1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0268-0033(98)90098-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Normal global motion of the cervical spine:

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

17
72
1
5

Year Published

2001
2001
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 135 publications
(95 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
17
72
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Age related changes in cervical kinematics as reported in literature [8][9][10][11] were clearly present in the RoM of the main motion component data in the present study. These correlations have been accounted for when comparing the results of the experimental group with controls.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Age related changes in cervical kinematics as reported in literature [8][9][10][11] were clearly present in the RoM of the main motion component data in the present study. These correlations have been accounted for when comparing the results of the experimental group with controls.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…From normative data [9,10,19] one can expect normal axial rotation ranges between 139°and 149°and lateral bending mobility ranging between 73°and 93°. The results of the present study show lesser RoM results in the control group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…29 Total rotation movement (right plus left rotation movement) was analyzed, because it is difficult to precisely determine the neutral position for cervical movements and because previous studies have found a significant effect of the initial head position on active ROM. 9,38 Both groups performed cervical rotation ROM movements in 2 conditions: condition 1, resting scapular position, and condition 2, neutral vertical scapular position. The order of testing of the 2 conditions was randomly assigned such that half of the subjects for each group The ANOVA revealed no significant interaction effect of group by condition (F = 0.19, df = 1, P = .66) or significant main effect of group (F = 0.41, df = 1, P = .53).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reliability and reproducibility of this instrument was validated in a previous study [10]. The linkage was mounted on the subject using a pelvic and a thoracic harness (Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%