Contribution of pelvic rotation to lumbar posteroanterior movement

Chansirinukor, Wunpen; Lee, M.; Latimer, Jane

doi:10.1054/math.2001.0420

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, there are structural differences between the lumbar and cervical spines which potentially affect stiffness measurements. Stiffness of the pelvis and ribs have been shown to contribute to lumbar spine measurements (Chansirinukor et al, 2001(Chansirinukor et al, , 2003, and there are no such constraints in the cervical spine.…”

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical spine posteroanterior stiffness differs with neck position

Snodgrass

Rhodes

2012

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical spine posteroanterior stiffness differs with neck position

Snodgrass

Rhodes

2012

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Asymptomatic: n = 24 Higher L3 stiffness with vertically applied forces; no differences at L5 with load direction Chansirinukor et al (2001) Lumbar: mechanical oscillating PA pressures to L1-L5…”

Section: Publicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…" with table more rigid Latimer et al (1997) 19 asymptomatics Maher et al (1999) 24 asymptomatics Bench rest after warm-up " after 30-min bench rest following a warm-up Green et al (2002) 9 asymptomatics Mechanical pelvic stability " with constraint of pelvis using a belt Cholewicki et al (1999) 10 asymptomatics Chansirinukor et al (2001) 37 asymptomatics Mechanical ribcage stability " with constraint of ribcage using a belt Chansirinukor et al (2003) 41 asymptomatics…”

Section: Rigidity Of Treatment Tablementioning

confidence: 99%

A structured review of spinal stiffness as a kinesiological outcome of manipulation: Its measurement and utility in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment decision-making

Snodgrass

Haskins

Rivett

2012

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When pressing on the midlumbar spine, the whole lumbar spine extends, and there is also rotation of the ribcage and pelvis. [27][28][29][30] Imaging studies with radiography30 and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)31,32 have shown that all of the lumbar vertebrae are involved in motion during PAS testing. The movements are generally rotational in nature, producing relative extension of the segments, although flexion can be seen at the lowest lumbar levels when loading is directed to the upper lumbar segments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Posteroanterior Spinal Stiffness Measures to Clinical and Demographic Findings at Baseline in Patients Enrolled in a Clinical Study of Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain

Owens

DeVocht

Gudavalli

et al. 2007

Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-A system for measuring posterior-to-anterior spinal stiffness (PAS) was developed for use in clinical trials of manipulation for low back pain (LBP). The current report is an analysis of the baseline PAS data, with particular emphasis on relationships between PAS and clinical and demographic characteristics.Methods-Posterior-to-anterior spinal stiffness measurements were recorded over the spinous processes of the lumbar spines from patients who had LBP. The system uses electronic sensors to record displacement and force, whereas a human operator provides the force of indentation. Clinical and outcome measures were compared with spinal stiffness.Results-We recruited 192 patients (89 female and 103 male; average age, 40.0 years; SD, 9.4 years). The average Roland-Morris score was 9.7 (SD, 3.2) on a 24-point scale. The Visual Analog Scale pain scores were 55.7 (SD, 20.9) on a 100-mm scale. Stiffness values ranged from 4. 16 to 39.68 N/mm (mean, 10.80 N/mm; SD, 3.72 N/mm). Females' lumbar spines were, on the average, 2 N/mm more compliant than males (P < .001).Conclusions-The PAS system of computer-monitored equipment with human operation performed well in this clinical study of LBP. Spinal stiffness was found to be different between males and females, and age and body mass index were related to PAS. We found no significant relationship between the severity or chronicity of the LBP complaint and spinal stiffness. There was little agreement between the stiff or tender segments identified by the clinicians using palpation and the segment that measured most stiff using the PAS device. Spinal stiffness assessments are frequently performed as part of patient evaluation in chiropractic, osteopathy, and physical therapy. Often referred to as posterior-to-anterior spinal stiffness (PAS), in chiropractic, the method might be called motion palpation or joint end-play assessment. The clinician typically will use the palm of his or her hand to press on the spine and feel for restricted movement.Studies of spinal stiffness or motion palpation in chiropractic and physical therapy most often find limited interexaminer reliability of the assessment.1,2 Because these are commonly used clinical tests, researchers have attempted to develop instruments to help improve the objectivity of the measures. Over the past 20 years, several devices have been reported in the literature.3-11 Such devices typically use a computer-controlled motor to indent the spine or adjacent tissues while monitoring the amount of displacement of the skin surface and the amount of force developed. These devices report very good reliability and accuracy.6Posterior-to-anterior spinal stiffness measurement is a more complex task than it might seem at first. Investigators have identified a host of variables that can influence the measurement. Relative to the patient, variables include patient positioning and the support surface,12,13 respiration and abdominal pressure,14,15 paraspinal muscle activity,16,17 and the thickness of soft tissue between t...

show abstract

Contribution of pelvic rotation to lumbar posteroanterior movement

Cited by 16 publications

References 12 publications

Cervical spine posteroanterior stiffness differs with neck position

Cervical spine posteroanterior stiffness differs with neck position

A structured review of spinal stiffness as a kinesiological outcome of manipulation: Its measurement and utility in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment decision-making

Comparison of Posteroanterior Spinal Stiffness Measures to Clinical and Demographic Findings at Baseline in Patients Enrolled in a Clinical Study of Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About