Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Pulling force in lateral lifting and lowering

Q M Huang1, M Sato, A Thorstensson

  • 1Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.

Ergonomics
|June 18, 1998
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Non-rigid response of the trunk to dynamic axial loading: an evaluation of current modelling assumptions.

Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)·2013
Same author

Motor control of the trunk during a modified clean and jerk lift.

Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports·2013
Same author

Recruitment order of the abdominal muscles varies with postural task.

Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports·2011
Same author

Calculations of mechanisms for balance control during narrow and single-leg standing in fit older adults: A reliability study.

Gait & posture·2011
Same author

Activation of transversus abdominis varies with postural demand in standing.

Gait & posture·2011
Same author

Activation patterns of the soleus and gastrocnemius muscles during different motor tasks.

Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology·2010
Same journal

Identification of systemic barriers, facilitators and adaptations to effective record-keeping: a South African primary healthcare clinic case study.

Ergonomics·2026
Same journal

Layer-specific facial soft-tissue thickness in 1174 Chinese adults: Implications for finite-element headforms and ergonomic design.

Ergonomics·2026
Same journal

The dual effects of information presentation speed on operator performance in dynamic tasks: a study in supervisory control and data acquisition interfaces.

Ergonomics·2026
Same journal

Evaluating generative AI teaching assistants in simulated learning environments: how instructor type and support type affect students' perceptions.

Ergonomics·2026
Same journal

Swipe smart, not hard: hand health of smartphone users in a university population.

Ergonomics·2026
Same journal

Couriers' work-related musculoskeletal disorders and psychological distress: Insights for work errors and traffic safety.

Ergonomics·2026
See all related articles

Maximal voluntary pulling force in the frontal plane is task-dependent. Lowering tasks generate higher forces than lifting tasks, potentially increasing injury risk due to eccentric muscle action.

Area of Science:

  • Biomechanics
  • Human Movement Science
  • Kinesiology

Background:

  • Understanding maximal voluntary pulling force is crucial for injury prevention and performance optimization.
  • Lateral trunk flexion plays a significant role in various physical activities and occupational tasks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate maximal voluntary lateral hand pulling force in healthy men.
  • To analyze the influence of trunk flexion angles and movement velocities (lifting vs. lowering) on pulling force.

Main Methods:

  • 18 healthy, habitually active men performed maximal voluntary lateral hand pulls.
  • Measurements included static trunk flexion angles and isokinetic lifting/lowering at controlled velocities.
  • Force was measured using a strain gauge, and trunk displacement via an electrogoniometer.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Static pulling forces were highest at 10-20 degrees of trunk flexion to the loaded side.
  • Lifting forces decreased with increasing velocity, peaking at 7-9 degrees flexion to the loaded side.
  • Lowering forces were significantly higher than lifting forces, less velocity-dependent, and peaked at -7 to -11 degrees (unloaded side).

Conclusions:

  • Maximal voluntary pulling force in the frontal plane is significantly influenced by the task (lifting vs. lowering).
  • Higher forces during lowering, coupled with eccentric muscle action, may indicate an elevated risk of injury.
  • Findings highlight the importance of considering task-specific biomechanics in strength assessment and injury prevention strategies.