Does the Directive to Avoid Low Back Flexion Hinder Physical Performance? Examining Isometric Strength in Postures Adopted During Light Mass Lifting.

IF 3.6 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Human Factors Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-08 DOI:10.1177/00187208251404836
Brendan L Pinto, Tyson A C Beach, Jack P Callaghan
{"title":"Does the Directive to Avoid Low Back Flexion Hinder Physical Performance? Examining Isometric Strength in Postures Adopted During Light Mass Lifting.","authors":"Brendan L Pinto, Tyson A C Beach, Jack P Callaghan","doi":"10.1177/00187208251404836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveObserve how instruction to avoid rounding the low back while lifting a relatively light mass impacts isometric lifting strength.BackgroundAs opposed to manual materials handling training directives recommending whole-body techniques such as a squat lift, targeting specific body regions such as low back curvature, theoretically affords workers greater flexibility to organize the rest of the body to reduce musculoskeletal loading without reducing physical performance. However, providing these directives during sub-maximal tasks may not prompt prioritization of physical performance as individuals self-organize, eventually making the intervention ineffective.MethodsForty participants (50% female) lifted a crate with and without the instruction to avoid rounding the low back. Postures at the initiation of crate lifting were replicated to test isometric strength.ResultsAt the group-level, instruction decreased low back flexion (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) but did not change strength (<i>p</i> = 0.862). However, high heterogeneity motivated examining individual responses. Thirty-seven participants (92.5% of the sample) exhibited greater than 40% of their flexion range-of-motion during baseline lifting, a threshold below which passive tissue strain is typically minimized. Yet, 22 participants (55%) were unsuccessful in reducing low back flexion below this threshold with instruction. Independent from these postural response groups, 23 maintained (57.5%), 8 increased (20%) and 9 decreased (22.5%) isometric strength.ConclusionOn average, physical performance potential was maintained in response to a low back postural directive. However, personalized movement coaching is needed to ensure the desired response for all.ApplicationManual materials handling training should include personalized movement coaching that considers both musculoskeletal loading and performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"504-518"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12909609/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251404836","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveObserve how instruction to avoid rounding the low back while lifting a relatively light mass impacts isometric lifting strength.BackgroundAs opposed to manual materials handling training directives recommending whole-body techniques such as a squat lift, targeting specific body regions such as low back curvature, theoretically affords workers greater flexibility to organize the rest of the body to reduce musculoskeletal loading without reducing physical performance. However, providing these directives during sub-maximal tasks may not prompt prioritization of physical performance as individuals self-organize, eventually making the intervention ineffective.MethodsForty participants (50% female) lifted a crate with and without the instruction to avoid rounding the low back. Postures at the initiation of crate lifting were replicated to test isometric strength.ResultsAt the group-level, instruction decreased low back flexion (p < 0.0001) but did not change strength (p = 0.862). However, high heterogeneity motivated examining individual responses. Thirty-seven participants (92.5% of the sample) exhibited greater than 40% of their flexion range-of-motion during baseline lifting, a threshold below which passive tissue strain is typically minimized. Yet, 22 participants (55%) were unsuccessful in reducing low back flexion below this threshold with instruction. Independent from these postural response groups, 23 maintained (57.5%), 8 increased (20%) and 9 decreased (22.5%) isometric strength.ConclusionOn average, physical performance potential was maintained in response to a low back postural directive. However, personalized movement coaching is needed to ensure the desired response for all.ApplicationManual materials handling training should include personalized movement coaching that considers both musculoskeletal loading and performance.

避免下腰屈的指令会影响体能表现吗?检查在轻质量举重中采用的姿势的等长力量。
目的观察举重时避免腰背弯曲的指导对等距举重强度的影响。与手工材料处理训练指令相反,推荐全身技术,如深蹲举,针对特定的身体区域,如下背部弯曲,理论上为工人提供了更大的灵活性来组织身体的其余部分,以减少肌肉骨骼负荷,而不降低身体表现。然而,在次最大任务期间提供这些指令可能不会促使个体自组织的身体表现优先级,最终使干预无效。方法40名参与者(50%为女性)在有或没有指示避免弯曲下背部的情况下举起一个板条箱。在板条箱起吊时的姿势被复制以测试等长强度。结果在组水平上,指导降低了下背部屈曲(p < 0.0001),但没有改变强度(p = 0.862)。然而,高度异质性激励了对个体反应的检查。37名参与者(样本的92.5%)在基线举举时表现出超过40%的屈曲活动范围,低于该阈值,被动组织张力通常最小。然而,22名参与者(55%)未能在指导下将腰屈度降低到该阈值以下。独立于这些姿势反应组,23人保持(57.5%),8人增加(20%),9人减少(22.5%)。结论平均而言,在低背部姿势指导下,身体运动潜能得以维持。然而,个性化的运动指导是必要的,以确保所有的预期反应。应用手册材料处理训练应包括考虑肌肉骨骼负荷和性能的个性化运动指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书