Sandra Alcaraz-Clariana , Lourdes García-Luque , Juan Luis Garrido-Castro , Cristina Carmona-Pérez , Daiana Priscila Rodrigues-de-Souza , María Lourdes Ladehesa Pineda , Francisco Alburquerque-Sendín
{"title":"按四分位数进行腰椎骨盆节律分析:识别不同原因腰痛患者在躯干屈伸过程中腰部和骨盆贡献的差异。病例对照研究","authors":"Sandra Alcaraz-Clariana , Lourdes García-Luque , Juan Luis Garrido-Castro , Cristina Carmona-Pérez , Daiana Priscila Rodrigues-de-Souza , María Lourdes Ladehesa Pineda , Francisco Alburquerque-Sendín","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Low back pain (LBP) can alters spinal kinematics. However, for adequate clinical care, a better understanding of lumbopelvic biomechanical behaviour according to the type of LBP is required. Our objectives were to identify differences in lumbopelvic rhythm (LPR) between subjects with acute low back pain (aLBP), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and healthy subjects. As well as to identify correlations between LPR and sociodemographic and clinical data. In each group of 39 subjects, LPR total and by quartiles (Q) and metrological and clinical data were evaluated. No differences were found in relation to total flexion and LPR extension. However, study by Q showed less movement in aLBP compared to axSpA and healthy subjects at the Lumbar level in Q2 (p = 0.001), Pelvis in Q3 and Q4 and Trunk in Q3 (p=<0.001). In Q4 the aLBP moved the Trunk less than axSpA exclusively [−3,64°(95 % confidence interval − 6.53,−0.74), p = 0.011]. For the extension movement, the Pelvic motion of Q2 was lower for the aLBP group compared to axSpA group [−3,11°(−6.00,−0.22), p = 0.030], and Trunk motion of Q2 and Q3 (p = 0.001, p = 0.007, respectively), and Lumbar mobility of Q3 were also lower compared to axSpA and control groups (p = 0.031). Specific correlations were found for each group. aLBP with BMI, axSpA with metrology and Healthy subjects with age.</div><div>Subjects with aLBP showed less lumbar, pelvic or trunk movement in Q2 and Q3 of trunk flexion and extension movements than axSpA and controls. RPL and its interrelationships with sociodemographic and clinical variables depend on the lumbar condition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 112438"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lumbopelvic rhythm analysis by quartiles: Identification of differences in lumbar and pelvic contribution during trunk flexion and extension in subjects with low back pain of different origin. A case-control study\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Alcaraz-Clariana , Lourdes García-Luque , Juan Luis Garrido-Castro , Cristina Carmona-Pérez , Daiana Priscila Rodrigues-de-Souza , María Lourdes Ladehesa Pineda , Francisco Alburquerque-Sendín\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112438\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Low back pain (LBP) can alters spinal kinematics. However, for adequate clinical care, a better understanding of lumbopelvic biomechanical behaviour according to the type of LBP is required. Our objectives were to identify differences in lumbopelvic rhythm (LPR) between subjects with acute low back pain (aLBP), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and healthy subjects. As well as to identify correlations between LPR and sociodemographic and clinical data. In each group of 39 subjects, LPR total and by quartiles (Q) and metrological and clinical data were evaluated. No differences were found in relation to total flexion and LPR extension. However, study by Q showed less movement in aLBP compared to axSpA and healthy subjects at the Lumbar level in Q2 (p = 0.001), Pelvis in Q3 and Q4 and Trunk in Q3 (p=<0.001). In Q4 the aLBP moved the Trunk less than axSpA exclusively [−3,64°(95 % confidence interval − 6.53,−0.74), p = 0.011]. For the extension movement, the Pelvic motion of Q2 was lower for the aLBP group compared to axSpA group [−3,11°(−6.00,−0.22), p = 0.030], and Trunk motion of Q2 and Q3 (p = 0.001, p = 0.007, respectively), and Lumbar mobility of Q3 were also lower compared to axSpA and control groups (p = 0.031). Specific correlations were found for each group. aLBP with BMI, axSpA with metrology and Healthy subjects with age.</div><div>Subjects with aLBP showed less lumbar, pelvic or trunk movement in Q2 and Q3 of trunk flexion and extension movements than axSpA and controls. RPL and its interrelationships with sociodemographic and clinical variables depend on the lumbar condition.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"volume\":\"177 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112438\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024005177\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024005177","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Lumbopelvic rhythm analysis by quartiles: Identification of differences in lumbar and pelvic contribution during trunk flexion and extension in subjects with low back pain of different origin. A case-control study
Low back pain (LBP) can alters spinal kinematics. However, for adequate clinical care, a better understanding of lumbopelvic biomechanical behaviour according to the type of LBP is required. Our objectives were to identify differences in lumbopelvic rhythm (LPR) between subjects with acute low back pain (aLBP), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and healthy subjects. As well as to identify correlations between LPR and sociodemographic and clinical data. In each group of 39 subjects, LPR total and by quartiles (Q) and metrological and clinical data were evaluated. No differences were found in relation to total flexion and LPR extension. However, study by Q showed less movement in aLBP compared to axSpA and healthy subjects at the Lumbar level in Q2 (p = 0.001), Pelvis in Q3 and Q4 and Trunk in Q3 (p=<0.001). In Q4 the aLBP moved the Trunk less than axSpA exclusively [−3,64°(95 % confidence interval − 6.53,−0.74), p = 0.011]. For the extension movement, the Pelvic motion of Q2 was lower for the aLBP group compared to axSpA group [−3,11°(−6.00,−0.22), p = 0.030], and Trunk motion of Q2 and Q3 (p = 0.001, p = 0.007, respectively), and Lumbar mobility of Q3 were also lower compared to axSpA and control groups (p = 0.031). Specific correlations were found for each group. aLBP with BMI, axSpA with metrology and Healthy subjects with age.
Subjects with aLBP showed less lumbar, pelvic or trunk movement in Q2 and Q3 of trunk flexion and extension movements than axSpA and controls. RPL and its interrelationships with sociodemographic and clinical variables depend on the lumbar condition.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.