Research Appraisalobservational

The influence of contact body size on superficial and deep tissue pain perception for development of a collision dummy.

Scientific reportsLucas, Benjamin, Behrens, Roland, Echterbeck, Philipp et al.14 July 2026DOI

Clinical Snapshot

50CEBM
Evidence: Weakobservational

PICO Framework

P — PopulationHealthy adult male volunteers (n=11) recruited for experimental algometry testing across six anatomical regions of the upper limb
I — InterventionStandardised algometric force application using three contact body sizes (7×7 mm², 14×14 mm², 24×24 mm²) with and without topical anaesthesia to differentiate superficial from deep tissue pain thresholds
C — ComparatorWithin-subject comparison across contact body sizes and between anaesthetised (deep tissue) versus non-anaesthetised (superficial tissue) conditions across six anatomical arm regions
O — OutcomesPain perception threshold (force in Newtons at first pain sensation), peak force required to induce pain, and the differential effect of topical anaesthesia on force thresholds across contact body sizes and anatomical sites

Bottom Line

This small experimental study (n=11 males) investigates how contact body size influences pain perception thresholds across arm regions, using a standardised algometer with topical anaesthesia to differentiate superficial from deep tissue pain. The applied goal — informing a biomechanical collision dummy for collaborative robot safety testing — is clinically and industrially relevant. The key finding that a medium-sized contact body (14×14 mm²) requires the greatest force to induce pain, and that topical anaesthesia significantly elevates thresholds for small and large contact bodies, is mechanistically interesting but requires cautious interpretation. The study is severely underpowered, restricted to males, and lacks reported quantitative effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confounder adjustment. Metadata inconsistencies (DOI, publisher) warrant verification of the source record. Until replicated in larger, sex-balanced, demographically representative samples with full statistical reporting, these findings should be regarded as preliminary and hypothesis-generating only. They are insufficient to independently anchor biomechanical safety thresholds for collaborative robot certification. Senior clinicians and safety engineers should await more robust evidence before applying these specific thresholds to standards development.

Evidence: Weak

Key Findings

  • P Value: Not reported in abstract; statistical significance implied for anaesthesia effect on small and large contact bodies

  • Effect Size: Not reported quantitatively in abstract. Directional finding: medium contact body (14×14 mm²) required greatest force to induce pain; topical anaesthesia significantly increased force thresholds for small and large contact bodies

  • Primary Outcome: Pain perception threshold (force in Newtons) at first pain sensation across three contact body sizes (7×7, 14×14, 24×24 mm²) and six anatomical arm regions, with and without topical anaesthesia

  • Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not applicable to this experimental pain threshold study. Relevant metric would be force threshold (N) with 95% CI and inter-individual coefficient of variation — not reported in abstract

  • Confidence Interval: Not reported

Clinical Application

The algometric methodology is feasible in research settings with appropriate equipment. Clinical translation of these specific findings to bedside pain assessment is limited. The primary application is industrial safety standard development (e.g., informing ISO/TS 15066 biomechanical limits for collaborative robots). Replication with larger, sex-balanced, demographically diverse samples is required before these thresholds can be incorporated into safety standards. In Australia, collaborative robot safety is governed by Safe Work Australia guidelines and AS/NZS standards aligned with ISO 10218 and ISO/TS 15066. The findings are potentially relevant to Australian manufacturing sectors with growing cobot deployment (automotive, food processing, logistics). Safe Work Australia's model Work Health and Safety laws require employers to eliminate or minimise risks from robotic systems. The RACGP and occupational medicine bodies (AFOEM) have limited direct involvement, though occupational physicians may be consulted on biomechanical injury thresholds. TGA and PBS are not relevant to this non-therapeutic study. Australian researchers at institutions such as the University of Melbourne's Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors may find these methods relevant for local workforce safety research. Findings are most directly applicable to occupational health and safety engineers, robotics safety standards bodies, and biomechanical researchers developing collision test dummies for human-robot collaboration environments. Clinical applicability to patient care is indirect.

Abstract

The use of robots is playing an increasingly important role in industrial manufacturing. Collaborative robots operated alongside humans can pose a hazard. Pain perception as an injury risk indicator is contingent on several factors, especially contact surface, anatomical region and the difference between superficial and deep tissue pain. In this article, we have conducted an experimental load study with human subjects in which we have analyzed these factors to enable the development of a pain-sensitive dummy for testing collaborative robot against biomechanical thresholds. For the load test, we used our established algometer setup with three different contact bodies (7 × 7 mm2, 14 × 14 mm2 and 24 × 24 mm2) to evaluate six anatomical regions of the arm. Subjects were instructed to activate a switch whenever they sensed pain after starting the test procedure. The algometer increased the force in 5 N/s increments. We used topical anesthetic to distinguish between superficial and deep tissue pain. We had 11 male subjects for measurements. The greatest force had to be applied with the medium-sized contact body to induce pain perception. Local anesthetization made it necessary to increase the force of the small and large contact bodies significantly. Our finding that peak force is a reliable indicator of the perception of pain caused by the medium-sized contact body indicates that the contact body's size affects peak force magnitude significantly.

References

  1. 1.Lucas, B., Behrens, R., Echterbeck, P., Pliske, G., & Piatek, S. (2026). The influence of contact body size on superficial and deep tissue pain perception for development of a collision dummy. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1067/mjd.2000.104303
Share:XLinkedIn

This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service