Effects of power tool vibration on peripheral nerve endings

Zimmerman, Jordan; Bain, James L. W.; Persson, Magnus; Riley, Denise

doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2016.08.012

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within 24 hours of completing vibration treatment, the 5‐week vibrated and 5‐week sham control rats were anesthetized, euthanized, perfused with formaldehyde fixative, and mid‐tail segments (C12) were excised. Segments were demineralized for 10 days, cryoprotected, quick‐frozen, and cross‐sectioned at 60 μm in a cryostat as performed previously 6,7 . The recovery vibration and sham rats were processed in a similar manner after the 5‐week treatments and 5‐week vivarium housing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The recovery vibration and sham rats were processed in a similar manner after the 5‐week treatments and 5‐week vivarium housing. Frozen sections of the tails were immunostained with PGP9.5, a pan neuronal antibody (EnCor Biotechnology Inc., Gainesville, Florida), and photographed fluorescently with a Nikon Eclipse light microscope to capture hair innervation 6,7 . The fluorescent images were inverted in Adobe Photoshop CS2 to transform the brightly fluorescence nerves into distinct dark lines.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Vibration from percussive impact tools contains shock waves with high‐frequency energy. For example, a riveting hammer was reported to generate shock waves with peak acceleration magnitudes (root mean squared, m/s 2 ) at 12.4 and 16.3 kHz, 10 and 50 times that at 35 Hz, the impact cycle 6 . Alarmingly, the high‐frequency energy is completely negated by weighting, and presently, only low‐frequency contributions are considered when linking vibration exposure to clinical disease occurrence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We were the first lab to report that a single 12 minutes exposure to riveting hammer vibration produced a 26% loss of mechanosensory nerve endings in the rattail skin, and lengthening exposure from 1 to 12 minutes generated increasing nerve damage 6,7 . A logical next step is to determine whether 5 weeks of daily exposure produces irreversible nerve damage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike less studied, vibration models of the hind paw, requiring anesthesia during vibration, tail vibration has been performed for minutes to hours on awake rats which mimics the human worker with functioning peripheral and central neural reflexes 10‐12 . The research publication database on rattail vibration is large and includes behavioral, neurophysiological, vascular, physical biodynamics, anatomical, histological, and ultrastructural data to aid interpretation of the present findings 6‐8,10,13‐18 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Riveting hammer vibration damages mechanosensory nerve endings

Zimmerman

Bain

et al. 2020

J Peripheral Nervous Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hand‐arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) is an irreversible neurodegenerative, vasospastic, and musculoskeletal occupational disease of workers who use powered hand tools. The etiology is poorly understood. Neurological symptoms include numbness, tingling, and pain. This study examines impact hammer vibration‐induced injury and recoverability of hair mechanosensory innervation. Rat tails were vibrated 12 min/d for 5 weeks followed by 5 week recovery with synchronous non‐vibrated controls. Nerve fibers were PGP9.5 immunostained. Lanceolate complex innervation was compared quantitatively in vibrated vs sham. Vibration peak acceleration magnitudes were characterized by frequency power spectral analysis. Average magnitude (2515 m/s2, root mean squared) in kHz frequencies was 109 times that (23 m/s2) in low Hz. Percentage of hairs innervated by lanceolate complexes was 69.1% in 5‐week sham and 53.4% in 5‐week vibration generating a denervation difference of 15.7% higher in vibration. Hair innervation was 76.9% in 5‐weeks recovery sham and 62.0% in 5‐week recovery vibration producing a denervation difference 14.9% higher in recovery vibration. Lanceolate number per complex (18.4 ± 0.2) after vibration remained near sham (19.3 ± 0.3), but 44.9% of lanceolate complexes were abnormal in 5 weeks vibrated compared to 18.8% in sham. The largest vibration energies are peak kHz accelerations (approximately 100 000 m/s2) from shock waves. The existing ISO 5349‐1 standard excludes kHz vibrations, seriously underestimating vibration injury risk. The present study validates the rat tail, impact hammer vibration as a model for investigating irreversible nerve damage. Persistence of higher denervation difference after 5‐week recovery suggests repeated vibration injury destroys the capability of lanceolate nerve endings to regenerate.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations