Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 13, Issue 1 , Pages 18-26, January 1998

Effects of a lumbar support on spine posture and motion assessed by electrogoniometer and recording

  • Philippe Thoumie

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence and reprint requests to: P. Thoumie, Unité de Rééducation Orthopédique, Hopital Rothschild, 33 Boulevard de Picpus, F-75012 Paris, France.
    • Department of Physical Medecine and Rehabilitation, Groupe Hospitalier Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France
  • ,
  • Jean-Luc Drape

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Groupe Hospitalier Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France
  • ,
  • Claire Aymard

      Affiliations

    • Department of Physical Medecine and Rehabilitation, Groupe Hospitalier Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France
  • ,
  • Michel Bedoiseau

      Affiliations

    • Department of Physical Medecine and Rehabilitation, Groupe Hospitalier Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France

Received 1 November 1996; accepted 16 July 1997.

Abstract 

Objective. To determine whether belt wearing causes changes in lumbar posture and motion during standing and work-related activities.

Design. The lumbar spine sagittal kinematics of healthy subjects were assessed with an electrogoniometer during a dynamic test and continuous recording with and without a lumbar support. Correlation between data from electrogoniometer and X-ray was established in preliminary experiments.

Background. The effects of a lumbar support were previously investigated in few patients using radiological or invasive techniques under laboratory conditions, with special regard to the restriction of global motion in flexion and extension. Whether lumbar posture may also be involved during belt wearing remains unclear. There is also no evidence that these changes affecting lumbar motion and posture persist during prolonged activities.

Methods. The correlation between electrogoniometer and radiographic data was assessed in 12 subjects. Lumbar curve angles were evaluated in 15 healthy subjects, with and without one type of lumbar support, during standing in orthostatic, fully-flexed and fully-extended positions and during work-related activities with a portable computer. Lumbar motion parameters were flexion, extension and total range of motion. Lumbar posture parameters were lumbar curve angle in orthostatic position and mean lumbar curve angle during continuous recording.

Results. Electrogoniometric and radiographic data from lumbar curve angles and motion changes during flexion/extension of the spine were slightly different but reasonably well correlated (r = 0.58–0.77). The lumbar support decreased the mean total range of motion of the lumbar spine during a single flexion/extension movement by 17% and during continuous recording by 22%. The lumbar curve angle in the orthostatic position was reduced by 3 ° and the mean lumbar curve (assessed by continuous recording) was reduced by 4 ° (mean for 15 subjects). There were major individual changes in these two parameters and the reduction in lumbar curvature was correlated with the initial values (r = 0.66–0.72).

Conclusion. Electrogoniometer data on lumbar motion are reasonably well correlated with X-ray data. The comparative values registered during flexion/extension tests and continuous recording confirm that a support belt limits slightly global lumbar motion. As changes affecting postural parameters (orthostatic or mean values during continuous recording) depend on subject morphometry, individual parameters should be taken in account when evaluating and using a lumbar support.

Keywords:  Electrogoniometer, motion analysis, posture, lumbar spine, lumbar support

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0268-0033(97)00084-3

Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 13, Issue 1 , Pages 18-26, January 1998