• DOI:10.1080/001401398186667
• Corpus ID: 35584880

Spine loading during asymmetric lifting using one versus two hands.

@article{Marras1998SpineLD,
  title={Spine loading during asymmetric lifting using one versus two hands.},
  author={William S. Marras and Kermit G. Davis},
  journal={Ergonomics},
  year={1998},
  volume={41 6},
  pages={
          817-34
        }
}

• W. Marras, K. Davis
• Published 1 June 1998
• Biology
• Ergonomics

This study documented three-dimensional spinal loading associated with asymmetric lifting while using either one or two hands to perform the task. Lift asymmetry was defined as a function of the load origin relative to the sagittal plane of the body. Lifts occurred at 0, 30, or 60 degrees off the sagittal plane on both sides of the body (lifting from the right and from the left relative to the sagittal plane). Ten subjects lifted a 13.7 kg box from one of these origins to a sagittally symmetric destination. Spinal loads were estimated through the use of a validated EMG-assisted model. Spine compression and lateral shear forces increased as the lift origin became more asymmetric. However, spinal compression and lateral shear increased by about twice the rate when lifting from origins to the left of the sagittal plane compared to lifting from origins to the right of the sagittal plane. Anterior-posterior spinal shear decreased as asymmetry increased with larger decreases occurring when lift origins occurred to the right of the sagittal plane. One-hand lifting changed the compression and shear profiles significantly. One-hand lifts using the hand on the same side of the body as the load resulted in compression forces that were approximately equal to those observed when lifting with two hands in a sagittally symmetric position. Anterior-posterior shear decreased and lateral shear increased under these conditions. These results reflect the trade-offs that must be considered among spinal forces during asymmetric lifting while using one or two hands. These findings have significant implications for task assessment interpretation and workplace design.