Mechanical lifting energy consumption in work activities designed by means of the "revised NIOSH lifting equation"\u80\u9d

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

The use of wearable/portable digital sensors in Huntington’s disease: a systematic review

In chronic neurological conditions, wearable/portable devices have potential as innovative tools to detect subtle early disease manifestations and disease fluctuations for the purpose of clinical diagnosis, care and therapeutic development. Huntington’s disease (HD) has a unique combination of motor and non-motor features which, combined with recent and anticipated therapeutic progress, gives great potential for such devices to prove useful. The present work aims to provide a comprehensive account of the use of wearable/portable devices in HD and of what they have contributed so far. We conducted a systematic review searching MEDLINE, Embase, and IEEE Xplore. Thirty references were identified. Our results revealed large variability in the types of sensors used, study design, and the measured outcomes. Digital technologies show considerable promise for therapeutic research and clinical management of HD. However, more studies with standardized devices and harmonized protocols are needed to optimize the potential applicability of wearable/portable devices in HD

Biomechanical Effects of Prefabricated Foot Orthoses and Rocker-Sole Footwear in Individuals with First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of prefabricated foot orthoses and rocker-sole footwear on spatiotemporal parameters, hip and knee kinematics, and plantar pressures in people with first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A total of 102 people with first MTP joint OA were randomly allocated to receive prefabricated foot orthoses or rocker-sole footwear. The immediate biomechanical effects of the interventions (compared to usual footwear) were examined using a wearable sensor motion analysis system and an in-shoe plantar pressure measurement system. RESULTS: Spatiotemporal/kinematic and plantar pressure data were available from 88 and 87 participants, respectively. The orthoses had minimal effect on spatiotemporal or kinematic parameters, while the rocker-sole footwear resulted in reduced cadence, percentage of the gait cycle spent in stance phase, and sagittal plane hip range of motion. The orthoses increased peak pressure under the midfoot and lesser toes. Both interventions significantly reduced peak pressure under the first MTP joint, and the rocker-sole shoes also reduced peak pressure under the second through fifth MTP joints and heel. When the effects of the orthoses and rocker-sole shoes were directly compared, there was no difference in peak pressure under the hallux, first MTP joint, or heel; however, the rocker-sole shoes exhibited lower peak pressure under the lesser toes, second through fifth MTP joints, and midfoot. CONCLUSION: Prefabricated foot orthoses and rocker-sole footwear are effective at reducing peak pressure under the first MTP joint in people with first MTP joint OA, but achieve this through different mechanisms. Further research is required to determine whether these biomechanical changes result in improvements in symptoms

Wearable inertial sensors to measure gait and posture characteristic differences in older adult fallers and non-fallers: A scoping review

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordBackground Wearable inertial sensors have grown in popularity as a means of objectively assessing fall risk. This review aimed to identify gait and posture differences among older adult fallers and non-fallers which can be measured with the use of wearable inertial sensors. In addition to describing the number of sensors used to obtain measures, the concurrent anatomical locations, how these measures compare to current forms of clinical fall risk assessment tests and the setting of tests. Methods Following the development of a rigorous search strategy, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, EMBASE, PEDro, and CINAHL were systematically searched for studies involving the use of wearable inertial sensors, to determine gait and postural based differences among fallers or those at high fall risk compared with non-fallers and low fall risk adults aged 60 years and older. Results Thirty five papers met the inclusion criteria. One hundred and forty nine gait and posture characteristic differences were identified using wearable inertial sensors. There were sensor derived measures which significantly and strongly correlated with traditional clinical tests. The use of a single wearable inertial sensor located at the lower posterior trunk, was most the most effective location and enough to ascertain multiple pertinent fall risk factors. Conclusion This review identified the capabilities of identifying fall risk factors among older adults with the use of wearable inertial sensors. The lightweight portable nature makes inertial sensors an effective tool to be implemented into clinical fall risk assessment and continuous unsupervised home monitoring, in addition to, outdoor testing.Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)National Institute for Health Research (NIHR