Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparisons of physiological and perceptual responses in healthy men and women during standardized arm cranking and task-specific pushing–pulling

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: Peak cardiorespiratory, metabolic, and perceptual responses in healthy men (n=11) and women (n=11) were compared during two different upper body exercise modes: standardized arm cranking and task-specific pushing–pulling. Methods: Each subject completed to volitional exhaustion both an incremental arm cranking and a pushing–pulling exercise continuously, in a random order, on two separate days. Physiological responses were monitored using an automated metabolic cart and a heart rate monitor, and the rating of perceived exertion was obtained using a 15-point Borg Scale. Results: Peak oxygen uptake, oxygen pulse, respiratory exchange ratio, and ventilation rate were higher and total exercise time to exhaustion was lower during arm cranking compared to pushing–pulling (P<0.05). However, heart rate was similar between exercise modes (P>0.05). Men showed greater physiological responses (absolute oxygen uptake, oxygen pulse, and ventilation rate) and longer exercise time to exhaustion than women (P<0.05). Power output during arm cranking was higher (by 79%) than pushing–pulling (P<0.01), with men demonstrating 30% greater values during both exercise modes (P<0.01). The lower power output generated during pushing–pulling resulted in a greater ratio of peak oxygen uptake to power output (by 72%; P<0.05). Interestingly, although power output and oxygen uptake were lower at the maximal workload, perceived exertion was higher (by 5%) during pushing–pulling (P<0.05). Conclusions: Based on the physiological differences, pushing–pulling is found to be metabolically less efficient than arm cranking. However, greater ratings of perceived exertion during pushing–pulling implies that the perception of effort can also be influenced by a low intensity task, such as pushing–pulling, if performed for a prolonged period. Occupational health professionals should be aware of the limitations of utilizing physiological and perceptual responses obtained only from standardized ergometric protocols in predicting the workers’ performance effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Whitt MC, Irwin ML, Swartz AM, Strath SJ, O’Brien WL, Bassett DR, Schmitz KH, Emplaincourt PO, Jacobs DR, Leon AS (2000) Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32:S498–S504

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • American College of Sports Medicine (1993) Resource manual for guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Aminoff T, Smolander J, Korhonen O, Louhevaara V (1998) Prediction of acceptable physical work loads based on responses to prolonged arm and leg exercise. Ergonomics 41:109–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Astrand I, Guharay A, Wahren J (1968) Circulatory responses to arm exercise with different arm positions. J Appl Physiol 25:528–532

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ayoub MM, McDaniel JW (1974) Effects of operator stance on pushing and pulling tasks. AIIE Trans 6:185–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Balady GJ, Weiner DA, Rose L, Ryan TJ (1990) Physiologic responses to arm ergometry exercise relative to age and gender. J Am Coll Cardiol 16:130–135

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baltimore Therapeutic Equipment (BTE) Operator’s Manual (1992) Baltimore Therapeutic Equipment Company, Maryland

  • Bar-Or O, Zwiren LD (1975) Maximal oxygen consumption test during arm exercise—reliability and validity. J Appl Physiol 38:424–426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bevegård S, Freyschuss U, Standell T (1966) Circulatory adaptation to arm and leg exercise in supine and sitting position. J Appl Physiol 21:37–46

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bhambhani Y, Esmail S, Brintnell S (1994) The Baltimore Therapeutic Equipment work simulator: biomechanical and physiologic norms for three attachments in healthy men. Am J Occup Ther 48:19–25

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bhambhani Y, Maikala R (2000) Gender differences during treadmill walking with graded loads: biomechanical and physiological comparisons. Eur J Appl Physiol 81:75–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bhambhani Y, Maikala R, Buckley S (1998) Muscle oxygenation during incremental arm and leg exercise in men and women. Eur J Appl Physiol 78:422–431

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bilzon JL, Allsopp AJ, Tipton MJ (2001) Assessment of physical fitness for occupations encompassing load-carriage tasks. Occup Med (Lond) 51:357–361

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bilzon JL, Scarpello EG, Bilzon E, Allsopp AJ (2002) Generic task-related occupational requirements for Royal Naval personnel. Occup Med (Lond) 52:503–510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Borg G (1982) Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 29:402–409

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard C, Godbout P, Mondor JC, Leblanc C (1979) Specificity of maximal aerobic power. Eur J Appl Physiol 40:85–93

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (1994) Revised Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire—RPARQ. Health Canada, Canada

  • Carton RL, Rhodes EC (1985) A critical review of the literature on ratings scales for perceived exertion. Sports Med 2:198–222

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chaffin DB, Andres RO (1983) Volitional postures during maximal push/pull exertions in the sagittal plane. Hum Factors 25:541–550

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins TD, Gladden LB (1983) Responses to submaximal and maximal arm cycling above, at, and below heart level. Med Sci Sports Exerc 15:295–298

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis JA, Vodak P, Wilmore JH, Vodak J, Kurtz P (1976) Anaerobic threshold and maximal aerobic power for three modes of exercises. J Appl Physiol 41:544–550

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esmail S, Bhambhani Y, Brintnell S (1995) Gender differences in work performance on the Baltimore therapeutic equipment work simulator. Am J Occup Ther 49:405–411

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Falkel JE, Sawka MN, Levine L, Pimental NA, Pandolf KB (1986) Upper-body exercise performance: comparison between women and men. Ergonomics 29:145–154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson GA, Takane Y (1989) Statistical analysis in psychology and education, Chap. 18. Multiple comparison procedures. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin BA (1985) Exercise testing, training and arm ergometry. Sports Med 2:100–119

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin BA (1989) Aerobic exercise training programs for the upper body. Med Sci Sports Exerc 21:S141–S148

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin BA, Hogan P, Bonzheim K, Bakalyar D, Terrien E, Gordon S, Timmis GC (1995) Cardiac demands of heavy snow shoveling. JAMA 273:880–882

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon M, Beaugrand S, Authier M (1992) The dynamics of pushing loads onto shelves of different heights. Int J Ind Ergon 9:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammermeister J, Page RM, Dolny D, Burnham T (2001) Occupational physical activity as an indicator of health and fitness. Percept Mot Skills 92:121–127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hettinger T (1961) Physiology of strength. Charles Thomas, Springfield

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoozemans MJM, van Der Beek AJ, Frings-dressen MHW, van Dijk JH, Van Der Wode (1998) Pushing and pulling in relation to musculoskeletal disorders: a review of risk factors. Ergonomics 41:757–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ikai M, Fukunga T (1968) Calculation of muscle strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle by means of ultrasonic measurements. Int Z Angew Physiol 26:26–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ilmarinen J (1992a) Job design for the aged with regard to decline in their maximal aerobic capacity: part I—guidelines for the practitioner. Int J Ind Ergon 10:53–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilmarinen J (1992b) Job design for the aged with regard to decline in their maximal aerobic capacity: part II—the scientific basis for the guide. Int J Ind Ergon 10:65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Intaranont K (1983) Evaluation of anaerobic threshold for lifting tasks. An unpublished PhD Dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock

  • Itoh M, Fukuoka Y, Grassi B, Marconi C, Cerreteli P, Araki H, Nish K (2002) VE response to VCO2 during exercise is unaffected by exercise training and different exercise limbs. Jpn J Physiol 52:489–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • James J, Cripwell A (2005) Pushing vs. pulling strength: effect of handle height and practical ergonomics applications. The fourth international cyberspace conference on ergonomics. International Ergonomics Association Press, Johannesburg

  • Karlqvist L, Leijon O, Harenstam A (2003) Physical demands in working life and individual physical capacity. Eur J Appl Physiol 89:536–547

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy L, Bhambhani Y (1991) The BTE work simulator: reliability and validity at three work intensities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 72:511–516

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khalil TM, Genaidy AM, Asfour SS, Vinciguerra T (1985) Physiological limits in lifting. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 46:220–224

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kroemer KH (1974) Horizontal push and pull forces: exertable when standing in working positions on various surfaces. Appl Ergon 5:94–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagally KM, Robertson RJ, Gallagher KI, Goss FL, Jakicic JM, Lephart SM, McCaw ST, Goodpaster B (2002) Perceived exertion, electromyography, and blood lactate during acute bouts of resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:552–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laubach LL (1976) Comparative muscular strength of men and women: a review of the literature. Aviat Space Environ Med 47:534–542

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Louhevaara V, Sovijärvi A, Ilmarinen J, Teräslinna P (1990) Differences in cardiorespiratory responses during and after arm crank and cycle exercise. Acta Physiol Scand 138:133–143

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martin JB, Chaffin DB (1972) Biomechanical computerized simulation of human strength in sagittal-plane activities. AIIE Trans 4:19–28

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell TR, Swett DD, Jeresaty RM, Missri JC, Al-Hani AJ (1984) The hemodynamic and physiologic differences between exercise modalities. J Sports Med 24:238–245

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AEJ, MacDougall JD, Tarnoplosky MA (1993) Gender differences in strength and muscle fiber characteristics. Eur J Appl Physiol 66:254–262

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nag PK (1984) Circulo-respiratory responses to different muscular exercises. Eur J Appl Physiol 52:393–399

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nindl BC, Sharp MA, Mello RP, Rice VJ, Murphy MM, Patton JF (1998) Gender comparison of peak oxygen uptake: repetitive box lifting versus treadmill running. Eur J Appl Physiol 77:112–117

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pate PR, Pratt M, Blair SN, Haskell WL, Macera CA et al (1995) Physical activity and public health: a recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine. JAMA 273:402–407

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pendergast DP, Cerretelli P, Rennie DW (1979) Aerobic and glycolytic metabolism in arm exercise. J Appl Physiol 47:754–760

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Petrofsky JS, Lind AR (1978) Comparison of metabolic and ventilatory responses of men to various lifting tasks and bicycle ergometry. J Appl Physiol 45:60–63

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Powell DM, Christopher A, Zimmer BA, Antoine MM, Baruch LD, Bellian KT, Morgan RF, Edlich RF (1991) Computer analysis of the performance of the BTE work simulator. J Burn Care Rehabil 12:250–256

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson RJ, Noble BJ (1997) Perception of physical exertion: methods, mediators, and applications. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 25:407–452

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sawka MN (1986) Physiology of upper body exercise. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 14:175–211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schibye B, Hansen AF, Søgaard K, Christensen H (2001) Aerobic power and muscle strength among young and elderly workers with and without physically demanding tasks. Appl Ergon 32:425–431

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp M (1994) Physical fitness and occupation performance of women in the US Army. Work 4:80–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp MA, Harman E, Vogel JA, Knapik JJ, Legg SJ (1988) Maximal aerobic capacity for repetitive lifting: comparison with three standard exercise testing modes. Eur J Appl Physiol 57:753–760

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shephard RJ, Bouhlel E, Vandewalle H, Monod H (1988) Muscle mass as a factor limiting physical work. J Appl Physiol 64:1472–1479

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Søgaard K, Fallentin N, Nielsen J (1996) Work load during floor cleaning. The effect of cleaning methods and work technique. Eur J Appl Physiol 73:73–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens J (1996) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (1996) Using multivariate statistics. HarperColins College Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulin SS, Armstrong TJ, Snook SH, Monroe-Keyserling W, (1993) Examination of the effect of tool mass and work postures on perceived exertion for a screw driving task. Int J Ind Ergon 12:105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vokac Z, Bell H, Bautz-Holter E, Rodahl K (1975) Oxygen uptake/heart rate relationship in leg and arm exercise, sitting and standing. J Appl Physiol 39:54–59

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Warren GL, Cureton KJ, Dengel DR, Graham RE, Ray CA (1990) Is the gender difference in peak VO2 greater for arm than leg exercise? Eur J Appl Physiol 60:149–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn RA, Seals DR (1984) Peak oxygen uptake during arm cranking for men and women. J Appl Physiol 56:954–957

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Waters TR, Putz-Anderson V, Garg A, Fine LJ (1993) Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 36:749–776

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Watts PB (2004) Physiology of difficult rock climbing. Eur J Appl Physiol 91:361–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells CL (1991) Women, sport and performance: a physiological perspective. Human Kinetics, Champaign

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was part of the doctoral dissertation done by the first author at the Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. This project was partly supported by the Small Faculties Grant, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. The authors sincerely thank Drs. Michelle Battié, Gordon Bell, Richard Jones, Pierre Gervais, and Alan Hargens for their valuable input, and Martha Roxburgh and Sharon Brintnell of the Occupational Performance and Analysis Unit for loaning the BTE work simulator. Additionally, we would like to extend our appreciation to anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticism on the earlier version of the manuscript. The first author is grateful to Gurpreet Sidhu for her help in initial experimental set-up and part of data collection; and to the volunteers who participated in the study. All of the experiments conducted complied with the current laws of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, 71 Frankland Road, Hopkinton, MA, 01748, USA

    Rammohan V. Maikala

  2. Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, T6G 2G4, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Yagesh N. Bhambhani

Authors
  1. Rammohan V. Maikala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yagesh N. Bhambhani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rammohan V. Maikala.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maikala, R.V., Bhambhani, Y.N. Comparisons of physiological and perceptual responses in healthy men and women during standardized arm cranking and task-specific pushing–pulling. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 79, 509–520 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-005-0076-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-005-0076-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation