ReviewWearable technologies2025
Biomechanical effects of soft and rigid passive back occupational exoskeletons during load-carrying and static trunk bending tasks in the aeronautics industry.
Review in Wearable technologies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The manufacturing industry, notably the aeronautics sector, involves tasks presenting risks of low back pain. One of the preventive strategies could be the use of passive back exoskeletons, which have demonstrated benefits during activities involving trunk bending. This study aims to evaluate the effects of four passive back exoskeletons on trunk neuromuscular activity, kinematics, and perceived discomfort during polishing tasks simulated in a laboratory setting. Nineteen participants performed four tasks (two static bending tasks and two load-carrying tasks) without and with two soft (CORFOR and BionicBack) and two rigid (BackX and Laevo FLEX) exoskeletons. The results showed varying effects depending on the tested exoskeleton model, beyond the distinction between rigid and soft designs. Reductions in lumbar erector spinae (LES) neuromuscular activity were observed with Laevo FLEX and CORFOR during static tasks compared to the condition without exoskeleton (8-18%;
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.