Motion Characteristics of the Lumbar Spine in the Normal Population

McGregor, Alison H.; McCarthy, Ian; Hughes, Sean

doi:10.1097/00007632-199511001-00009

Cited by 113 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have documented a decrease in spine motion associated with aging. 1,10,20,30,32,37 There is the possibility that the impairment measures of interest in the current study could be affected by age-related spine changes. To further examine the potential effect of age on the gender effects obtained in the current study, we divided the sample into 2 equal groups: (1) patients younger than 42 years of age and (2) patients 42 years of age or older.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender-Related Differences in Prevalence of Lumbopelvic Region Movement Impairments in People With Low Back Pain

Scholtes¹,

Dillen²

2007

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender-Related Differences in Prevalence of Lumbopelvic Region Movement Impairments in People With Low Back Pain

Scholtes¹,

Dillen²

2007

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…At the 95% confidence level, this is defined as 1.96×√2× SEM or 2.77×SEM and sometimes referred to as the 'minimum (or smallest) detectable change' [3]. For lumbar ROF, for example, the minimum detectable change T12-S1 42-65 14-32 CA6000 [11] T12-S1 81 35 116 CA6000 [13] e T12-S1 63 24 87 CA6000 [27] L1-S1 65 2 88 CA6000 [29] f T12-S1 57 24 81 CA6000 [40] T12-S1 62 21 83 CA6000 [45] g T12-S1 40-72 6-29 X-ray [12] L1-S1 --77 X-ray [20] h L1-S1 53 X-ray [34] i L1-S1 52 16 68 X-ray [40] T12-S1 61 20 81 [32] and 34% [17]. Some authors have actually argued that 95% confidence limits are too stringent to use as a threshold for deciding that real change has occurred, and they recommend 1.5 or 2.0 times the SEM (rather than 2.77×SEM) [21].…”

Section: Between-day Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Naturally some caution is required in making these comparisons, as the gender, age, and back pain history of the participants all differ somewhat between the studies, as does the number of motion segments attributed to the lumbar spine. With respect to the latter, most of the skin-surface devices -CA6000 [11,13,29,37,41,46], long-arm goniometers [40], and inclinometers [53] -measure from the thoracolumbar junction (T12-L1) to the sacrum, and these obviously give slightly higher values than when the motion sensors are placed over the spinous process of L1 and the sacrum, as is typically done when using the Fastrak [25,27] or Isotrak [8,9,10] systems or when the curvature is measured from L1-2 to L5-S1 with X-rays [12,34]. Regarding spinal mobility, there appears to be no consensus as to whether the T12-L1 motion segment should be considered part of the lumbar spine, although guidelines for the measurement of lumbar ROM [2] recommend its inclusion, as T11-12 is considered to represent the functional junction between the thoracic and lumbar regions [5].…”

Section: Lumbar Spine and Hipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature

Mannion

Knecht

Balaban

et al. 2004

European Spine Journal

321

242

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increasing awareness of the risks and dangers of exposure to radiation associated with repeated radiographic assessment of spinal curvature and spinal movements. As such, attempts are continuously being made to develop skinsurface devices for use in examining the progression and response to treatment of various spinal disorders. However, the reliability and validity of measurements recorded with such devices must be established before they can be recommended for use in the research or clinical environment. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability of measurements using a newly developed skin-surface device, the Spinal Mouse. Twenty healthy volunteers (mean age 41±12 years, nine males, 11 females) took part. On 2 separate days, spinal curvature was measured with the Spinal Mouse during standing, full flexion, and full extension (each three times by each of two examiners). Paired t-tests, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and standard errors of measurement (SEM) with 95% confidence intervals were used to characterise between-day and interexaminer reliability for: standing sacral angle, lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, and ranges of motion (flexion, extension) of the thoracic spine, lumbar spine, hips, and trunk. The between-day reliability for segmental ranges of flexion was also determined for each motion segment from T1-2 to L5-S1. The majority of parameters measured for the 'global regions' (thoracic, lumbar, or hips) showed good between-day reliability. Depending on the parameter of interest, between-day ICCs ranged from 0.67 to 0.92 for examiner 1 (average 0.82) and 0.57 to 0.95 for examiner 2 (average 0.83); for 70% of the parameters measured, the ICCs were greater than 0.8 and generally highest for the lumbar spine and whole trunk measures. For lumbar spine range of flexion, the SEM was approximately 3°. The ICCs were also good for the interexaminer comparisons, ranging from 0.62 to 0.93 on day 1 (average 0.81) and 0.70 to 0.94 on day 2 (average 0.86), although small systematic differences were sometimes observed in their mean values. The latter were still evident even if both examiners used the same skin markings. For segmental ranges of flexion, the ICCs varied between vertebral levels but overall were lower than for the global measures (average for all levels in all analyses, ICC 0.6). For each examiner, the average between-day SEM over all vertebral levels was approximately 2°. For 'global' regions of the spine, the Spinal Mouse delivered consistently reliable values for standing curvatures and ranges of motion which compared well with those reported in the literature. This suggests that the device can be reliably implemented for in vivo studies of the ORIGINAL ARTICLE Eur Spine J (2004) 13 : 122-136 DOI 10.1007 Anne F. Mannion Katrin Knecht Gordana Balaban Jiri Dvorak Dieter Grob A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the ...

show abstract

“…It was not unexpected that age would have an influence on mobility, as we all experience this naturally (27,28). In fact, Chilton-Mitchell et al (29) found a difference in the BASMI in healthy individuals, from a mean 0.9 points in those age Ͻ25 years to a mean 2.1 in persons age Ͼ65 years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Is Spinal Mobility in Patients With Spondylitis Determined By Age, Structural Damage, and Inflammation?

Calvo‐Gutiérrez

Garrido-Castro

Gil-Cabezas

et al. 2014

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To explore the association between mobility, inflammation, and structural damage in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods. Patients with AS were included in a cross-sectional study in which spinal mobility was measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) and by the University of Có rdoba Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (UCOASMI), based on an automated motion analysis. Structural damage was measured by the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS), and activity by the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity (BASDAI). We analyzed the correlations between variables, as well as interaction by multiple linear regression models to reach a predictive equation. Results. Fifty AS patients, mainly men in their mid-40s and with moderate levels of disease activity and structural damage, were included in the study. BASMI and UCOASMI scores showed a strong correlation (r ‫؍‬ 0.89). UCOASMI scores correlated stronger than BASMI with structural damage (r ‫؍‬ 0.72 versus r ‫؍‬ 0.67) and patient's age (r ‫؍‬ 0.68 versus r ‫؍‬ 0.56). Correlations of mobility were weaker with disease activity by the ASDAS (r ‫؍‬ 0.38) and BASDAI (r ‫؍‬ 0.49), and disease duration (r ‫؍‬ 0.40). Multiple linear regression showed that factors associated to mobility by UCOASMI were age, the BASDAI, mSASSS, ASDAS (0:<2.1, 1:>2.1), and disease duration >15 years. The largest weight in the equation corresponded to the mSASSS. The association between the ASDAS and UCOASMI is dependent on disease duration. Conclusion. Mobility in AS is influenced by both structural damage and activity, but definitely also by age and disease duration. Improved mobility should be a relevant target in AS, even more prominently than activity, given its closer relation to structural damage.

show abstract

Motion Characteristics of the Lumbar Spine in the Normal Population

Cited by 113 publications

References 0 publications

Gender-Related Differences in Prevalence of Lumbopelvic Region Movement Impairments in People With Low Back Pain

Gender-Related Differences in Prevalence of Lumbopelvic Region Movement Impairments in People With Low Back Pain

A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature

Is Spinal Mobility in Patients With Spondylitis Determined By Age, Structural Damage, and Inflammation?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About