscdi=true |