{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/30835"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/30835","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Low Back Biomechanical Analysis of Isometric Pushing and Pulling Tasks","abstract":"Few studies have investigated the neuromuscular recruitment and stabilizing control of the spine during pushing and pulling exertions. Past theoretical investigation suggest that co-contraction of the of the paraspinal muscles is necessary to stabilize the spine during pushing exertions. We hypothesized greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions. Co-contraction of trunk musculature was quantified during isometric pushing and pulling tasks. The mean value of co-contraction during pushing was two-fold greater (p < 0.01) than during extension. Co-contraction has been shown to increase the stiffness of the ankle but this effect has not been demonstrated in the trunk. Trunk stiffness was measured as a function of co-activation during extension exertions. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.01) greater with co-activation. Trunk stiffness was calculated during isometric pushing and pulling exertions. We hypothesized trunk stiffness would be greater during pushing tasks due to increased levels of co-contraction to maintain stability of the spine. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.05) greater during pushing compared to pulling exertions. Results suggest that trunk isometric pushing tasks require more co-contraction than pulling tasks enable to maintain spinal stability. Greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions caused trunk stiffness to be greater during pushing compared to pulling tasks. Results may indicate greater risk of spinal instability from motor control error during pushing tasks than pulling exertions. Future studies need to consider co-contraction and neuromuscular control of spinal stability when evaluating the biomechanical risks of pushing and pulling tasks.","abstract_html":"Few studies have investigated the neuromuscular recruitment and stabilizing control of the spine during pushing and pulling exertions. Past theoretical investigation suggest that co-contraction of the of the paraspinal muscles is necessary to stabilize the spine during pushing exertions. We hypothesized greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions. Co-contraction of trunk musculature was quantified during isometric pushing and pulling tasks. The mean value of co-contraction during pushing was two-fold greater (p &lt; 0.01) than during extension. Co-contraction has been shown to increase the stiffness of the ankle but this effect has not been demonstrated in the trunk. Trunk stiffness was measured as a function of co-activation during extension exertions. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p &lt; 0.01) greater with co-activation. Trunk stiffness was calculated during isometric pushing and pulling exertions. We hypothesized trunk stiffness would be greater during pushing tasks due to increased levels of co-contraction to maintain stability of the spine. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p &lt; 0.05) greater during pushing compared to pulling exertions. Results suggest that trunk isometric pushing tasks require more co-contraction than pulling tasks enable to maintain spinal stability. Greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions caused trunk stiffness to be greater during pushing compared to pulling tasks. Results may indicate greater risk of spinal instability from motor control error during pushing tasks than pulling exertions. Future studies need to consider co-contraction and neuromuscular control of spinal stability when evaluating the biomechanical risks of pushing and pulling tasks.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Lee, Patrick James"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Mechanical Engineering","degree_department":"Mechanical Engineering","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Granata, Kevin P."],"committee_members":["Duma, Stefan M.","Madigan, Michael L."],"year":2005,"date_issued":"2005-01-03","date_published":"2005-01-03","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:38Z","subjects":["stiffness","spine","low-back","co-contraction","push","stability"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-01062005-170155"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-01062005-170155","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/30835","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Granata, Kevin P."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Duma, Stefan M.","Madigan, Michael L."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Mechanical Engineering"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Lee, Patrick James"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:30:14Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:30:14Z","2005-01-07"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2005-01-03"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Mechanical Engineering"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["stiffness","spine","low-back","co-contraction","push","stability"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-01062005-170155"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/30835"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Few studies have investigated the neuromuscular recruitment and stabilizing control of the spine during pushing and pulling exertions. Past theoretical investigation suggest that co-contraction of the of the paraspinal muscles is necessary to stabilize the spine during pushing exertions. We hypothesized greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions. Co-contraction of trunk musculature was quantified during isometric pushing and pulling tasks. The mean value of co-contraction during pushing was two-fold greater (p < 0.01) than during extension. Co-contraction has been shown to increase the stiffness of the ankle but this effect has not been demonstrated in the trunk. Trunk stiffness was measured as a function of co-activation during extension exertions. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.01) greater with co-activation. Trunk stiffness was calculated during isometric pushing and pulling exertions. We hypothesized trunk stiffness would be greater during pushing tasks due to increased levels of co-contraction to maintain stability of the spine. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.05) greater during pushing compared to pulling exertions. Results suggest that trunk isometric pushing tasks require more co-contraction than pulling tasks enable to maintain spinal stability. Greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions caused trunk stiffness to be greater during pushing compared to pulling tasks. Results may indicate greater risk of spinal instability from motor control error during pushing tasks than pulling exertions. Future studies need to consider co-contraction and neuromuscular control of spinal stability when evaluating the biomechanical risks of pushing and pulling tasks."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Low Back Biomechanical Analysis of Isometric Pushing and Pulling Tasks"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Granata, Kevin P."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Duma, Stefan M.","Madigan, Michael L."],"dc:contributor.department":["Mechanical Engineering"],"dc:creator":["Lee, Patrick James"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:30:14Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:30:14Z","2005-01-07"],"dc:date.issued":["2005-01-03"],"dc:description.abstract":["Few studies have investigated the neuromuscular recruitment and stabilizing control of the spine during pushing and pulling exertions. Past theoretical investigation suggest that co-contraction of the of the paraspinal muscles is necessary to stabilize the spine during pushing exertions. We hypothesized greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions. Co-contraction of trunk musculature was quantified during isometric pushing and pulling tasks. The mean value of co-contraction during pushing was two-fold greater (p < 0.01) than during extension. Co-contraction has been shown to increase the stiffness of the ankle but this effect has not been demonstrated in the trunk. Trunk stiffness was measured as a function of co-activation during extension exertions. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.01) greater with co-activation. Trunk stiffness was calculated during isometric pushing and pulling exertions. We hypothesized trunk stiffness would be greater during pushing tasks due to increased levels of co-contraction to maintain stability of the spine. Results demonstrate trunk stiffness was significantly (p < 0.05) greater during pushing compared to pulling exertions. Results suggest that trunk isometric pushing tasks require more co-contraction than pulling tasks enable to maintain spinal stability. Greater levels of co-contraction during pushing exertions caused trunk stiffness to be greater during pushing compared to pulling tasks. Results may indicate greater risk of spinal instability from motor control error during pushing tasks than pulling exertions. Future studies need to consider co-contraction and neuromuscular control of spinal stability when evaluating the biomechanical risks of pushing and pulling tasks."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-01062005-170155"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/30835"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["stiffness","spine","low-back","co-contraction","push","stability"],"dc:title":["Low Back Biomechanical Analysis of Isometric Pushing and Pulling Tasks"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Mechanical Engineering"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:38Z"}