Radiographic Measurements of Intervertebral Foramina of Cervical Vertebra in Forward and Normal Head Posture

Awalt, Patricia; Lavin, Nancy L.; McKeough, Michael

doi:10.1080/08869634.1989.11746267

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Body posture shows the interrelationship of human muscles, nervous system, bones, and internal organs [ 1 , 2 ]. Normal posture refers to the head in a normal position (not leaning forward, backward, laterally, or twisted), the cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, and lumbar vertebrae are in normal curvature, the pelvis and hip joints are in a normal position (not abducted or adducted), and the ilium and pubic symphysis are in the same plane [ 3 ]. The body posture that deviates from the normal state is known as poor posture and is one of the problems associated with physical development in children [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Kinematic and Kinetic Responses of the Trunk and Lower Extremity Joints during Walking with and without the Spinal Orthosis

Wang

Guo

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spinal orthoses are an effective option for restoring the spine to its original position and controlling poor posture. However, the effects of poor posture and spinal orthoses on the kinematics and kinetics of trunk and lower extremity joints remain unclear. A six-camera Vicon motion capture system and two AMTI force plates were employed to collect gait parameters, including joint angle (spine, thorax, hip, knee, and ankle), range of motion (ROM), and ground reaction forces (GRFs). Furthermore, joint moments and joint reaction forces (JRFs) were calculated using a full-body musculoskeletal model in OpenSim. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA (p < 0.05) was used to compare significant differences among three trial conditions. These three conditions were walking in a normal posture, poor posture, and spinal orthosis. The results showed that spine ROM in the coronal and transverse plane was significantly lower when walking with a spinal orthosis compared to walking in normal and poor posture (p < 0.05). Compared to normal posture, the lumbar moments and back compressive forces were significantly increased when walking in poor posture (p < 0.05). However, when walking with a spinal orthosis, there was a significant decrease in trunk moments and reaction forces compared to walking in poor posture (p < 0.05). Individuals with poor posture could potentially induce instability and disorders, as evidenced by an increase in trunk moments and JRF compared to the normal posture. Spinal orthosis not only restricts spine ROM but also reduces the load on the spine and thus increases balance and stability.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Kinematic and Kinetic Responses of the Trunk and Lower Extremity Joints during Walking with and without the Spinal Orthosis

Wang

Guo

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous efforts aiming to characterize the biomechanical basis of the adjacent level disease in cadaveric models have been challenged by difficulties in simulating the real world mechanical environment of a motion segment [ 13 , 14 ], estimating post-operative behavior of the patient [ 15 ] and replicating biological processes around the implant. Standard radiographic [ 16 , 17 ], magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [ 18 ] and computed tomography (CT) [ 19 – 23 ] imaging techniques are limited to static neck positions, or ranges of motion that may not accurately represent the movements that the patient would normally make [ 24 ]. With the introduction of motion analysis systems utilizing dynamic biplane x-ray radiography together with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, and computational techniques such as model based tracking, accurate three dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion during physiological neck motion tasks performed by live humans has become possible [ 25 – 27 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic foraminal dimensions during neck motion 6.5 years after fusion and artificial disc replacement

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare changes in foraminal motion at two time points post-surgery between artificial disc replacement (ADR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods Eight ACDF and 6 ADR patients (all single-level C5-6) were tested at 2 years (T1) and 6.5 years (T2) post-surgery. The minimum foraminal height (FH.Min) and width (FW.Min) achieved during neck axial rotation and extension, and the range of these dimensions during motion (FH.Rn and FW.Rn, respectively) were measured using a biplane dynamic x-ray system, CT imaging and model-based tracking while patients performed neck axial rotation and extension tasks. Two-way mixed ANOVA was employed for analysis. Results In neck extension, significant interactions were found between year post-surgery and type of surgery for FW.Rn at C5-6 (p<0.006) and C6-7 (p<0.005), and for FH.Rn at C6-7 (p<0.01). Post-hoc analysis indicated decreases over time in FW.Rn for ACDF (p<0.01) and increases in FH.Rn for ADR (p<0.03) at the C6-7 adjacent level. At index level, FW.Rn was comparable between ACDF and ADR at T1, but was smaller for ACDF than for ADR at T2 (p<0.002). In axial rotation, differences were found between T1 and T2 but did not depend on type of surgery (p>0.7). Conclusions Changes were observed in the range of foraminal geometry at adjacent levels from 2 years to 6.5 years post-surgery that were different between ACDF and ADR for neck extension.

show abstract

Radiographic Measurements of Intervertebral Foramina of Cervical Vertebra in Forward and Normal Head Posture

Cited by 2 publications

References 4 publications

The Kinematic and Kinetic Responses of the Trunk and Lower Extremity Joints during Walking with and without the Spinal Orthosis

The Kinematic and Kinetic Responses of the Trunk and Lower Extremity Joints during Walking with and without the Spinal Orthosis

Dynamic foraminal dimensions during neck motion 6.5 years after fusion and artificial disc replacement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About