Low back joint loading and kinematics during standing and unsupported sitting
Low back joint loading and kinematics during standing and unsupported sitting
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/00140130118276
复制
发表时间：
2001-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
McGill, SM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Callaghan, JP;McGill, SM
目的是检查长时间（2 小时）坐着期间的腰椎运动学、脊柱关节负荷和躯干肌肉激活模式。这些信息对于帮助人体工学专家设计可能存在姿势变化的工作是必要的，特别是在站立和各种坐姿之间。通过高度详细的解剖生物力学模型（包含 104 块肌肉、被动韧带和椎间盘）预测关节负荷，该模型利用每位受试者每次试验的脊柱姿势生物信号和肌肉肌电图 (EMG)。坐姿导致的腰部压缩负荷（平均值+/-SD 1698+/-467 N）明显高于站立时腰椎承受的压缩负荷（1076+/-243 N）（p < 0.001）。受试者被平等地分为采用两种坐姿策略之一：单一“静态”或“动态”多种姿势方法。在每个人中，与坐姿相比，站立产生的脊柱姿势明显不同，并且当对所有八个受试者的脊柱姿势进行平均时，站立的脊柱姿势与坐姿所采用的弯曲姿势不重叠。在坐姿和站立任务中监测的所有肌肉都存在休息成分（如肌电图振幅概率分布函数所示）。坐着时，上、下竖脊肌群表现出更高水平的激活。采用不同坐姿策略的个体没有明显的肌肉激活水平差异。鉴于被动组织力的减少，站立似乎是坐姿的良好休息方式。然而，站立和坐姿均具有动态运动少的恒定负载，这将为肌肉激活水平或低背部负载提供很少的休息/变化。
The aim was to examine lumbar spine kinematics, spinal joint loads and trunk muscle activation patterns during a prolonged (2 h) period of sitting. This information is necessary to assist the ergonomist in designing work where posture variation is possible-particularly between standing and various styles of sitting. Joint loads were predicted with a highly detailed anatomical biomechanical model (that incorporated 104 muscles, passive ligaments and intervertebral discs), which utilized biological signals of spine posture and muscle electromyograms (EMG) from each trial of each subject. Sitting resulted in significantly higher (p < 0.001) low back compressive loads (mean+/-SD 1698+/-467 N) than those experienced by the lumbar spine during standing (1076+/-243 N). Subjects were equally divided into adopting one of two sitting strategies: a single 'static' or a 'dynamic' multiple posture approach. Within each individual, standing produced a distinctly different spine posture compared with sitting, and standing spine postures did not overlap with flexion postures adopted in sitting when spine postures were averaged across all eight subjects. A rest component (as noted in an amplitude probability distribution function from the EMG) was present for all muscles monitored in both sitting and standing tasks. The upper and lower erector spinae muscle groups exhibited a shifting to higher levels of activation during sitting. There were no clear muscle activation level differences in the individuals who adopted different sitting strategies. Standing appears to be a good rest from sitting given the reduction in passive tissue forces. However, the constant loading with little dynamic movement which characterizes both standing and sitting would provide little rest/change for muscular activation levels or low back loading.