Evaluation of the subjective and objective benefits of occupational soft and rigid back support exoskeletons in simulated automotive assembly tasks
本研究在模拟汽车装配任务中测试了软性和刚性两种背部支撑外骨骼，发现两者均能减少躯干旋转并增加侧弯，软性外骨骼更有效降低肌肉活动，但使用者感知的费力程度反而增加，舒适度和表现随时间下降。
Despite extensive research demonstrating the benefits of back-support exoskeletons (BSEs), most objective evidence on the effectiveness of BSEs is based on short-term outcomes from static/non-functional tasks, which may not fully represent the complexities and dynamics inherent in real-world scenarios. To address this gap, the current study examined the effects of BSEs on both objective and subjective physical demands in simulated automotive assembly performed on a semi-assembled 2018 BMW X5 vehicle, under three conditions: control (no-exoskeleton), and using two different passive BSEs (soft vs. rigid), in a convenience sample of 18 healthy adults. Across the job that included a wide variety of tasks, using the soft BSE significantly reduced peak trunk flexion, and both BSEs restricted axial rotation, which was compensated by increased trunk lateral bending (with the rigid BSE having a more pronounced effect). Using both BSEs also led to decreased median trunk extensor muscle activity. However, at the task-specific level, the soft device showed higher efficacy. The main effects of both BSEs on perceived exertion were significant, with a small increase in the exoskeleton condition compared to control, and it was also associated with a significant decrease in perceived ‘comfort’ and ‘performance’ over time. These findings highlight that objective biomechanical effects and subjective responses may reflect different, complementary aspects of BSE use during complex industrial task simulations and over longer exposure durations. • Soft & rigid back-support exoskeletons were evaluated in automotive assembly tasks. • Both exoskeletons reduced trunk axial rotation and increased lateral bending. • The soft device reduced trunk extensor muscle activity across most tasks. • Using both exoskeletons led to higher perceived exertion. • Disconnect between perceived vs objective benefits may lead to low acceptance.