Lumbar-Hip Flexion Motion

J, Porter; Wilkinson, A. W.

doi:10.1097/00007632-199707010-00017

Cited by 119 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Included studies were grouped in categories: lordosis [31,32,38,47-49,57,58], range of movement (ROM) [29,30,34,37-42,44,47,50-54,56-59,69,71], relative hip and lumbar contribution to trunk flexion/extension [34,40,50,52,61,71], pelvic angle/relative position and ROM [31,32,57,58], speed/acceleration of lumbar movement [28,34,37,39,41,42,50,71], and proprioception (repositioning accuracy) [33,35,45,46,53,55,60-68,70,72]. Additional file 4 summarises the characteristics of included studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six studies examined the relative lumbar and hip contribution to flexion movements, five [34,50,52,61,71] during forward flexion, and one [40] returning from a fully flexed position. Four of five studies investigating forward flexion found no significant difference between those with and without LBP when comparing lumbar with hip contribution (ratio) to flexion ROM at end range .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A non-significant but consistent effect favored reduced lumbar (compared with hip) contribution to flexion (Figure 7) for those with LBP (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI -0.52 to 0.09, p = 0.17). Three studies [34,40,52] found significant differences in the ‘ through-range ’ contribution of lumbar movement. Esola et al [34] (SMD = -0.86, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.22) and Porter et al [52] (SMD = -0.71 95% CI -1.43 to 0.00) both found significant reductions of lumbar contribution to mid-range flexion but not at end range.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies [34,40,52] found significant differences in the ‘ through-range ’ contribution of lumbar movement. Esola et al [34] (SMD = -0.86, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.22) and Porter et al [52] (SMD = -0.71 95% CI -1.43 to 0.00) both found significant reductions of lumbar contribution to mid-range flexion but not at end range. McClure et al [40] found a greater contribution of the lumbar spine during mid-range return from the fully flexed position (relative extension) (SMD = 0.95 95% CI 0.10 to 1.81).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laird

Gilbert

Kent

et al. 2014

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

315

209

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundClinicians commonly examine posture and movement in people with the belief that correcting dysfunctional movement may reduce pain. If dysfunctional movement is to be accurately identified, clinicians should know what constitutes normal movement and how this differs in people with low back pain (LBP). This systematic review examined studies that compared biomechanical aspects of lumbo-pelvic movement in people with and without LBP.MethodsMEDLINE, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, AMI, CINAHL, Scopus, AMED, ISI Web of Science were searched from inception until January 2014 for relevant studies. Studies had to compare adults with and without LBP using skin surface measurement techniques to measure lumbo-pelvic posture or movement. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria, and identified and extracted data. Standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for group differences between people with and without LBP, and where possible, meta-analyses were performed. Within-group variability in all measurements was also compared.ResultsThe search identified 43 eligible studies. Compared to people without LBP, on average, people with LBP display: (i) no difference in lordosis angle (8 studies), (ii) reduced lumbar ROM (19 studies), (iii) no difference in lumbar relative to hip contribution to end-range flexion (4 studies), (iv) no difference in standing pelvic tilt angle (3 studies), (v) slower movement (8 studies), and (vi) reduced proprioception (17 studies). Movement variability appeared greater for people with LBP for flexion, lateral flexion and rotation ROM, and movement speed, but not for other movement characteristics. Considerable heterogeneity exists between studies, including a lack of detail or standardization between studies on the criteria used to define participants as people with LBP (cases) or without LBP (controls).ConclusionsOn average, people with LBP have reduced lumbar ROM and proprioception, and move more slowly compared to people without LBP. Whether these deficits exist prior to LBP onset is unknown.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laird

Gilbert

Kent

et al. 2014

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

315

209

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Changes in lumbar range of motion and motion velocity have been recognized in individuals with LBP [16]. Also, reduced hip mobility during forward bending has been reported in the literature [17]. LBP subjects demonstrate a decreased magnitude of hip flexion, but not other hip motions implying that an alteration in activity level of the hamstrings may be present in symptomatic subjects [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

The Effect of Stretching Hamstring, Gastrocnemius, Iliopsoas and Back Muscles on Pain and Functional Activities in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Seif¹,

Alenazi²,

Hassan³

et al. 2015

OJTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A back pain lasting more than 12 weeks has been defined as a chronic low back pain (LBP) [1]. More than half of people suffer from LBP [1]. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of gastrocnemius muscle stretching in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Methods: Forty patients with chronic low back pain, ages ranging from 25 to 40 years, were recruited and divided randomly into two groups. The control group followed a physical therapy program that included stretching exercises for back, hamstring and iliopsoas muscles. Strengthening exercises for abdominal muscle and postural instructions for activities of daily living were also performed. The experimental group followed the same control-group exercises with the addition of stretching exercises for gastrocnemius muscles. The interventions for both groups consisted of three sessions per week for six weeks, each session lasting for an hour. The outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS) for pain severity, modified fingertip to floor (FTF) for range of motion (ROM) of trunk flexion, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and loading X-ray to detect lumbosacral angle. Results:

show abstract

A Narrative Review of Evidence‐Based Recommendations for the Physical Examination of the Lumbar Spine, Sacroiliac and Hip Joint Complex

Wong

Johnson

2012

Musculoskeletal Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-specific low back pain is a frequent complaint in primary care, but the differential diagnosis for low back pain can be complex. Despite advances in diagnostic imaging, a specific pathoanatomical source of low back pain can remain elusive in up to 85% of individuals. Best practice guidelines recommend that clinicians conduct a focused physical examination to help to identify patients with non-specific low back pain and an evidence-based course of clinical management. The use of sensitive and specific clinical methods to assess the lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joints is critical for effective physical examination. Psychosocial factors also play an important role in the evaluation of individuals with low back pain, but are not included in this narrative review of physical examination methods. Physical examination of the lumbar spine, sacroiliac and hip joints is presented, organized around patient position for efficient and effective clinical assessment.

show abstract

Lumbar-Hip Flexion Motion

Cited by 119 publications

References 12 publications

Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The Effect of Stretching Hamstring, Gastrocnemius, Iliopsoas and Back Muscles on Pain and Functional Activities in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

A Narrative Review of Evidence‐Based Recommendations for the Physical Examination of the Lumbar Spine, Sacroiliac and Hip Joint Complex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About