ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Biomechanical Analysis of Two-Person Emergency Patient Lifting Techniques Using Motion Capture and Ergonomic Assessment.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Emergency responders face a high risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), particularly lower back injuries, due to frequent patient-handling tasks performed in awkward and dynamic postures. This aim of study is to utilize dual motion capture systems integrated with a digital human modeling (DHM) ergonomics tool to evaluate the biomechanical effects of two common two-person carrying techniques: facing forward and facing each other. Twenty-two participants lifted a 25 kg mannequin while wearing Xsens motion sensors, and lumbar forces and joint angles were analyzed using Siemens Jack software (v9.0). Peak compressive and anterior-posterior (AP) shear forces, along with trunk, hip, and knee joint angles, were examined. Compressive forces ranged from approximately 948.6 to 2955.6 N, and AP shear forces ranged from 286.0 to 827.0 N. Mean compressive and AP shear forces were higher during the facing-each-other task (1977.3 N and 595.0 N) than during the facing-forward task (1596.0 N and 462.0 N). Males experienced higher spinal loads than females across both tasks. The facing-each-other technique was associated with greater hip flexion, lower knee flexion, and reduced trunk flexion, whereas the facing-forward technique resulted in less hip flexion, greater knee flexion, and greater trunk flexion. Overall, under the conditions of the present study, the facing-forward technique was associated with lower lumbar loading indicators. Integrating motion capture with DHM offers a valuable approach for evaluating realistic rescue tasks and can inform ergonomic training strategies for emergency responders.
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.