Five grip spans (45 to 65 mm) were tested to evaluate the effects of handle grip span and user's hand size on maximum grip strength, individual finger force and subjective ratings of comfort using a computerised digital dynamometer with independent finger force sensors. Forty-six males participated and were assigned into three hand size groups (small, medium, large) according to their hands' length. In general, results showed the 55- and 50-mm grip spans were rated as the most comfortable sizes and showed the largest grip strength (433.6 N and 430.8 N, respectively), whereas the 65-mm grip span handle was rated as the least comfortable size and the least grip strength. With regard to the interaction effect of grip span and hand size, small and medium-hand participants rated the best preference for the 50- to 55-mm grip spans and the least for the 65-mm grip span, whereas large-hand participants rated the 55- to 60-mm grip spans as the most preferred and the 45-mm grip span as the least preferred. Normalised grip span (NGS) ratios (29% and 27%) are the ratios of user's hand length to handle grip span. The NGS ratios were obtained and applied for suggesting handle grip spans in order to maximise subjective comfort as well as gripping force according to the users' hand sizes. In the analysis of individual finger force, the middle finger force showed the highest contribution (37.5%) to the total finger force, followed by the ring (28.7%), index (20.2%) and little (13.6%) finger. In addition, each finger was observed to have a different optimal grip span for exerting the maximum force, resulting in a bow-contoured shaped handle (the grip span of the handle at the centre is larger than the handle at the end) for two-handle hand tools. Thus, the grip spans for two-handle hand tools may be designed according to the users' hand/finger anthropometrics to maximise subjective ratings and performance based on this study. Results obtained in this study will provide guidelines for hand tool designers and manufacturers for designing grip spans of two-handle tools, which can maximise handle comfort and performance.

The aim of this study was to determine the muscle load reduction of the upper extremities and lower extremities associated with wearing an exoskeleton, based on analyses of muscle activity (electromyography: EMG) and the AnyBody Modeling System (AMS). Twenty healthy males in their twenties participated in this study, performing bolting tasks at two working heights (60 and 85 cm). The muscle activities of the upper trapezius (UT), middle deltoid (MD), triceps brachii (TB), biceps brachii (BB), erector spinae (ES), biceps femoris (BF), rectus femoris (RF), and tibialis anterior (TA) were measured by EMG and estimated by AMS, respectively. When working at the 60 cm height with the exoskeleton, the lower extremity muscle (BF, RF, TA) activities of EMG and AMS decreased. When working at the 85 cm height, the lower extremity muscle activity of EMG decreased except for TA, and those of AMS decreased except for RF. The muscle activities analyzed by the two methods showed similar patterns, in that wearing the exoskeleton reduced loads of the lower extremity muscles. Therefore, wearing an exoskeleton can be recommended to prevent an injury. As the results of the two methods show a similar tendency, the AMS can be used.

This study quantified the neck posture and fatigue using the flexion relaxation phenomenon (FRP) and craniovertebral angle (CVA); further, it compared the difference between the level of fatigue and neck posture induced by two types of monitors (regular fixed monitor and moving monitor). Twenty-three male participants were classified into two groups—the low-flexion relaxation ratio (FRR) group and the normal-FRR group, depending on the FRR value. All participants performed a document task for 50 min using both types of monitors. It was found that the FRR values significantly decreased after the documentation task. The CVA analysis showed that the moving monitor’s frequency of forward head posture (FHP) was lower than that for the fixed monitor. Overall, the moving monitor worked better than the fixed monitor; this can be interpreted as proof that such monitors can reduce neck fatigue.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the muscle activities and subjective discomfort according to the heights of tasks and the lower-limb exoskeleton CEX (Chairless EXoskeleton), which is a chair-type passive exoskeleton. Twenty healthy subjects (thirteen males and seven females) participated in this experiment. The independent variables were wearing of the exoskeleton (w/ CEX, w/o CEX), working height (6 levels: 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, and 140 cm), and muscle type (8 levels: upper trapezius (UT), erector spinae (ES), middle deltoid (MD), triceps brachii (TB), biceps brachii (BB), biceps femoris (BF), rectus femoris (RF), and tibialis anterior (TA)). The dependent variables were EMG activity (% MVC) and subjective discomfort rating. When wearing the CEX, the UT, ES, RF, and TA showed lower muscle activities at low working heights (40–80 cm) than not wearing the CEX, whereas those muscles showed higher muscle activities at high working heights (100–140 cm). Use of the CEX had a positive effect on subjective discomfort rating at lower working heights. Generally, lower discomfort was reported at working heights below 100 cm when using the CEX. At working heights of 100–140 cm, the muscle activity when wearing the CEX tended to be greater than when not wearing it. Thus, considering the results of this study, the use of the lower-limb exoskeleton (CEX) at a working height of 40–100 cm might reduce the muscle activity and discomfort of whole body and decrease the risk of related disorders.

Eighteen co-ordination postures with shoulder flexion angles (0°, 45° and 90°) and elbow flexion angles (0°, 45° and 90°) in standing and sitting positions were evaluated to identify the effects of co-ordination postures on maximum grip strength and muscle activities of the upper limb in this study. Thirty-nine subjects were recruited and their maximum grip strengths were measured. According to the analysis of grip strength, grip strength was shown to be stronger in a standing posture (297.4 N) than in a sitting posture (274.6 N). In addition, grip strength (293.8 N) at 90° shoulder flexion angle was significantly higher than that at 0° and 45° shoulder angles. There was no statistically significant difference in grip strength from the effects of elbow angles in this study. The results of muscle activities for all muscle groups showed a similar trend with the results of grip strength associated with shoulder angles.

Agricultural upper limb assessment (AULA), which was developed for evaluating upper limb body postures, was compared with the existing assessment tools such as rapid upper limb assessment (RULA), rapid entire body assessment (REBA), and ovako working posture analysis system (OWAS) based on the results of experts’ assessments of 196 farm tasks in this study. The expert group consisted of ergonomists, industrial medicine experts, and agricultural experts. As a result of the hit rate analysis, the hit rate (average: 48.6%) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (RULA: 33.3%, REBA: 30.1%, and OWAS: 34.4%). The quadratic weighted kappa analysis also showed that the kappa value (0.718) of AULA was significantly higher than those of the other assessment tools (0.599, 0.578, and 0.538 for RULA, REBA, and OWAS, respectively). Based on the results, AULA showed a better agreement with expert evaluation results than other evaluation tools. In general, other assessment tools tended to underestimate the risk of upper limb posture in this study. AULA would be an appropriate evaluation tool to assess the risk of various upper limb postures.