File
H. Kuruma1, T. Toraiwa1, S. Sato1, H. Sakurai1, Y. Kumada1, S. Nami1, Y. Furukawa1
1Tokyo Metropolitan University, Physical Therapy, Tokyo, Japan
Background: Farming is a hard work, and many farmers suffer from low back pain. Here, we investigated the efficiency of the use of a harness to improve posture in farmers. We found that the use of a harness resulted in improved hip movements while walking.
Purpose: We examined the efficiency of use of a harness on farmers for 4 months.
Methods: The subjects were 11 healthy adults (1 female and 10 male) with an average age of 52.0 years (range: 44-71 years). We recorded the complaints regarding pain and measured range of shoulder and hip motion using easy angle. We measured hip abduction and knee extension muscle strength using a hand-held dynamometer.
Subjects put on a harness for a couple of hours almost every day for 4 months. The harness was attached to a rubber belt that crossed over and wound around the femoral region. Four months later, all parameters were re-assessed.
The data were analyzed using the paired t-test or Wilcoxon’s matched pair test, and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Subjects put on a harness for a couple of hours almost every day for 4 months. The harness was attached to a rubber belt that crossed over and wound around the femoral region. Four months later, all parameters were re-assessed.
The data were analyzed using the paired t-test or Wilcoxon’s matched pair test, and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results: Before the intervention (before), eight, one, and two participants complained of low back, neck, and shoulder pain, respectively. After the intervention (after), only six and one participants complained of low back and shoulder pain, respectively.
Before vs after the intervention, flexion, extension, and abduction in dominant and non-dominant hand were 147.2±15.4 vs 157.5±13.7 and 156.5±18.2 vs 163.8±11.8, 56.7±10.9 vs 61.2±7.6 and 59.2±7.9 vs 58.9±7.5, and 145.6±17.7 vs 169.4±6.9 and 155.0±15.7 vs 172.0±5.8, respectively. We observed a significant difference in range of flexion in the dominant and non-dominant hands (p = 0.002 and p = 0.049, respectively) and abduction in the dominant and non-dominant hands (p = 0.002 and p = 0.013, respectively). Before vs after the intervention, right and left hip flexion were 101.9±5.1 vs 115.0±7.9 and 103.4±8.0 vs 114.8±7.8, respectively, while right and left hip extension were 19.6±3.9 vs 21.9±5.3 and 17.8±3.6 vs 18.5±4.6, respectively. We observed a significant difference in the range of right and left hip flexion (p = 0.00002 and p = 0.008, respectively).
Furthermore, before vs after the intervention, right and left hip abduction were 56.9±27.2 vs 75.1±19.3 Nm and 51.6±24.0 vs 66.5±19.3 Nm, respectively, while right and left knee extension were 47.5±15.5 vs 61.0±23.3 and 44.6±15.3 vs 60.7±22.2, respectively. We observed a significant difference in right hip abduction (p = 0.01) and right and left knee extension (p = 0.018 and p = 0.001, respectively).
Before vs after the intervention, flexion, extension, and abduction in dominant and non-dominant hand were 147.2±15.4 vs 157.5±13.7 and 156.5±18.2 vs 163.8±11.8, 56.7±10.9 vs 61.2±7.6 and 59.2±7.9 vs 58.9±7.5, and 145.6±17.7 vs 169.4±6.9 and 155.0±15.7 vs 172.0±5.8, respectively. We observed a significant difference in range of flexion in the dominant and non-dominant hands (p = 0.002 and p = 0.049, respectively) and abduction in the dominant and non-dominant hands (p = 0.002 and p = 0.013, respectively). Before vs after the intervention, right and left hip flexion were 101.9±5.1 vs 115.0±7.9 and 103.4±8.0 vs 114.8±7.8, respectively, while right and left hip extension were 19.6±3.9 vs 21.9±5.3 and 17.8±3.6 vs 18.5±4.6, respectively. We observed a significant difference in the range of right and left hip flexion (p = 0.00002 and p = 0.008, respectively).
Furthermore, before vs after the intervention, right and left hip abduction were 56.9±27.2 vs 75.1±19.3 Nm and 51.6±24.0 vs 66.5±19.3 Nm, respectively, while right and left knee extension were 47.5±15.5 vs 61.0±23.3 and 44.6±15.3 vs 60.7±22.2, respectively. We observed a significant difference in right hip abduction (p = 0.01) and right and left knee extension (p = 0.018 and p = 0.001, respectively).
Conclusion(s): Wearing a harness could improve the posture alignments of farmers. The ranges of shoulder and hip movements increased. Good shoulder and hip movement for farmers reduced the stress in the lumbar region. This stress reduction led to reduced low back pain.
Implications: We showed that the use of our novel harness aided in farmers’ movements and reduced their low back pain.
Funding, acknowledgements: This study was supported by the Helinx Japan corporation.
Keywords: harness, low back pain, farmers
Topic: Health promotion & wellbeing/healthy ageing/physical activity
Did this work require ethics approval? Yes
Institution: Tokyo Metropolitan University
Committee: Tokyo Metropolitan University Ethical Review Board
Ethics number: 18114
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
