Overhead work can pose substantial musculoskeletal stress in many industrial settings. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of passive upper-limb exoskeletons in reducing muscular activity and subjective discomfort ratings. In a repeated-measures laboratory experiment, 20 healthy male participants performed 10-min drilling tasks with and without two passive upper-limb exoskeletons (VEX and Airframe). During the tasks, muscle activity in eight muscles (upper limb - upper trapezius, middle deltoid, biceps brachii, triceps brachii; low back - erector spinae; lower limb - rectus femoris, biceps femoris, tibialis anterior) was collected using electromyography as a physical exertion measure. Subjective discomfort rating in six body parts was measured using the Borg's CR-10 scale. The results showed that muscle activity (especially in the upper-limb muscles) was significantly decreased by 29.3-58.1% with both exoskeletons compared to no exoskeleton condition. The subjective discomfort ratings showed limited differences between the conditions. These findings indicate that passive upper-limb exoskeletons may have potential as an effective intervention to reduce muscular loading and physical exertion during overhead work.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The aim of this study was to confirm the effect of a lift-assist device when performing a patient-lifting task. Ten working caregivers participated in this experiment, and lifting patients from bed to wheelchair (B2C) and wheelchair to bed (C2B) was performed for manual care (MC) and lift-assist device (robot) care (RC). EMG sensors and IMU motion sensors were attached as indicators of the assistive device’s effectiveness. EMG was attached to the right side of eight muscles (UT, MD, TB, BB, ES, RF, VA, and TA), and flexion/extension angles of the neck, shoulder, back, and knee were collected using motion sensors. As a result of the analysis, both B2C and C2B showed higher muscle activities in MC than RC. When using a lift-assist device to lift patients, the RC method showed reductions in muscle activities compared to MC. As a result of the work-posture analysis, both the task type and the task phase exhibited pronounced reductions in shoulder, back, and knee ROM (range of motion) compared to those of MC. Therefore, based on the findings of this study, a lift-assist device is recommended for reducing the physical workloads of caregivers while performing patient-lifting tasks.