Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences

Effect of Carrying Two Types of Packs in Two Heights of Placement (Lumbar and Thoracic) on some Kinematics Variables of Primary Schoolboys

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

1 PhD, Department of Corrective Exercise, University of Tehran AND Lecturer, Department of Sport Science, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Sports Health and Medicine,, School of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Health and Sport Medicine, School of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22122/jrrs.v16i0.3545

Abstract

Introduction: The present study is conducted with the aim to investigating the effect of carrying backpacks and modified packs (with three bags that distribute the load equally in front and back of trunk) in two heights of placement including lumbar and thoracic, on craniovertebral angle, trunk angle, and the angle of hip and knee joints among the 8-11-year-old schoolboys during walking.Materials and Methods: Considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 27 schoolboys participated in the study and fulfilled five tasks including walking without a pack, carrying backpack on lumbar area, backpack on thoracic area, modified packs on lumbar area, and modified packs on thoracic area. Then, the photogrammetry of the right side was performed by a camera (Panasonic, Japan). The target angles were measured as single-blind with Kinovea motion analysis software. Repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare tasks.Results: The results showed significant decrease in craniovertebral angle (increased forward head posture) in the task of carrying backpacks on thoracic area in contrast with the lumbar area, as well as increase in trunk forward lean while carrying packs (P < 0.05) that was significantly higher in the backpack carrying tasks (P < 0.05). But in craniovertebral angle, significant difference was not seen while carrying modified packs in contrast with the control group (P > 0.05).Conclusion: Carrying packs on lumbar area caused less postural variations, thus seeming better. Changing the position of the load concentrated on the back can more affect the kinematic parameters of schoolboys. The modified pack carriage only caused a little trunk forward lean which was lesser than that of backpack carriage, so it can be a good alternative for students’ backpack.

Keywords

  1. Singh T, Koh M. Effects of backpack load position on spatiotemporal parameters and trunk forward lean. Gait Posture 2009; 29(1): 49-53.
  2. Adeyemi AJ, Rohani JM, Abdul Rani MR. Backpack-back pain complexity and the need for multifactorial safe weight recommendation. Appl Ergon 2017; 58: 573-82.
  3. Brzek A, Dworrak T, Strauss M, Sanchis-Gomar F, Sabbah I, Dworrak B, et al. The weight of pupils' schoolbags in early school age and its influence on body posture. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2017; 18(1): 117.
  4. Beurskens R, Muehlbauer T, Grabow L, Kliegl R, Granacher U. Effects of backpack carriage on dual-task performance in children during standing and walking. J Mot Behav 2016; 48(6): 500-8.
  5. Golriz S, Walker B. Backpacks. Several factors likely to influence design and usage: A systematic literature review. Work 2012; 42(4): 519-31.
  6. Mohammadi S, Mokhtarinia H, Nejatbakhsh R, Scuffham A. Ergonomics evaluation of school bags in Tehran female primary school children. Work 2017; 56(1): 175-81.
  7. Daneshmandi H, Hoseini H. Study of backpack carriage among Iranian school boys. Sport Medicine Studies 2011; 3(10): 13-32. [In Persian].
  8. Hong Y, Brueggemann GP. Changes in gait patterns in 10-year-old boys with increasing loads when walking on a treadmill. Gait Posture 2000; 11(3): 254-9.
  9. Orantes-Gonzalez E, Heredia-Jimenez J. Pulling a school trolley: A good kinematic option for children. Gait Posture 2017; 53: 61-6.
  10. Ramadan MZ, Al-Shayea AM. A modified backpack design for male school children. Int J Ind Ergon 2013; 43(5): 462-71.
  11. Chen YL, Mu YC. Effects of backpack load and position on body strains in male schoolchildren while walking. PLoS One 2018; 13(3): e0193648.
  12. Knapik JJ, Reynolds KL, Harman E. Soldier load carriage: historical, physiological, biomechanical, and medical aspects. Mil Med 2004; 169(1): 45-56.
  13. Devroey C, Jonkers I, de BA, Lenaerts G, Spaepen A. Evaluation of the effect of backpack load and position during standing and walking using biomechanical, physiological and subjective measures. Ergonomics 2007; 50(5): 728-42.
  14. Kim MH, Yi CH, Kwon OY, Cho SH, Yoo WG. Changes in neck muscle electromyography and forward head posture of children when carrying schoolbags. Ergonomics 2008; 51(6): 890-901.
  15. Kinoshita H. Effects of different loads and carrying systems on selected biomechanical parameters describing walking gait. Ergonomics 1985; 28(9): 1347-62.
  16. Chow DH, Ou ZY, Wang XG, Lai A. Short-term effects of backpack load placement on spine deformation and repositioning error in schoolchildren. Ergonomics 2010; 53(1): 56-64.
  17. Lloyd R, Cooke CB. Kinetic changes associated with load carriage using two rucksack designs. Ergonomics 2000; 43(9): 1331-41.
  18. Wang CXG, Chow D, Pope M. Biomechanical effect of LOAuD carriage on spine curvature and repositioning ability in adolescents. Proceedings of the 5th IASTED International Conference on Biomechanics, BioMech 2007; 2007 Aug 20-22; Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
  19. Golriz S, Hebert JJ, Foreman KB, Walker BF. The effect of hip belt use and load placement in a backpack on postural stability and perceived exertion: A within-subjects trial. Ergonomics 2015; 58(1): 140-7.
  20. Brackley HM, Stevenson JM, Selinger JC. Effect of backpack load placement on posture and spinal curvature in prepubescent children. Work 2009; 32(3): 351-60.
  21. Grimmer K, Dansie B, Milanese S, Pirunsan U, Trott P. Adolescent standing postural response to backpack loads: A randomised controlled experimental study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2002; 3: 10.
  22. Yoo WG. Effects of a low-center-of-gravity backpack on the trunk stability of mountaineers while ascending and descending. J Phys Ther Sci 2015; 27(10): 3259-60.
  23. Mackie HW, Legg SJ. Postural and subjective responses to realistic schoolbag carriage. Ergonomics 2008; 51(2): 217-31.
  24. Kellis E, Arampatzi F. Effects of sex and mode of carrying schoolbags on ground reaction forces and temporal characteristics of gait. J Pediatr Orthop B 2009; 18(5): 275-82.
  25. Muslim K, Nussbaum MA. The effects of a simple intervention on exposures to low back pain risk factors during traditional posterior load carriage. Appl Ergon 2017; 59(Pt A): 313-9.
  26. Abdullah AM, McDonald R, Jaberzadeh S. The effects of backpack load and placement on postural deviation in healthy students: A systematic review. Int J Eng Res Appl 2012; 2(6): 466-81.
  27. Chow DH, Kwok ML, Au-Yang AC, Holmes AD, Cheng JC, Yao FY, et al. The effect of backpack load on the gait of normal adolescent girls. Ergonomics 2005; 48(6): 642-56.
  28. Janakiraman B, Ravichandran H, Demeke S, Fasika S. Reported influences of backpack loads on postural deviation among school children: A systematic review. J Educ Health Promot 2017; 6: 41.
  29. Johnson R, Pelot R, Doan J, Stevenson J. The effect of load position on biomechanical and physiological measures during a short duration march. Halifax and Truro, NS: Dalhousie University; Halifax; 2001.
  30. Connolly BH, Cook B, Hunter S, Laughter M, Mills A, Nordtvedt N, et al. Effects of backpack carriage on gait parameters in children. Pediatr Phys Ther 2008; 20(4): 347-55.
  31. Talbott NR. The effect of the weight, location and type of backpack on posture and postural stability of children. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati; 2005.
  32. Chow D, Hin C, Ou D, Lai A. Carry-over effects of backpack carriage on trunk posture and repositioning ability. Int J Ind Ergon 2011; 41(5): 530-5.
  33. Ou Z. The effects of backpack weights and positions on motor control of schoolchildren [MSc Thesis]. Kowloon, Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2010.
  34. Abdelraouf OR, Hamada HA, Selim A, Shendy W, Zakaria H. Effect of backpack shoulder straps length on cervical posture and upper trapezius pressure pain threshold. J Phys Ther Sci 2016; 28(9): 2437-40.
  35. Birrell SA, Haslam RA. The effect of load distribution within military load carriage systems on the kinetics of human gait. Appl Ergon 2010; 41(4): 585-90.
  36. Bloom D, Woodhull-Mcneal AP. Postural adjustments while standing with two types of loaded backpack. Ergonomics 1987; 30(10): 1425-30.
  37. Frank E, Stevenson J, Stothart P. The effect of load placement on static posture and reaction forces in youth. Med Sci Sport Exercise 2003; 35(Suppl 1): S21.
  38. Kim KH, Ann J, Jang SH. Analysis of the effect of backpack design with reduced load moment arm on spinal alignment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(22): 4351.
  39. Daffin L, Stuelcken MC, Armitage J, Sayers MGL. The effect of backpack load position on photographic measures of craniovertebral posture in 150 asymptomatic young adults. Work 2020; 65(2): 361-8.
  40. Wang X. Biomechanical effects of load carriage on spine curvature and proprioception. [MSc Thesis]. Kowloon, Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2008.
  41. Mackie HW, Stevenson JM, Reid SA, Legg SJ. The effect of simulated school load carriage configurations on shoulder strap tension forces and shoulder interface pressure. Appl Ergon 2005; 36(2): 199-206.
  42. Al-Khabbaz YS, Shimada T, Hasegawa M. The effect of backpack heaviness on trunk-lower extremity muscle activities and trunk posture. Gait Posture 2008; 28(2): 297-302.
  43. Dahl KD, Wang H, Popp JK, Dickin DC. Load distribution and postural changes in young adults when wearing a traditional backpack versus the BackTpack. Gait Posture 2016; 45: 90-6.
Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences
Volume 16, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
April 2020
Pages 95-102
  • Receive Date: 30 April 2020
  • Revise Date: 02 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 22 May 2022