Comparison of Lumbar Proprioception as Measured in Unrestrained Standing in Individuals With Disc Replacement, With Low Back Pain, and Without Low Back Pain

Hobbs, Amanda J.; Adams, Roger; Shirley, Debra; Hillier, Terence M.

doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.3149

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the newly fixed spine likely requires time to adapt to its new lumbar curve and proprioception after surgery. 41 This could be confirmed by serial improvement between 3 months and 1 year postoperative in terms of EQ-5D measure and the 4 mobility test results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Effect of Sagittal Balance on Risk of Falling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Combined with Posterior Surgery

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo demonstrate the impact of correcting sagittal balance (SB) on functional outcomes of surgical treatment for degenerative spinal disease and actual falls via utilization of new minimally invasive lumbar fusion techniques via a lateral approach.Materials and MethodsFrom November 2011 to March 2015, we enrolled 56 patients who underwent minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and matched 112 patients receiving decompression/postero-lateral fusion (PLF) surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. According to SB status using C7-plumb line-distance (C7PL) and surgery type, patients were divided into three groups: SB PLF, sagittal imbalance (SI) PLF, and LLIF groups. We then compared their outcomes.ResultsThe mean C7PL was 6.2±13.6 mm in the SB PLF group, 72.9±33.8 mm in the SI PLF group, and 74.8±38.2 mm in the LLIF group preoperatively. Postoperatively, C7PL in only the LLIF group improved significantly (p=0.000). Patients in the LLIF group showed greater improvement in fall-related functional test scores than the SI PLF group (p=0.007 for Alternate-Step test, p=0.032 for Sit-to-Stand test). The average number of postoperative falls was 0.4±0.7 in the SB PLF group, 1.1±1.4 in the SI PLF group, and 0.8±1.0 in the LLIF group (p=0.041). Oswestry Disability Index and the Euro-QoL 5 dimension visual analogue scale scores also showed greater improvements in the LLIF group than in the SI PLF group at postoperative 1 year (p=0.003, 0.016).ConclusionSurgical correction of SI in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis using a combination of minimal invasive LLIF and posterior surgery achieved better surgical outcomes and a lower incidence of actual falls than PLF surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Effect of Sagittal Balance on Risk of Falling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Combined with Posterior Surgery

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 89 Using the absolute judgement method, Waddington and Adams 38 developed the AMEDA to test participants' ability to use proprioceptive information to differentiate between ankle inversion angles. In recent years, the AMEDA technique has been developed and validated for testing proprioception at the knee, 90 , 91 , 92 hip, 66 , 93 lumbar spine, 94 , 95 cervical spine, 96 shoulder, 97 , 98 and hand. 37 , 99 , 100 The same technique has been termed “interdental dimension discrimination” when used for assessing proprioception at the jaw in dentistry and oral rehabilitation.…”

Section: Origin Of Proprioception Assessment Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing proprioception: A critical review of methods

Han

Waddington

Adams

et al. 2016

Journal of Sport and Health Science

412

322

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To control movement, the brain has to integrate proprioceptive information from a variety of mechanoreceptors. The role of proprioception in daily activities, exercise, and sports has been extensively investigated, using different techniques, yet the proprioceptive mechanisms underlying human movement control are still unclear. In the current work we have reviewed understanding of proprioception and the three testing methods: threshold to detection of passive motion, joint position reproduction, and active movement extent discrimination, all of which have been used for assessing proprioception. The origin of the methods, the different testing apparatus, and the procedures and protocols used in each approach are compared and discussed. Recommendations are made for choosing an appropriate technique when assessing proprioceptive mechanisms in different contexts.

show abstract

“…A previous study involving discrimination of active movements in lumbar spine flexion has employed a standing position, without restraint of body parts, and with general vision available (Hobbs, et al, 2010). In that study, healthy normal and disc-replacement groups did not differ in terms of their ability to discriminate lumbar forward flexion movements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The aim of the present study was to use the same method to investigate whether having vision available alters discrimination of the extent of lumbar-flexion movements and whether those individuals who have undergone lumbar disc-replacement surgery perform differently than normal healthy participants in the same conditions. Data from the previous study (Hobbs, et al, 2010) indicate that if the capability of the surgical group to discriminate between spinal movements with vision occluded was reduced from an anticipated mean score of 0.73 by 0.13 (one standard deviation), if there were 20 participants in each of two groups, power would be 0.88 to detect this difference.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…As there is potential for return to high activity following disc-replacement surgery, it is important to maximise control around the lumbar spine (Siepe, Wiechert, Khattab, Korge, & Mayer, 2007). A previous study in which discrimination of forward flexion movements was compared in three groups, two with discogenic pain (one of these following lumbar disc-replacement surgery) and one of healthy controls, indicated discrimination of movement was heightened in range around 11° for the back pain group but not in the surgical and no back-pain groups who were not significantly different (Hobbs, Adams, Shirley, & Hillier, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Discrimination of Amount of Spinal Flexion for Movements Made with and without Vision after Lumbar Disc Replacement

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discrimination of differences between small lumbar flexion movements made when standing may differ depending on whether vision is available. Dependence on general vision during trunk movements may be increased following surgery, in which an intervertebral disc is replaced with a prosthetic disc. This study investigated whether the availability of vision changed discrimination of small differences in lumbar forward flexion movement when standing for patients with lumbar disc replacement and healthy peers. 20 volunteers without a history of back pain and 20 with disc replacement undertook a 100-trial sequence of forward flexion movements to a set of physical stops, making an absolute judgement as to the position after each movement. General (nontarget) vision during the movement was available or removed randomly trial by trial. Availability of vision did not affect discrimination of flexion movements of the lumbar spine either in normal healthy individuals or those with disc replacement.

show abstract

Comparison of Lumbar Proprioception as Measured in Unrestrained Standing in Individuals With Disc Replacement, With Low Back Pain, and Without Low Back Pain

Cited by 4 publications

References 55 publications

Effect of Sagittal Balance on Risk of Falling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Combined with Posterior Surgery

Effect of Sagittal Balance on Risk of Falling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Combined with Posterior Surgery

Assessing proprioception: A critical review of methods

Discrimination of Amount of Spinal Flexion for Movements Made with and without Vision after Lumbar Disc Replacement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About