ArticleTrials2026
Practical applicability and effectiveness of passive, back-support exoskeletons in logistics and care: a randomized controlled trial protocol (ELSA LogiCare).
Article in Trials, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMusculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are the leading work-related health issue in Europe. While passive back-support exoskeletons have shown promise in reducing physical strain in laboratory settings, their medium-term effects under real-world working conditions remain largely unexplored. This study will assess the applicability and the medium-term effects of passive back-support exoskeletons on MSDs in the logistics and healthcare sectors.
methodsELSA LogiCare is a multicenter, parallel-designed, randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to either an intervention group or a control group. The intervention group will be randomly assigned (1:1) to use one of two passive back-support exoskeleton models for 3 months, while the control group works unassisted as usual. We aim to recruit a total sample size of 120 participants, resulting in approximately 80 participants in the intervention group and 40 participants in the control group. Primary outcomes focus on feasibility and use of the exoskeleton, including daily wearing time. Effectiveness-related outcomes include musculoskeletal complaints after 3 months, assessed using the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include physical and mental workload (NASA-Raw Task Load Index), job satisfaction (Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire), cognitive performance (Wiener Testsystem), fatigue (Fatigue Scale), acceptance of exoskeletons (Technology Commitment), user satisfaction (Quest 2.0), user experience and implementation barriers (short interviews), absences due to illness, blood pressure, physical activity (Fitbit/Garmin) and dropouts. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, every 4 weeks during, and immediately after the intervention. The study is open-label, with blinding applied to outcome assessors and data analysts only. Primary analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle and will be conducted using mixed-effects models with repeated measures to estimate feasibility- and effectiveness-related outcomes over time. DISCUSSION: When effectively integrated into workplace environments, passive back-support exoskeletons have the potential to significantly alleviate physical strain and enhance efforts to reduce the risks associated with MSDs. Our process evaluation can also help to understand how passive back-support exoskeletons can be successfully integrated into the logistics and care sectors.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under the DRKS-ID: DRKS00036072.
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.