Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42205247›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026

Effects of an active exoskeleton on the muscle activity of the erector spinae and biceps femoris muscles during lifting with symmetric stoop and squat technique.

Jens Hasenmaier, Tobias Siebert, Dominik Mayer, Norman Stutzig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jens HasenmaierMotion and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Tobias SiebertMotion and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Dominik MayerMotion and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Norman StutzigMotion and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Active exoskeletons are increasingly used to reduce muscle activity and support lifting tasks. However, the effectiveness of exoskeletons can vary depending on the lifting technique. This study investigates the effects of a commercially available active exoskeleton (Apogee) on muscle activity during two different lifting techniques: stoop and squat. Methods: 17 healthy young adults (8 male, 9 female) participated in the study. Muscle activity was measured in the M. erector spinae (MES) and M. biceps femoris (MBF) using EMG while lifting a 15 kg box in four conditions: 1) without exoskeleton, 2) exoskeleton in passive mode, 3) 50% support and 20% counterforce, 4) 100% support and 60% counterforce. Results: The MBF activity was 29% lower during the squat technique compared to the stoop technique (F Discussion: The results indicate that the exoskeleton provides greater benefits during the stoop technique, where the lifting motion primarily involves hip extension. The reduction in muscle activity supports the potential of exoskeletons in reducing muscle load and preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, the squat technique showed limited improvements, suggesting that exoskeletons may need to be adapted for different lifting tasks. Future exoskeletons should aim to dynamically adjust their support based on the specific lifting technique to maximize effectiveness.

Indexed as

activeapogeeelectromyographyexoskeletonlower backmuscle activitymusculoskeletal disorders

Identifiers

PMID42205247
PMCPMC13201388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.