Effect of a passive shoulder-support exoskeleton on muscle activity, range of motion, discomfort, and exertion during painting tasks

Afolabi, A; Yusuf, A and Akanmu, A (2025) Effect of a passive shoulder-support exoskeleton on muscle activity, range of motion, discomfort, and exertion during painting tasks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(5): 04025027, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Shoulder injuries are prevalent among painters due to the repetitive and overhead nature of their tasks. Using two experimental conditions (with and without an exoskeleton), this study examined the effect of a passive shoulder-support exoskeleton on muscle activity, range of motion, perceived rate of discomfort, and exertion during painting tasks. The study employed a laboratory-simulated painting experiment, involving bending, upper-level, and ceiling-level painting subtasks. The results indicated a suboptimal effect of the exoskeleton during the bending subtask, leading to increased activity in some muscles and a higher perceived rate of discomfort and exertion. However, using the exoskeleton reduced muscle activation in most of the muscles during the upper-level and ceiling-level painting subtasks. Moreover, using the exoskeleton reduced the perceived rate of discomfort and exertion in these subtasks. There was no profound change in the participants' range of motion during the bending, upper-level, and ceiling-level painting subtasks. These findings suggest that shoulder-support exoskeletons hold promise as ergonomic interventions to mitigate shoulder injuries and enhance performance in painting tasks. The study contributes to the extant literature on the potential of passive shoulder-support exoskeletons to mitigate shoulder injuries associated with overheard tasks, which is important to practitioners, manufacturers of exoskeletons, and researchers. Further research is warranted to explore these exoskeletons' long-Term effects and usability in real-world painting environments.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction workers; exoskeletons; musculoskeletal disorders; overhead tasks; painting tasks; shoulder injuries; shoulder-support
Index terms: discomfort, practitioner, experiment, injury, usability, manufacturer, construction worker, laboratory
Subjects: user-centered design, health conditions and diseases, practitioner, data collection methods, research management, health risk and incident analysis
Topics: Health and Safety, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here