An Evaluation of the NIOSH Lifting Equation: A Psychophysical and Biomechanical Investigation

Elfeituri, Farag E.; Taboun, S. M.

doi:10.1080/10803548.2002.11076527

Cited by 40 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, approximately 35% of lifting tasks and 63% of workers cannot be assessed by means of the RNLE owing to its strict parameters and equation restrictions22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 ) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of the present work were: to calculate lifting energy consumption (LEC) in work activities designed to have a growing lifting index (LI) by means of revised NIOSH lifting equation; to evaluate the relationship between LEC and forces at the L5-S1 joint. The kinematic and kinetic data of 20 workers were recorded during the execution of lifting tasks in three conditions. We computed kinetic, potential and mechanical energy and the corresponding LEC by considering three different centers of mass of: 1) the load (CoML); 2) the multi-segment upper body model and load together (CoMUpp+L); 3) the whole body and load together (CoMTot). We also estimated compression and shear forces. Results shows that LEC calculated for CoMUpp+L and CoMTot grew significantly with the LI and that all the lifting condition pairs are discriminated. The correlation analysis highlighted a relationship between LEC and forces that determine injuries at the L5-S1 joint.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These effects are primarily based on psychophysical evaluation of the influence of lifting on self-perceived work load or fatigue within a few hours. Therefore, the ability of these directives to protect against LBP risks has been questioned 34 35. Besides, current directives do not assess long-term consequences, which has hampered the development of threshold limit values distinguishing between healthy and unhealthy lifting exposure at work 36.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of lifting during work on low back pain: a health impact assessment based on a meta-analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lifting at work is considered an important risk factor for low back pain (LBP). However, contradictory findings have been reported, partly because frequency, duration and intensity (ie, the weight of the load) of lifting have not been systematically considered. This has hampered developments of threshold values for lifting. The aims of this study were: to assess the effect of lifting during work (quantified in duration, frequency or intensity) on the incidence of LBP and to quantify the impact of these relationships on the occurrence of LBP in occupational populations exposed to lifting. We searched in PubMed and EMBASE.com for longitudinal studies assessing the effect of occupational lifting on LBP incidence. For each study, the exposure-response slope of the association was estimated by loglinear regression analysis. When possible, a meta-analysis on these slopes was conducted. In a health impact assessment, the effects of the pooled exposure-response relationships on LBP incidence was assessed. Eight longitudinal studies were included. Pooled estimates resulted in ORs of 1.11 (1.05 to 1.18) per 10 kg lifted and 1.09 (1.03 to 1.15) per 10 lifts/day. Duration of lifting could not be pooled. Using these ORs, we estimated that lifting loads over 25 kg and lifting at a frequency of over 25 lifts/day will increase the annual incidence of LBP by 4.32% and 3.50%, respectively, compared to the incidence of not being exposed to lifting. Intensity and frequency of lifting significantly predict the occurrence of LBP. Exposure-response relationships show that lifting heavy loads may have a substantial impact on musculoskeletal health of the working population. This information may direct the development of occupational lifting guidelines and workplace design for LBP prevention.

show abstract

“…The RNLE was compared with dynamic biomechanical models in several studies (Elfeituri & Taboun, 2002; Kee & Chung, 1996; Lavender, Andersson, Schipplein, & Fuentes, 2003). It was observed that for low-level lifting the RNLE under-represents increased peak-sagittal moment, which was estimated using a linked segment-dynamic biomechanical model (Lavender et al, 2003).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Impact of the Revised National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Lifting Equation

Lu¹,

Putz-Anderson²,

Garg

et al. 2016

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the impact of the revised National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health lifting equation (RNLE). Background The RNLE has been used extensively as a risk assessment method for prevention of low back pain (LBP). However, the impact of the RNLE has not been documented. Methods A systematic review of the literature on the RNLE was conducted. The review consisted of three parts: characterization of the RNLE publications; assessment of the impact of the RNLE; and evaluation of the influences of the RNLE on ergonomic standards. The literature for assessing the impact was categorized into four research areas: methodology, laboratory, field and risk assessment studies using the Lifting Index (LI) or Composite LI (CLI), both of which are the products of the RNLE. Results The impact of the RNLE has been both widespread and influential. We found 24 studies that examined the criteria used to define lifting capacity used by the RNLE, 28 studies that compared risk assessment methods for identifying LBP, 23 studies that found the RNLE useful in identifying the risk of LBP with different work populations, and 13 studies on the relationship between LI/CLI and LBP outcomes. We also found evidence on the adoption of the RNLE as an ergonomic standard for use by various local, state, and international entities. Conclusion The review found 13 studies that link LI/CLI to adverse LBP outcomes. These studies showed a positive relationship between LI/CLI metrics and the severity of LBP outcomes.

show abstract

An Evaluation of the NIOSH Lifting Equation: A Psychophysical and Biomechanical Investigation

Cited by 40 publications

References 2 publications

Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”

Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the “revised NIOSH lifting equation”

The effect of lifting during work on low back pain: a health impact assessment based on a meta-analysis

Evaluation of the Impact of the Revised National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Lifting Equation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About