Upper limb musculoskeletal disorders in highly repetitive industries: precise anatomical physical findings

Ranney, D.; Wells, Richard; Moore, Anne

doi:10.1080/00140139508925198

Cited by 165 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the physical assessment of 146 female workers in highly repetitive jobs found 54% to have musculoskeletal disorders in the upper limb that were potentially work-related [8]. Many workers had multiple problems, and/or were affected bilaterally (33% of workers).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Musculoskeletal discomfort in production assembly workers

Jansen¹,

Luik²,

Reinvee³

et al. 2012

AKUT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to analyse subjective self-evaluation of musculoskeletal discomfort conducted by female production assembly workers. Thirty-seven female assembly workers aged 20-54 years participated in this study, whereas 35 of them were right-handed. Discomfort in neck, shoulder, upper back, upper arm, low back, forearm, wrist, hips, thigh, knees, lower legs and heels was subjectively evaluated by Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire. The results indicated that female assembly workers felt most work-related discomfort in the neck (44%), lower back (19.7%) and in the right wrist (15%). Discomfort was less pronounced in the right knee (0.01%), left upper arm (0.04%) and left hip buttocks (0.1%). In conclusion, this study indicated that subjective discomfort sensed by female production assembly workers was higher in the neck, lower back, right shoulder and the right wrist. According to the study results, further research is needed on the relationship between musculoskeletal discomfort and its influence on the quality of assembly work.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Musculoskeletal discomfort in production assembly workers

Jansen¹,

Luik²,

Reinvee³

et al. 2012

AKUT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Work-related Musculo Skeletal Disorders (WMSDs) of the forearm and elbow have been studied very little, especially in comparison to the wrist [1,2,3,4]. The more common forearm and elbow injuries, including pronator teres syndrome and humeral epicondylitis (both medial and lateral), have been linked to forearm rotations [5,6,7,8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper-limb surface electro-myography at maximum supination and pronation torques: the effect of elbow and forearm angle

O’Sullivan

Gallwey

2002

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forearm pronation and supination, and increased muscular activity in the wrist extensors have been both linked separately to work-related injuries of the upper limb, especially humeral epicondylitis. However, there is a lack of information on forearm torque strength at ranges of elbow and forearm angles typical of industrial tasks. There is a need for strength data on forearm torques at different upper limb angles need to be investigated. Such study should also include the measurement of muscular activity for the prime torque muscles and also other muscles at possible risk of injury due to high exertion levels during tasks requiring forearm torques.Twenty-four male subjects participated in the study that involved maximum forearm torque exertions for the right arm, in the pronation and supination directions, and at four elbow and three forearm rotation angles. Surface EMG (SEMG) was used to evaluate the muscular activity of the pronator teres (PT), pronator quadratus (PQ), biceps brachi (BB), brachioradialis (BR), mid deltoid (DT) and the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) during maximum torque exertions. Repeated measures ANOVA indicated that both direction and forearm angle had a significant effect on the maximum torques (p<0.05) while elbow angle and the interactions were highly significant (p<0.001). The results revealed that supination torques were stronger overall with a mean maximum value of 16.2 Nm recorded for the forearm 75% prone. Mean maximum pronation torque was recorded as 13.1 Nm for a neutral forearm with the elbow flexed 45 0 . The data also indicated that forearm angle had a greater effect on supination torque than pronation torque. Supination torques were stronger for the mid range of elbow flexion, but pronation torques increased with increasing elbow extension. The strength profiles for the maximum torque exertions were reflected in the EMG changes in the prime supinators and pronators. In addition, the EMG data expressed as the percentage of MaximumVoluntary Electrical activity (MVE), revealed high muscular activity in the ECRB for both 3 supination (26-43% MVE) and pronation torques (17-55% MVE). The results suggest that the ECRB acts as a stabiliser to the forearm flexors for gripping during pronation torques depending on forearm angle, but acts as a prime mover in wrist extension for supination torques with little effect of elbow and forearm angle. This indicates a direct link between forearm rotations against resistance and high muscular activity in the wrist extensors, thereby increasing stress on the forearm musculo-skeletal system, especially the lateral epicondyle.4

show abstract

“…Since shoulder-neck pain may originate from several local structures, a wide range of data is required for estimating mechanical exposure (6)(7)(8)(9). This is of particular importance for large populations with a mixture of exposures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%