Relationship between the movements of the lumbar spine and hip

Lee, Raymond Y.W.; Wong, Thomas K.T

doi:10.1016/s0167-9457(02)00117-3

Cited by 127 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each rater was blinded to the results of the other since they did not share the values of the results. The method of computation was based on mathematical techniques, and kinematic joint angles were derived from the direction cosine matrices of the sensors [22,23]. The reliability of the motion analysis system has also been reported and confirmed with previous studies [2,24,26].…”

Section: Outcome Measuressupporting

confidence: 74%

“…Therefore, three-dimensional shoulder and pelvic angles were derived from the relative orientation based on the spine axis. The method of computation was based on mathematical techniques, and kinematic joint angles were derived from the direction cosine matrices of the sensors [22,23]. The maximum angle was measured based on the direction of the rotation at 70°at a self-selected speed (0.8 ± 0.2 m/s).…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Factors affecting shoulder–pelvic integration during axial trunk rotation in subjects with recurrent low back pain

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Shoulder-pelvic integration could play a central role in the control of dynamic posture and movement. However, kinematic coordination during axial trunk rotation has not been carefully investigated in subjects with recurrent low back pain (LBP). The purpose of this study was to compare the maximum rotational angles of the shoulders and pelvis in the transverse plane between subjects with and without recurrent LBP. Materials and methods A total of 38 age-matched subjects (19 control subjects: 69.00 ± 5.75 years old and 19 subjects with LBP: 68.79 ± 5.40 years old) participated in the study. The axial trunk rotation test was conducted in the upright position with bilateral hips and knees fully extended and both feet shoulder width apart. Results The results of this study indicated that there was a difference in pelvic girdle rotation between groups (100.79 ± 26.46 in the control group, 82.12 ± 23.16 in the LBP group; t = 2.31, p = 0.02); however, there was no difference for the shoulder girdle (177.63 ± 36.98 in the control group, 156.42 ± 30.09 in the LBP group; t = 1.91, p = 0.06). There were interactions with age (F = 9.27, p = 0.004) and BMI (F = 7.50, p = 0.01) with the rotational angles of the shoulder and pelvis. Conclusion These results indicated a different pattern of trunk rotation movement with the age and BMI serving as important factors to consider for recurrent LBP. The results of our study also indicated a different pattern of shoulder and pelvic coordination with age and gender. Clinicians need to consider the consequences of limited shoulderpelvic rotational angles, especially limited rotational angle on the pelvis during trunk axial rotation. Further studies are required to determine the causes of the underlying problems for clinical decision-making and altered shoulderpelvic rotation in subjects with recurrent LBP.

show abstract

Section: Outcome Measuressupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting shoulder–pelvic integration during axial trunk rotation in subjects with recurrent low back pain

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Timing of the spine and hip joint motions in a cyclic flexion extension task was assessed in healthy participants (Lee and Wong, 2002) and in participants with chronic low back pain (Wong and Lee, 2004). In both these studies, the authors used cross-correlation analyses to evaluate onset timing of the spine and hip joints and reported no timing differences in either healthy subjects or those with chronic low back pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most investigations of the coupling of the spine and hip have focused on the relative excursions of the spine and hip using the highly constrained forward bend test (Esola et al, 1996;Lariviere et al, 2000;Lee & Wong, 2002;McClure et al, 1997;Paquet et al, 1994;Porter & Wilkinson, 1997;Wong & Lee, 2004). While others have examined the spine hip ratio with weighted and un-weighted extension tasks performed from a flexed posture (Granata & Sanford, 2000;McClure et al, 1997;Nelson et al, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While others have examined the spine hip ratio with weighted and un-weighted extension tasks performed from a flexed posture (Granata & Sanford, 2000;McClure et al, 1997;Nelson et al, 1995). In those studies that examined the coupling of the spine and hip during un-weighted forward bending, there is a consistent finding of a greater contribution from the spine than from the hips in the early stages of movement, while the hips contributed more than the spine toward the end of the movement task (Esola et al, 1996;Lee & Wong, 2002;Paquet et al, 1994;Porter & Wilkinson, 1997;Wong & Lee, 2004). The data from these studies indicate clear differences in how motion is apportioned to the spine and hips during the movement task and suggest that there are likely differences in the onset timing of these joints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coordination and timing of spine and hip joints during full body reaching tasks

Thomas

Gibson

2007

Human Movement Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coupling of spine and hip joints during full body reaching tasks was investigated in sixteen participants (8 male & 8 female) who performed reaching tasks at comfortable and fast-paced movement speeds to three targets located in a para-sagittal plane. The participants paused at target contact for 500 ms and then returned to an upright posture. Three dimensional joint motions of the spine and hip were recorded using an electromagnetic tracking device. We found an effect of movement phase (i.e. reach and return) on the onset timing of the spine and hip joints. For most target locations and movement speeds, spine motion onset preceded hip motion onset during the reaching phase of the movement task. In the reach phase, when averaged across all movement conditions, spine joint motion preceded hip joint motion by an average of 48.9 ms. In contrast, in the return phase, hip joint motion preceded spine joint motion by an average of 63.0 ms. Additionally, when subjects were instructed to use either a knee flexion or knee extension strategy to perform the reaching tasks there was no effect of movement strategy on timing of the spine and hip. There was also no effect of target height on the spine hip ratio, but as movement speed increased, the spine/hip ratio decreased for all target locations due primarily to an increase in hip joint excursion. The findings indicate clear differences in onset timing of the spine and hip joints during reaching tasks that necessitate some forward bending of the trunk and that onset timing is reversed for the return to an upright posture.

show abstract

Evaluation of Posterior Hip Pain

Hatem¹,

Martin²

2021

Hip Arthroscopy and Hip Joint Preservation Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship between the movements of the lumbar spine and hip

Cited by 127 publications

References 37 publications

Factors affecting shoulder–pelvic integration during axial trunk rotation in subjects with recurrent low back pain

Factors affecting shoulder–pelvic integration during axial trunk rotation in subjects with recurrent low back pain

Coordination and timing of spine and hip joints during full body reaching tasks

Evaluation of Posterior Hip Pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About