ArticleJournal of biomechanics2024
Musculoskeletal models determine the effect of a soft active exosuit on muscle activations and forces during lifting and lowering tasks.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating Different Optimization Criteria for Estimating Spine Loads and Muscle Activity During Manual Lifting With and Without Assistance from Back-Support Exoskeletons.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Case Report: Design of a University of the District of Columbia (UDC) intrepid dynamic exoskeletal orthosis.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Exosuits have the potential to mitigate musculoskeletal stress and prevent back injuries during industrial tasks. This study aimed to 1) validate the implementation of a soft active exosuit into a musculoskeletal model of the spine by comparing model predicted muscle activations versus corresponding surface EMG measurements, and 2) evaluate the effect of the exosuit on peak back and hip muscle forces. Fourteen healthy participants performed squat and stoop lift and lower tasks with boxes of 6 and 10 kg, with and without wearing a 2.7 kg soft active exosuit. Participant-specific musculoskeletal models, which included the exosuit, were created in OpenSim. Model validation focused on the back and hip extensors, where temporal agreement between EMG and model estimated muscle activity was generally strong to excellent (average cross-correlation coefficients ranging from 0.84 to 0.98). Root mean square errors of muscle activity (0.05-0.10) were similar with and without the exosuit, and compared well to prior model validation studies without the exosuit (average root mean square errors ranging from 0.05 to 0.19). In terms of performance, the exosuit reduced the estimated peak erector spinae forces during lifting and lowering phases across all lifting tasks but reduced peak hip extensor muscles forces only in a squat lift task of 10 kg. These reductions in total peak muscle forces were approximately 1.7-4.2 times greater than the corresponding exosuit assistance force, which were 146 ± 19 N and 102 ± 14 N at the times of peak erector spinae forces in lifting and lowering, respectively. Overall, the results support the hypothesis that exosuits reduce soft tissue loading, and thereby potentially reduce fatigue and injury risk during manual materials handling tasks. Incorporating exosuits into musculoskeletal models is a valid approach to understand the impact of exosuit assistance on muscle activity and forces.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.