These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
102 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10675063)
1. Gender differences in exerted forces and physiological load during pushing and pulling of wheeled cages by postal workers. van der Beek AJ; Kluver BD; Frings-Dresen MH; Hoozemans MJ Ergonomics; 2000 Feb; 43(2):269-81. PubMed ID: 10675063 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Gender comparison of psychophysical forces, cardiopulmonary, and muscle metabolic responses during a simulated cart pushing task. Maikala RV; Ciriello VM; Dempsey PG; O'Brien NV Gait Posture; 2010 Oct; 32(4):524-9. PubMed ID: 20864348 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mechanical loading of the low back and shoulders during pushing and pulling activities. Hoozemans MJ; Kuijer PP; Kingma I; van Dieën JH; de Vries WH; van der Woude LH; Veeger DJ; van der Beek AJ; Frings-Dresen MH Ergonomics; 2004 Jan; 47(1):1-18. PubMed ID: 14660215 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Force direction and physical load in dynamic pushing and pulling. de Looze MP; van Greuningen K; Rebel J; Kingma I; Kuijer PP Ergonomics; 2000 Mar; 43(3):377-90. PubMed ID: 10755660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effects of task duration on psychophysically-determined maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ciriello VM; Snook SH; Blick AC; Wilkinson PL Ergonomics; 1990 Feb; 33(2):187-200. PubMed ID: 2354696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Maximum acceptable forces of dynamic pushing: comparison of two techniques. Ciriello VM; McGorry RW; Martin SE; Bezverkhny IB Ergonomics; 1999 Jan; 42(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 9973870 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pushing and pulling in relation to musculoskeletal disorders: a review of risk factors. Hoozemans MJ; van der Beek AJ; Frings-Dresen MH; van Dijk FJ; van der Woude LH Ergonomics; 1998 Jun; 41(6):757-81. PubMed ID: 9629062 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impact of hand forces and start/stop frequency on physiological responses to three forms of pushing and pulling: a South African perspective. Ai T Work; 2012; 41 Suppl 1():1588-93. PubMed ID: 22316941 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Psychophysically determined horizontal and vertical forces of dynamic pushing on high and low coefficient of friction floors for female industrial workers. Ciriello VM J Occup Environ Hyg; 2005 Mar; 2(3):136-42. PubMed ID: 15764537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dynamic pushing on three frictional surfaces: maximum acceptable forces, cardiopulmonary and calf muscle metabolic responses in healthy men. Maikala RV; Dempsey PG; Ciriello VM; O'Brien NV Ergonomics; 2009 Jun; 52(6):735-46. PubMed ID: 19431004 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effect of body mass on physiological indicators in the performance of forestry workers. Martinić I; Segotić K; Risović S; Goglia V Coll Antropol; 2006 Jun; 30(2):305-11. PubMed ID: 16848144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Pushing and pulling: personal mechanics influence spine loads. Lett KK; McGill SM Ergonomics; 2006 Jul; 49(9):895-908. PubMed ID: 16801235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Psychophysically determined forces of dynamic pushing for female industrial workers: Comparison of two apparatuses. Ciriello VM; Maikala RV; Dempsey PG; O'Brien NV Appl Ergon; 2010 Jan; 41(1):141-5. PubMed ID: 19628201 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Description and analysis of hand forces in medicine cart pushing tasks. Boyer J; Lin JH; Chang CC Appl Ergon; 2013 Jan; 44(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 22607837 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mechanical loading on the low back in three methods of refuse collecting. de Looze MP; Stassen AR; Markslag AM; Borst MJ; Wooning MM; Toussaint HM Ergonomics; 1995 Oct; 38(10):1993-2006. PubMed ID: 7588581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Forearm posture and grip effects during push and pull tasks. Di Domizio J; Keir PJ Ergonomics; 2010 Mar; 53(3):336-43. PubMed ID: 20191408 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Secular changes in psychophysically determined maximum acceptable weights and forces over 20 years for male industrial workers. Ciriello VM; Dempsey PG; Maikala RV; O'Brien NV Ergonomics; 2008 May; 51(5):593-601. PubMed ID: 18432440 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Incremental stress test: comparison between protocols and cardiorespiratory reference values in healthy workers]. Carta P; Aru G G Ital Med Lav Ergon; 2001; 23(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 11386187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A study of the difference between nominal and actual hand forces in two-handed sagittal plane whole-body exertions. Hoffman SG; Reed MP; Chaffin DB Ergonomics; 2011 Jan; 54(1):47-59. PubMed ID: 21181588 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]