» Articles » PMID: 32069181

Biomechanical Factors During Common Agricultural Activities: Results of On-farm Exposure Assessments Using Direct Measurement Methods

Overview
Publisher Informa Healthcare
Date 2020 Feb 19
PMID 32069181
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Agricultural work is associated with increased risk of adverse musculoskeletal health outcomes. The purpose of this study was to quantify exposure to biomechanical factors among a sample (n = 55) of farmers in the Midwest region of the U.S. while they performed a variety of routine agricultural activities, and to compare exposure levels between these activities. Surface electromyography was used to estimate activity levels of the erector spinae, upper trapezius, forearm flexor, and forearm extensor muscle groups. Simultaneously, inertial sensors were used to measure kinematics of the trunk, upper arm, and wrist. In general, lower muscle activity levels, less extreme postures, and slower movement speeds were observed during activities that involved primarily the use of agricultural machinery in comparison to manual activities, suggesting a potential advantage of mechanization relative to musculoskeletal health. Median wrist movement speeds exceeding recently proposed exposure thresholds were also observed during many manual activities, such as milking animals and repairing equipment. Upper arm postures and movement speeds did not appear to confer excessive risk for shoulder-related outcomes (on the whole), but interpretation of the results is limited by a sampling approach that may not have captured the full extent of exposure variation. Not surprisingly, substantial variation in exposure levels were observed within each agricultural activity, which is related to substantial variation in the equipment, tools, and work practices used by participants. Ultimately, the results of this study contribute to an emerging literature in which the physical demands of routine agricultural work have been described on the basis of sensor-based measurements rather than more common self-report or observation-based approaches.

Citing Articles

Reliability and Accuracy of Standard Reference Procedures for Measurements of Trunk and Arm Postures in Ergonomics.

Lind C, Rhen I, Forsman M Bioengineering (Basel). 2025; 12(1).

PMID: 39851325 PMC: 11761571. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering12010050.


The Use of Wearable Systems for Assessing Work-Related Risks Related to the Musculoskeletal System-A Systematic Review.

Motta F, Varrecchia T, Chini G, Ranavolo A, Galli M Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025; 21(12.

PMID: 39767409 PMC: 11675614. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph21121567.


Comparison of Six Sensor Fusion Algorithms with Electrogoniometer Estimation of Wrist Angle in Simulated Work Tasks.

Razavi A, Forsman M, Abtahi F Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(13).

PMID: 39000951 PMC: 11244359. DOI: 10.3390/s24134173.


Towards in-field assessment of humeral and scapular kinematics: a comparison between laboratory and field settings using inertial sensors.

Lordall J, Akinluyi O, Lang A Front Sports Act Living. 2024; 6:1349570.

PMID: 38481467 PMC: 10933028. DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2024.1349570.


Defining humeral axial rotation with optical motion capture and inertial measurement units during functional task assessment.

Lang A, Friesen K Med Biol Eng Comput. 2023; 61(11):2963-2970.

PMID: 37535299 DOI: 10.1007/s11517-023-02894-z.


References
1.
Lee S, Tak S, Alterman T, Calvert G . Prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms among agricultural workers in the United States: an analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2004-2008. J Agromedicine. 2014; 19(3):268-80. DOI: 10.1080/1059924X.2014.916642. View

2.
Earle-Richardson G, Jenkins P, Strogatz D, Bell E, Freivalds A, Sorensen J . Electromyographic assessment of apple bucket intervention designed to reduce back strain. Ergonomics. 2008; 51(6):902-19. DOI: 10.1080/00140130801939790. View

3.
Mathiassen S, Winkel J, Hagg G . Normalization of surface EMG amplitude from the upper trapezius muscle in ergonomic studies - A review. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2010; 5(4):197-226. DOI: 10.1016/1050-6411(94)00014-x. View

4.
Morse T, Warren N, Dillon C, Diva U . A population based survey of ergonomic risk factors in Connecticut: distribution by industry, occupation, and demographics. Conn Med. 2007; 71(5):261-8. View

5.
Douphrate D, Fethke N, Nonnenmann M, Rodriguez A, Hagevoort R, de Porras D . Effect of a novel teat preparation system on upper extremity muscle activity among U.S. large-herd dairy parlor workers. Int J Ind Ergon. 2020; 56:161-169. PMC: 7043381. DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2016.10.003. View