Lumbar Axial Rotation Kinematics in an Upright Sitting and With Forward Bending Positions in Men With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain (original) (raw)
Related papers
2019
Background: Although, non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) has been associated with abnormal lumbosacral kinematics, little is known about the possible driving mechanisms of pain development overtime during prolonged sitting period. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the differences in lumbosacral postures in adults with and without NSCLBP, and their role on pain development during a 1-hour of prolonged sitting task. Methods: Twenty NSCLBP subjects with motor control impairment (MCI) [10 classified as having flexion pattern (FP) disorder, and 10 with active extension pattern (AEP) disorder], and 10 healthy controls participated in the study. Subjects underwent a 1-hour sitting protocol on a standard office chair. Lumbosacral postures including: sacral tilt (ST), third lumbar vertebrae (L3) position, and relative lower lumbar angle (RLLA) were recorded using a two-dimensional inclinometer over the 1-hour period. Perceived back pain intensity was recorded using...
Journal of biomedical physics & engineering, 2018
Background: Lumbar motion analysis is used as a clinical method in the diagnosis and treatment of low back pain (LBP). So far, no studies have shown if manipulating the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) will change spinal kinematics. Objective: The main objectives of this study were to investigate the effects of SIJ manipulation on the lumbar kinematics in subjects with innominate rotation and to compare lumbar kinematics among experiment and control groups. Material and Methods: This study was a quasi-experiment-control trial study. 21 LBP patients with anterior or posterior innominate rotations in experiment group and 22 asymptomatic subjects in control group were evaluated. Lumbar kinematic variables (LKV) include lumbar range of motion (ROM) and speed, lumbar lateral flexion and rotation asymmetry were evaluated using Qualysis Track Manager (QTM) twice within two days in control group, and these parameters with pelvic asymmetry and disability were tested before and after intervention in the experiment group. Results: While pre-intervention experiment group exhibited significantly lower lumbar lateral flexion (p=0.0001), rotation (p=0.008) ROM and lower lateral flexion speed (p=0.014), post-intervention experiment group exhibited significantly lower lumbar lateral flexion (p=0.01) ROM in comparison with control group. Pelvic asymmetry (p=0.049) and disability (p=0.01) significantly decreased in the experiment group after manipulation, but LKV did not change significantly after the intervention (p˃0.05). Conclusion: Experiment groups had different lumbar kinematics in comparison with control group before and after SIJ manipulation. Despite the changes in pelvic asymmetry and disability, intervention had no effect on lumbar kinematics.
Lumbar Kinematic Pattern Among Adults with Low Back Pain: A Study Protocol
Jurnal Teknologi, 2016
Non-Specific Low back pain (NSLBP) is associated with lumbar spine kinematics and curvature changes. However, there is limited information regarding lumbar spine kinematics and curvature in normal daily living when both static and dynamic postures are adopted interchangeably during extended periods. The aim of this study is to evaluate the differences in lumbar kinematic patterns and curvature when adopting various static and dynamic postures over an extended period of time among adults with acute, chronic and without NSLBP. Lumbar kinematic patterns and curvature of adults with chronic and acute NSLBP will also be reassessed at six weeks and three months follow-up. This is a cross-sectional and prospective design study. Seventy-two adults aged between 20 and 45 years will be recruited for three study groups (acute, chronic and without NSLBP). Kinematic parameters that include a lumbar range of movements, velocities, accelerations and lumbar curvature changes will be assessed for a...
Reduced instantaneous center of rotation movement in patients with low back pain
European Spine Journal, 2017
Purpose The instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) can be used to investigate movement coordination and control in patients with low back pain (LBP). Tracking of the ICR in LBP patients has not been systematically investigated. This study aimed to (1) determine the within-session measurement error of ICR parameters, and (2) characterize the change in ICR among three groups of participants (no history of LBP = HC; history of LBP = HLBP; and current LBP = LBP). Methods Ninety-three participants (HC = 31; HLBP = 33; and LBP = 29) were recruited. Participants performed two sets of three repetitions of an active forward bend, while their lumbar and pelvic movements were recorded with an electromagnetic tracking system. Total ICR displacement and the radius of the bounding sphere containing the ICR were derived during the forward bending and the return to upright phases. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC 3,3) and minimal detectable difference (MDD) were used to determine measurement error and interpret findings of the group analysis. One-way ANOVAs and post hoc Bonferroni comparisons were used to determine differences among groups. Results ICC 3,3 demonstrated excellent within-session testretest reliability of the ICR parameters (ICC 3,3 = 0.86-0.97). The MDD values were 0.20-3.40 mm. Comparisons between the HC and LBP groups and between the HLBP and LBP groups showed significant differences (p \ 0.05) for all ICR parameters, with medium effect sizes (0.51-0.66), except for total displacement during forward bending between the HC and LBP groups. Conclusion Less ICR displacement and variability in patients with LBP may indicate coping strategies to stiffen the lumbar spine. This could result from patients with LBP adopting a strategy of increased muscle activation to provide spinal stability during functional tasks.
Manual Therapy, 2013
Studies examining repositioning error (RE) in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) demonstrate contradictory results, with most studies not correlating RE deficits with measures of pain, disability or fear. This study examined if RE deficits exist among a subgroup of patients with NSCLBP whose symptoms are provoked by flexion, and how such deficits relate to measures of pain, disability, fear-avoidance and kinesiophobia. 15 patients with NSCLBP were matched (age, gender, and body mass index) with 15 painfree participants. Lumbo-pelvic RE, pain, functional disability, fear-avoidance and kinesiophobia were evaluated. Participants were asked to reproduce a target position (neutral lumbo-pelvic posture) after 5 s of slump sitting. RE in each group was compared by evaluating constant error (CE), absolute error (AE) and variable error (VE). Both AE (p ¼ 0.002) and CE (p ¼ 0.006) were significantly larger in the NSCLBP group, unlike VE (p ¼ 0.165) which did not differ between the groups. There were significant, moderate correlations in the NSCLBP group between AE and functional disability (r ¼ 0.601, p ¼ 0.018), and between CE and fear-avoidance (r ¼ À0.577, p ¼ 0.0024), but all other correlations were weak (r < 0.337, r s < 0.377) or non-significant (p > 0.05). The results demonstrate increased lumbo-pelvic RE in a subgroup of NSCLBP patients, with the selected subgroup undershooting the target position. Overall, RE was only weakly to moderately correlated with measures of pain, disability or fear. The deficits observed are consistent with findings of altered motor control in patients with NSCLBP. The mechanisms underlying these RE deficits, and the most effective method of addressing these deficits, require further study.
Lumbar motion changes in chronic low back pain patients
The Spine Journal, 2014
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Several therapies have been used in the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP), including various exercise strategies and spinal manipulative therapy (SMT). A common belief is that spinal motion changes in particular ways in direct response to specific interventions, such as exercise or spinal manipulation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess changes in lumbar region motion for more than 12 weeks by evaluating four motion parameters in the sagittal plane and two in the horizontal plane in LBP patients treated with either exercise therapy or spinal manipulation. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Secondary analysis of a subset of participants from a randomized clinical trial. PATIENT SAMPLE: One hundred ninety-nine study participants with LBP of more than 6 weeks' duration who had spinal motion measures obtained before and after the period of intervention. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lumbar region spinal kinematics sampled using a six-degree-offreedom instrumented spatial linkage system. METHODS: Trained therapists collected regional lumbar spinal motion data at baseline and 12 weeks of follow-up. The lumbar region spinal motion data were analyzed as a total cohort and relative to treatment modality (high dose, supervised low-tech trunk exercise, SMT, and a short course of home exercise and self-care advice). The study was supported by grants from Health Resources and Services Administration, Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation, Danish Chiropractors Research Foundation, and the University of Southern Denmark. No conflicts of interest reported. RESULTS: For the cohort as a whole, lumbar region motion parameters were altered over the 12week period, except for the jerk index parameter. The group receiving spinal manipulation changed significantly in all, and the exercise groups in half, the motion parameters included in the analysis. The spinal manipulation group changed to a smoother motion pattern (reduced jerk index), whereas the exercise groups did not. FDA device/drug status: Not applicable.
Physical Therapy, 2007
The movement system impairment (MSI) system is one proposed system for classifying low back pain (LBP) problems. Prior clinical data and observations for the MSI system suggest that different LBP subgroups demonstrate different patterns of movement during clinical tests, such as trunk lateral bending (TLB). The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the validity of the observation that lumbar region (LR) movement patterns during TLB are different between 2 subgroups of people with LBP: lumbar rotation with extension (RotExt) and lumbar rotation (Rot).
Development of kinematics tests for the evaluation of lumbar proprioception and equilibration
Clinical Biomechanics, 2003
Objective. This study aimed at developing lumbar repositioning and seated equilibration tests. Design. 3D-electrogoniometric study of trunk repositioning and equilibration in seated position. Background. Postural equilibrium and lumbar proprioception alterations have been shown in patients with low-back pain. Methods. In 21 healthy volunteers, pure flexion and flexion + rotation repositioning error was measured using 3D-electrogoniometry. Lumbar kinematics was analysed (time and frequency domain) during antero-posterior and lateral equilibration tests in seated position. Reproducibility and stability of the protocol were evaluated.
Center of rotation locations during lumbar spine movements: a scoping review protocol
JBI Evidence Synthesis, 2020
The objective of this review is to identify and map current literature describing the center of rotation locations and migration paths during lumbar spine movements. Introduction: Altered lumber spine kinematics has been associated with pain and injury. Intervertebral segments' center of rotations, the point around which spinal segments rotate, are important for determining the features of lumbar spine kinematics and the potential for increased injury risk during movements. Although many studies have investigated the center of rotations of humans' lumbar spine, no review has summarized and organized the state of the science related to center of rotation locations and migration paths of the lumbar spine during lumbar spine movements. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that include human lumbar spines of any age and condition (e.g. heathy, pathological) during lumbar spine movements. Quantitative study designs, including clinical, observational, laboratory biomechanical experimental studies, mathematical and computer modeling studies will be considered. Only studies published in English will be included, and there will be no limit on dates of publication.
SPINE, 2017
Study Design-Prospective cohort study. Objective-To identify associations of spondylotic and kinematic changes with low back pain (LBP). Summary of Background Data-The ability to characterize and differentiate the biomechanics of both the symptomatic and asymptomatic lumbar spine is crucial to alleviate the sparse literature on the association of lumbar spine biomechanics and LBP. Methods-Lumbar dynamic plain radiographs (flexion-extension), dynamic CT scanning (axial rotation, disc height) and MRI (disc and facet degeneration grades) were obtained for each subject. These parameters were compared between symptomatic and control groups using Student's t-test and multivariate logistic regression, which controlled for patient age and sex and identified spinal parameters that were independently associated with symptomatic LBP. Disc grade and mean segmental motion by level were tested by one-way ANOVA. Results-Ninety-nine volunteers (64 asymptomatic/35 LBP) were prospectively recruited. Mean age was 37.3±10.1 y.o. and 55% were male. LBP showed association with increased L5/S1 translation (odds ratio [OR] 1.63 per mm, p=0.005), decreased flexion-extension motion at L1/L2 (OR 0.87 per degree, p=0.036), L2/L3 (OR 0.88 per degree, p=0.036), and L4/L5 (OR 0.87 per degree, p=0.020), increased axial rotation at L4/L5 (OR 2.11 per degree, p=0.032), decreased disc height at L3/L4 (OR 0.52 per mm, p=0.008) and L4/L5 (OR 0.37 per mm, p<0.001), increased disc grade at all levels (ORs 2.01-12.33 per grade, p=0.001-0.026), and increased facet grade at L4/L5 (OR 4.99 per grade, p=0.001) and L5/S1 (OR 3.52 per grade, p=0.004). Significant associations were found between disc grade and kinematic parameters (flexion-extension motion, axial rotation, and translation) at L4/L5 (p=0.001) and L5/S1 (p<0.001), but not at other levels (p>0.05).