Comparing the risk of low-back injury using model-based optimization: Improved technique versus exoskeleton assistance. (1st October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Marinou, Giorgos; Millard, Matthew; Šarabon, Nejc; Mombaur, Katja
• Is Part Of: Wearable technologies. Volume 2(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-10-01
• Subjects: back-support exoskeletons -- low-back pain -- model-based optimization -- optimal control -- wearable robotics; Wearable technology -- Periodicals; Robotics in medicine -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1017/wtc.2021.12
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2631-7176

Abstract

Abstract: Although wearable robotic systems are designed to reduce the risk of low-back injury, it is unclear how effective assistance is, compared to improvements in lifting technique. We use a two-factor block study design to simulate how effective exoskeleton assistance and technical improvements are at reducing the risk of low-back injury when compared to a typical adult lifting a box. The effects of assistance are examined by simulating two different models: a model of just the human participant, and a model of the human participant wearing the SPEXOR exoskeleton. The effects of lifting technique are investigated by formulating two different types of optimal control problems: a least-squares problem which tracks the human participant's lifting technique, and a minimization problem where the model is free to use a different movement. Different lifting techniques are considered using three different cost functions related to risk factors for low-back injury: cumulative low-back load (CLBL), peak low-back load (PLBL), and a combination of both CLBL and PLBL (HYB). The results of our simulations indicate that an exoskeleton alone can make modest reductions in both CLBL and PLBL. In contrast, technical improvements alone are effective at reducing CLBL, but not PLBL. The largest reductions in both CLBL and PLBL occur when both an exoskeleton and technical improvements are used. While all three of the lifting technique cost functions reduce both CLBL and PLBL, the HYB cost function offers the most balanced reduction in both CLBL and PLBL.