A cross-validation of the NIOSH limits for manual lifting

The psychophysical, biomechanical, and physiological criteria used in establishing the NIOSH limits for manual lifting were cross-validated against the data published by different researchers in the subject literature. Assessment of the 1991 NIOSH lifting equation indicated that: (1) NIOSH-based limits are significantly different from the psychophysical limits in the (i) low and high frequencies of lift, and (ii) small and large horizontal distances; (2) NIOSH limits are highly correlated with the data of Snook and Ciriello (1991) in the low frequency range, with the Recommended Weight Limit (RWL) protecting about 85% of the female population and 95% of the male population; (3) the 3·4 kN limit for compression on the lumbosacral joint cannot protect the majority of the worker population on the basis of damage load concept; and (4) energy expenditure limits used in development of the RWL index can be sustained by 57 to 99% of worker population when compared to the physiological limits based on previous fatigue studies. Results of the cross-validation for psychophysical criterion confirmed the validity of assumptions made in the 1991 NIOSH revised lifting equation. However, the results of cross-validation for the biomechanical and physiological criteria were not in total agreement with the 1991 NIOSH model     

Review paper A comparative study of methods for establishing load handling capabilities

There has been much effort in recent years to quantify manual handling capabilities. Four main techniques have been used to this end; biomechanical modelling; the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure; psychophysics; and metabolic/physiological criteria. The aim of this study was to compare quantitatively the data produced from the first three techniques. The comparisons were limited to bimanual, sagittal plane lifting, which of all manual handling activities has been studied the most comprehensively, except that pushing and pulling data were compared from the psychophysics and intra-abdominal pressure (‘force limits’) databases. It was found that the data from ‘force limits’ proposed weights for bimanual lifting in the sagittal plane are lower than those reported to be psychophysically acceptable except for lifting close to and around the shoulder. The closest agreement between the databases was for lifting from an origin above knuckle height. The ‘force limits’ data were found to propose weights of lift which are at a minimum when lifting with a freestyle posture from the floor whereas the psychophysical technique proposes weights which are at a maximum when lifting from the floor. The psychophysical data were found to generate compressive forces at L5/S1 according to a static sagittal plane biomechanical model about 10% in excess of the NIOSH action limit (NIOSH 1981) when lifting from the floor, although over other lifting ranges the compressive forces were less than the NIOSH action limit. Lifting the (force limits) weights generated compressive forces which were on average 55% less than the AL (range 45 to 60%) when lifting in an erect posture. The data for pushing according to the psychophysical and ‘force limits’ database showed good agreement, but for pulling the ‘force limits’ weights were considerably greater than those selected psych ophysically. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

A comparative study of methods for establishing load handling capabilities

There has been much effort in recent years to quantify manual handling capabilities. Four main techniques have been used to this end; biomechanical modelling; the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure; psychophysics; and metabolic/physiological criteria. The aim of this study was to compare quantitatively the data produced from the first three techniques. The comparisons were limited to bimanual, sagittal plane lifting, which of all manual handling activities has been studied the most comprehensively, except that pushing and pulling data were compared from the psychophysics and intra-abdominal pressure ('force limits') databases. It was found that the data from 'force limits' proposed weights for bimanual lifting in the sagittal plane which [corrected] are lower than those reported to be psychophysically acceptable except for lifting close to and around the shoulder. The closest agreement between the databases was for lifting from an origin above knuckle height. The 'force limits' data were found to propose weights of lift which are at a minimum when lifting with a freestyle posture from the floor whereas the psychophysical technique proposes weights which are at a maximum when lifting from the floor. The psychophysical data were found to generate compressive forces at L5/S1 according to a static sagittal plane biomechanical model about 10% in excess of the NIOSH action limit (NIOSH 1981) when lifting from the floor, although over other lifting ranges the compressive forces were less than the NIOSH action limit. Lifting the 'force limits' weights generated compressive forces which were on average 55% less than AL (range 45 to 60%) when lifting in an erect posture. The data for pushing according to the psychophysical and 'force limits' database showed good agreement, but for pulling the 'force limits' weights were considerably greater than those selected psychophysically. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Maximum frequency acceptable to female workers for one-handed lifts in the horizontal plane

Abstract

A laboratory study was conducted to determine the maximum frequencies acceptable to female workers for one-handed lifts in the horizontal plane. A psychophysical method was used to determine maximum acceptable frequency for an 8-hour workday. Ten female college students were required to lift continuously three different loads to two different reach distances (38 and 63 cm) on a 91 cm high work table. The lifting task was paced by a repeating timer which the subject controlled according to her subjective feelings of fatigue. Heart rate and RPE were measured during the last 5min of the experiment to determine the physiological level of functioning and perceived exertion. Psychophysically determined maximum acceptable frequencies were compared with the standards based on methods-time measurement (MTM) analysis.

Statistical analysis showed that both the weight of the load and reach distance had a significant effect on maximum frequency acceptable to the subjects. No single value for percentage of maximum frequency can be used to establish permissible one-handed lift limits in women; rather, this value depends upon the weight of the object and distance of lift. The average maximum acceptable frequency was 51% of the maximum frequency that the subjects could maintain for a period of 4min. The subjects selected workloads which resulted in a mean heart rate of 101 beats/min. The subjects rated the perceived exertion ranging from ‘fairly light’ to ‘somewhat hard’. Performance based on MTM analysis ranged from 11% below to 32% above the maximum workload acceptable to the subjects. The non-significant heart rate differences found among the six load-distance combinations lend strong support for the use of psychophysical methodology in future studies of fatigue criteria. The study also supports the previous findings that separate physiological fatigue criteria are needed for tasks involving arm work and whole body exertion.     

A review of: “Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction”, edited by MARTIN HELANDER,Elsevier Science Publisher Publishers,b.v., PO Box 103, 1000 AC Amsterdam,NL (1988), pp. 1200, ISBN 0 444 70536 8

Abstract

A widely used risk prediction tool, the revised NIOSH lifting equation (RNLE), provides the recommended weight limit (RWL), but is limited by analyst subjectivity, experience, and resources. This paper describes a robust, non-intrusive, straightforward approach to automatically extract spatial and temporal factors necessary for the RNLE using a single video camera in the sagittal plane. The participant’s silhouette is segmented by motion information and the novel use of a ghosting effect provides accurate detection of lifting instances, and hand and feet location prediction. Laboratory tests using 6 participants, each performing 36 lifts, showed that a nominal 640 pixel × 480 pixel 2D video, in comparison to 3D motion capture, provided RWL estimations within 0.2?kg (SD?=?1.0?kg). The linear regression between the video and 3D tracking RWL was R² = 0.96 (slope = 1.0, intercept = 0.2?kg). Since low definition video was used in order to synchronise with motion capture, better performance is anticipated using high definition video.

Practitioner's summary: An algorithm for automatically calculating the revised NIOSH lifting equation using a single video camera was evaluated in comparison to laboratory 3D motion capture. The results indicate that this method has suitable accuracy for practical use and may be, particularly, useful when multiple lifts are evaluated.

Abbreviations: 2D: Two-dimensional; 3D: Three-dimensional; ACGIH: American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; AM: asymmetric multiplier; BOL: beginning of lift; CM: coupling multiplier; DM: distance multiplier; EOL: end of lift; FIRWL: frequency independent recommended weight limit; FM: frequency multiplier; H: horizontal distance; HM: horizontal multiplier; IMU: inertial measurement unit; ISO: International Organization for Standardization; LC: load constant; NIOSH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; RGB: red, green, blue; RGB-D: red, green, blue – depth; RNLE: revised NIOSH lifting equation; RWL: recommended weight limit; SD: standard deviation; TLV: threshold limit value; VM: vertical multiplier; V: vertical distance     

Manual lifting load limit equation for adult Indian women workers based on physiological criteria

A comprehensive equation for the evaluation of a maximum load limit for manual load lifting has been developed for the first time for Indian adult female workers, based on a physiological criterion due to the limitation of applicability of the NIOSH (1991) equation. Ten adult female workers, who had been engaged in building construction activities for at least 7 years participated in this study. The cut-off value was selected as the working heart rate corresponding to the 33% level of maximum aerobic power (i.e. V'O2 max.) of this population, which was equivalent to a heart rate of 101.6 beats x min(-1). An equation was developed based on the effects of the following three lifting parameters on working heart rate: vertical height (knee, waist, shoulder and maximum reach height), lifting frequency (1, 4, 7 and 14 lifts x min(-1)), and load weight (5, 10 and 15 kg). The variations of the specific lifting parameter values were selected from field observations. From this equation, the maximum load limit was calculated as 15.4 kg and the workers give this a psychophysical rating as in the moderate to heavy category.     

The effects of task duration on psychophysically-determined maximum acceptable weights and forces

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate maximum acceptable weights and forces when performing manual handling tasks continuously for four hours at frequencies of 4.3 min-1 or slower. Twelve female and ten male second shift industrial workers performed 18 varieties of lifting, lowering, pushing, pulling, and carrying. A psychophysical methodology was employed, whereby the subjects were asked to select a workload they could sustain for 8 h 'without straining themselves or without becoming unusually tired, weakened, overheated or out of breath'. Measurements of heart rate, oxygen consumption, dynamic and static strengths were also taken. The weights selected after 40 min were not significantly different from the weights selected after four hours. The average oxygen consumption for the fast tasks was 28% VO2 max, within physiological guidelines for eight hours. The results also revealed that the maximum acceptable weights for the combination task of lifting, carrying, and lowering were limited by the lifting and lowering components. It is concluded from the results of this study that the psychophysical methodology is appropriate for determining maximum acceptable weights for task frequencies of 4.3 min-1 or slower. It is also concluded that the maximum acceptable weight for a combination task is limited by the lowest acceptable weight of any of the components.     

Maximum acceptable weights for asymmetric lifting of Chinese females

This study used the psychophysical approach to evaluate the effects of asymmetric lifting on the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) and the resulting heart rate, oxygen uptake and rating of perceived exertion (RPE). A randomized complete block factorial design was employed. Twelve female college students lifted weights at three different lifting frequencies (one-time maximum, 1 and 4 lifts/min) in the sagittal plane and at three different asymmetric angles (30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees ) from the floor to a 68-cm height pallet. This lifting experiment was conducted for a 1-h work period using a free-style lifting technique. The MAWLs for asymmetric lifting were significantly lower than those for symmetric lifting in the sagittal plane. The MAWL decreased with the increase in the angle of asymmetry. However, the heart rate, oxygen uptake and RPE remained unchanged. Though the MAWL decreased significantly with lifting frequency, both the physiological costs (heart rate and oxygen uptake) and rating of perceived exertion increased with the increase in lift frequency. The most stressed body part was the arm. Lifting frequency had no significant effect on the percentage decrease in MAWL from the sagittal plane values. On average, decreases of 5%, 9% and 14% for MAWL at 30 degrees, 60 degrees and 90 degrees asymmetric lifting, respectively, were revealed. This result was in agreement with the findings of Chinese males studied by Wu [Int. J. Ind. Ergonom. 25 (2000) 675]. The percentage decrease in MAWL with twisting angle for the Chinese participants was somewhat lower than those for Occidental participants. In addition, even though there was an increase in heart rate and RPE with the increase in the symmetrical lift angle for Occidental participants, it was different from the Chinese participants. Lastly, the 1991 NIOSH equation asymmetry multiplier is more conservative in comparison with the results of the present study.     

Manual lifting load limit equation for adult Indian women workers based on physiological criteria

A comprehensive equation for the evaluation of a maximum load limit for manual load lifting has been developed for the first time for Indian adult female workers, based on a physiological criterion due to the limitation of applicability of the NIOSH (1991) equation. Ten adult female workers, who had been engaged in building construction activities for at least 7 years participated in this study. The cut-off value was selected as the working heart rate corresponding to the 33% level of maximum aerobic power (i.e. V′O₂ max.) of this population, which was equivalent to a heart rate of 101.6 beats.min^???1. An equation was developed based on the effects of the following three lifting parameters on working heart rate: vertical height (knee, waist, shoulder and maximum reach height), lifting frequency (1, 4, 7 and 14 lifts.min^???1), and load weight (5, 10 and 15?kg). The variations of the specific lifting parameter values were selected from field observations. From this equation, the maximum load limit was calculated as 15.4?kg and the workers give this a psychophysical rating as in the moderate to heavy category.     

Significance of biomechanical and physiological variables during the determination of maximum acceptable weight of lift

The aim was to identify which biomechanical and physiological variables were associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) in a psychophysical study. Fifteen male college students lifted a box of unknown weight at 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as heart rate, trunk positions, velocities and accelerations were measured during the lifting, as well as estimated spinal loading in terms of moments and spinal forces in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques identified variables associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that heart rate, predicted sagittal lift moment and low back disorder (LBD) risk index were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, historical measures of LBD risk (e.g. compression, shear force) were not associated with decreases in weight prior to the next lift. Additionally, the magnitudes of the predicted spinal forces and LBD risk were all very high at the MAWL when compared with literature sources of tolerance as well as observational studies on LBD risk. Our findings indicate that the psychophysical methodology may be useful for the decision to lower the weight of loads that may present extreme levels of risk of LBD; however, the psychophysical methodology does not seem to help in the decision to stop changing the weight at a safe load weight.     

Significance of biomechanical and physiological variables during the determination of maximum acceptable weight of lift.

The aim was to identify which biomechanical and physiological variables were associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) in a psychophysical study. Fifteen male college students lifted a box of unknown weight at 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as heart rate, trunk positions, velocities and accelerations were measured during the lifting, as well as estimated spinal loading in terms of moments and spinal forces in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques identified variables associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that heart rate, predicted sagittal lift moment and low back disorder (LBD) risk index were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, historical measures of LBD risk (e.g. compression, shear force) were not associated with decreases in weight prior to the next lift. Additionally, the magnitudes of the predicted spinal forces and LBD risk were all very high at the MAWL when compared with literature sources of tolerance as well as observational studies on LBD risk. Our findings indicate that the psychophysical methodology may be useful for the decision to lower the weight of loads that may present extreme levels of risk of LBD; however, the psychophysical methodology does not seem to help in the decision to stop changing the weight at a safe load weight.     

Comprehensive manual handling limits for lowering,pushing, pulling and carrying activities

The objective of this study was to develop a set of mathematical models for manual lowering, pushing, pulling and carrying activities that would result in establishing load capacity limits to protect the lower back against occupational low-back disorders. In order to establish safe guidelines, a three-stage process was used. First, psychophysical data was used to generate the models' discounting factors and recommended load capacities. Second, biomechanical analysis was used to refine the recommended load capacities. Third, physiological criteria were used to validate the models' discounting factors. Both task and personal factors were considered in the models' development. When compared to the results from prior psychophysical research for these activities, the developed load capacity values are lower than previously established limits. The results of this study allowed the authors to validate the hypothesis proposed and tested by Karwowski (1983) that states that the combination of physiological and biomechanical stresses should lead to the overall measure of task acceptability or the psychophysical stress. This study also found that some of the discounting factors for the task frequency parameters recommended in the prior psychophysical research should not be used as several of the high frequency factors violated physiological limits.     

Evaluating lifting tasks using subjective and biomechanical estimates of stress at the lower back

The objective of this study was to evaluate five different lifting tasks based on subjective and biomechanical estimates of stress at the lower back. Subjective estimates were obtained immediately after the subjects performed the lifting tasks. Rankings for different tasks were obtained according to the perceived level of stress at the lower back. A biomechanical model was used to predict the compressive force at the L5/S1 disc for the weight lifted considering link angles for the particular posture. The tasks were also ranked according to the compressive force loading at the L5/S1 disc. The weight lifted in these tasks for obtaining the subjective estimate of stress was the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWOL). This was determined separately for each subject using a psychophysical approach. Subjective estimates of stress were obtained for infrequent lifting, specifically for a single lift, as well as for lifting at a frequency of four lifts per min. The results showed that a lifting task acceptable from the biomechanical point of view may not be judged as a safe or acceptable task by the worker based on his subjective perception. This may result in a risk of the worker not performing the recommended task or not following the recommended method.     

Ergonomic issues in team lifting

In this article we review and critique the current body of scientific knowledge regarding the use of team lifting including: (a) psychophysical studies of team lifting capacity, and (b) studies of manual handling, patient handling, and stretcher carriage performed by lifting teams. The consensus of the research literature is that team‐lifting capacity is greater than the lifting capacity of an individual, but that the capacity of lifting teams is less than the summed capacity of individual team members. Further, biomechanical, psychophysical, and physiological stress tends to be reduced compared to the equivalent lifts and transfers performed by individuals. However, the stress associated with team lifting depends on a broad range of individual team member, load, task and environmental factors, which can interact in unexpected ways. Caution is therefore recommended against making broad assumptions regarding the use of team lifting. Future studies are needed to examine how effort and load are distributed among lifting team members, with emphasis on identifying factors that may increase the risk of injury. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Hum Factors Man 15: 293–307, 2005.     

Biomechanical analysis of the effect of changing patient-handling technique

The objective of the study was to assess the changes in the mechanical load on the low-back when shifting from a self-chosen to a recommended patient-handling technique. Nine female health care workers without formal education in patient-handling carried out 8 different tasks involving moving, turning and lifting situations. By means of a dynamic 3D biomechanical model of the lower part of the body, peak torque, compression and shear forces at the L4/L5 joint were compared using the two different patient-handling techniques. In 5 of the 8 tasks, a significant reduction was observed in spinal loading. Application of the recommended technique decreased the compression value significantly for all tasks with a mean value above 3000 N. For the two tasks with the highest compression values when using the self-chosen technique (4223, 4446 N), the loading was reduced with 36% and 25%, respectively. If the principles behind the recommended technique are implemented and maintained, a decrease in the risk of low-back disorders during patient-handling should thus be expected.     

Maximum acceptable weights and maximum voluntary isometric strengths for asymmetric lifting

A laboratory study was conducted to determine the effects of asymmetric lifting on psychophysically determined maximum acceptable weights and maximum voluntary isometric strengths. Thirteen male college students lifted three different boxes in the sagittal plane and at three different angles of asymmetry (30,60 and 90°) from floor to an 81-cm high table using a free-style lifting technique. For each lifting task, the maximum voluntary isometric strength was measured at the origin of lift.

The maximum acceptable weights and the static strengths for asymmetric lifting were significantly lower than those for symmetric lifting in the sagittal plane for three box sizes (P<0·01). The decrease in maximum acceptable weight and static strength from the sagittal plane values increased with an increase in the angle of asymmetry (P < 0·01). Box size had no significant effect (P≥ 0·05) on the percentage decrease in maximum acceptable weight or voluntary isometric strength from the sagittal plane values. Correction factors of 7,15 and 22% for maximum acceptable weights and 12, 21 and 31% for static strength at 30, 60 and 90% of asymmetric lifting are recommended. Lastly, in the absence of epidemiological data, a comparison of maximum acceptable weight and static strength in the sagittal plane with the NIOSH guidelines for action and maximum permissible limits indicates that the guidelines may be conservative.     

An ergonomic evaluation of handle height and load in maximal and submaximal cart pushing

Awareness of the hazards of repetitive lifting has brought about significant changes in the design of industrial jobs. Pushing and pulling tasks have become increasingly common as the result of the introduction of a variety of carts and other materials-handling assistance devices. In order to predict the peak performance of workers in these tasks, and the biomechanical stresses that can result from them, the exertions involved in cart pushing were studied. Four subjects of various strengths pushed carts with loads from 45 to 450 kg at several heights. Peak push forces reached 500 N for male subjects and 200 N for female subjects. Strong subjects moved a 45 kg cart at velocities of 1.1 m s(-1) and a 450 kg cart at velocities of 0.8 m s(-1). Weaker subjects moved the carts at velocities of 0.5 and 0.4 m s(-1) respectively. Calculated static compression forces at the L5/S1 spinal disc were consistently above the NIOSH Action Limit of 3400 N for strong subjects when the cart load reached 225 kg.     

The relationship between isometric strength of Cantonese males and the US NIOSH guide for manual lifting

A laboratory study was undertaken to assess the relationship between the maximal voluntary isometric strength (MVIS) of a group of Hong Kong Cantonese males and recommended limiting values for lifting proposed in the Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting (NIOSH, 1981). Forty-one male subjects were required to apply a 'free-style' vertical 'lift' force to a horizontal bar located 150 mm from the ground. Forces were applied with the horizontal location of the midpoint of the ankles at 200, 400, 600 and 800 mm from the bar. The results were compared with the Maximal Permissible Limit (MPL) and the Action Limit (AL) values proposed in the NIOSH guide. The results showed that the mean MVIS of the Hong Kong subjects lay between the MPL and AL when the load was 200 mm and 400 mm from the ankles, but was significantly below the AL at 600 mm. At 800 mm more than half of the subjects were unable to apply any measurable positive vertical force. The compressive force at the L5/S1 disc of four subjects was estimated using a static biomechanical model. The relationship between the disc pressure and the force exerted was largely in accordance with NIOSH guide values. The results are discussed in terms of differences in subject population and lifting technique. Comments on the applicability of the NIOSH standards internationally, are also presented.