The effect of hip belt use and load placement in a backpack on postural stability and perceived exertion: a within-subjects trial

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of hip belt use and load placement in a backpack on perceived exertion and postural stability. Thirty participants were instructed to stand on a force plate and walk along a designated route under five conditions: unloaded, high-load placement, low-load placement, hip belt on and hip belt off. The average velocity and sway area from the force plate were measured. Participants also rated their perceived stability and exertion. Compared to the unloaded condition, all loaded conditions significantly increased average velocity, sway area, perceived stability and exertion. Hip belt use did not affect average velocity and sway area; however, participants reported higher levels of stability and lower levels of exertion with hip belt use. Load placement did not affect average velocity, sway area, perceived stability or exertion. This study showed that wearing a backpack loaded to 20% of body weight reduced postural stability, while manipulation of load placement in a backpack did not affect subjective and objective measures of postural stability. Also, hip belt use only improved subjective measures of postural stability.

A kinematic comparison of gait with a backpack versus a trolley for load carriage in children

“…In this way, according to the categorization of gait phases (Perry and Burnfield, 2010), our study showed that walking while carrying a backpack could be related to the inefficiency of weight-bearing stability (loading response phase), limb progression and limb advancement (pre-swing phase and terminal swing phases). Supporting these results, previous studies found that carrying a backpack decreased postural stability during walking (Yen et al, 2011) and standing (Golriz et al, 2014;Pau and Pau, 2010).…”

The effect of backpack load placement on physiological and self-reported measures of exertion

“…Consistent with previous research, we did not identify differences in overall RPE between the high and low load placement conditions [18,19,37,38], which contradicts the finding of Stuempfle et al [7], who reported high load placement as being the most desirable backpack placement on the spine. Unlike the overall RPE, the shoulder region RPE was greater during the high load placement condition as compared to low load placement.…”

Impact of Backpacks on Ergonomics: Biomechanical and Physiological Effects: A Narrative Review

“…Compared to the unloaded condition, some studies showed no significant effects of load on walking speed with loads up to 20% BM [ 47 ], whereas a significant decrease was observed with loads up to 40% BM in other studies [ 7 ]. However, a significant increase was found at loads of 20–35% BM load [ 44 , 50 ]. In all studies, loads ranged from 20–40% BM, with no clear trend in the effects as load increased or decreased.…”

“…Other studies found no difference in neck and shoulders comfort based on load placement, but only on load entity (15 to 40% BM, compared with 0%) [ 24 , 69 , 70 ]. In the last stand, it was reported that the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was significantly lower when the BP was worn with the support of a hip belt [ 50 ].…”

“…Therefore, the influence of load on upper back comfort remains unclear. As for RPE, it was reported to be significantly lower when the BP was worn with the support of a hip belt [ 50 ].…”