Lower Limb Muscle Co-Activation Maps in Single and Team Lifting at Different Risk Levels
-
Published:2024-05-28
Issue:11
Volume:14
Page:4635
-
ISSN:2076-3417
-
Container-title:Applied Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Applied Sciences
Author:
Chini Giorgia1ORCID, Varrecchia Tiwana1, Serrao Mariano2ORCID, Ranavolo Alberto1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Hygiene, INAIL, Via Fontana Candida, 1, Monte Porzio Catone, 00078 Rome, Italy 2. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Polo Pontino, Via Franco Faggiana 1668, 04100 Latina, Italy
Abstract
The central nervous system uses muscle co-activation for body coordination, effector movement control, and joint stabilization. However, co-activation increases compression and shear stresses on the joints. Lifting activity is one of the leading causes of work-related musculoskeletal problems worldwide, and it has been shown that when the risk level rises, lifting enhances trunk muscle co-activation at the L5/S1 level. This study aims to investigate the co-activation of lower limb muscles during liftings at various risk levels and lifting types (one-person and vs. two-person team lifting), to understand how the central nervous system governs lower limb rigidity during these tasks. The surface electromyographic signal of thirteen healthy volunteers (seven males and six females, age range: 29–48 years) was obtained over the trunk and right lower limb muscles while lifting in the sagittal plane. Then co-activation was computed according to different approaches: global, full leg, flexor, extensor, and rostro-caudal. The statistical analysis revealed a significant increase in the risk level and a decrease in the two-person on the mean and/or maximum of the co-activation in almost all the approaches. Overall, our findings imply that the central nervous system streamlines the motor regulation of lifting by increasing or reducing whole-limb rigidity within a distinct global, extensor, and rostro-caudal co-activation scheme, depending on the risk level/lifting type.
Funder
European Union’s Horizon 2020 INAIL
Reference62 articles.
1. de Kok, J., Vroonhof, P., Snijders, J., Roullis, G., Clarke, M., Peereboom, K., Dorst, P., and van Isusi, I. (2019). Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: Prevalence, Costs and Demographics in the EU, European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. 2. Govaerts, R., Tassignon, B., Ghillebert, J., Serrien, B., De Bock, S., Ampe, T., El Makrini, I., Vanderborght, B., Meeusen, R., and De Pauw, K. (2021). Prevalence and incidence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in secondary industries of 21st century Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 22. 3. Criteria for diagnosis and attribution of an occupational musculoskeletal disease;Violante;Med. Lav.,2020 4. Are work-related musculoskeletal disorders claims related to risk factors in workplaces of the manufacturing industry?;Bao;Ann. Work Expo. Health,2019 5. (2023). Guideline for Introducing and Implementing Real-Time Instrumental-Based Tools for Biomechanical Risk Assessment (Standard No. CWA 17938:2023). Available online: https://researchportal.vub.be/en/publications/cwa-17938-guideline-for-introducing-and-implementing-real-time-in.
|
|