Comparison of low back joint moment using a dynamic 3D biomechanical model in different transferring tasks wearing low back belt

Katsuhira, Junji; Sasaki, Hideaki; Asahara, Sanae; Ikegami, Takanori; Ishihara, Hisako; Kikuchi, Takashi; Hirai, Yusuke; Yamasaki, Yasuyuki; Wada, T; Maruyama, Hitoshi

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2007.12.070

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, we found that the low back joint extension moment was significantly smaller during TB transfer than under the WD and LBB conditions. This finding is in good agreement with our previous study 18) .…”

Section: Low Back Joint Extension Momentsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…Moreover, an additional 10 reflective markers were attached to the following positions only on the caregivers: on both midtemporal points, midpoint between the acromion process and lateral epicondyle, anterior superior iliac spine, iliac crest, midpoint between the acetabulum and knee, anterior and posterior aspects of the thigh, and the point between the fourth and fifth lumbar vertebra, in order to locate spinal segments. These markers were interpolated using techniques reported in our previous study when marker data were missing 18) . This method made it possible to obtain kinematic data not only for the caregiver but also for the patient.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The low back joint extension moment was calculated as reported previously 18) . An eight-link segmental model was developed to calculate the low back joint extension moment in which we used inverse dynamics and referred to the calculation methods of Skotte et al 9) .…”

Section: Calculation Methods For Kinematic and Kinetic Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of General Principles of Person Transfer Techniques on Low Back Joint Extension Moment

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of general principles of person transfer techniques specifically on the low back joint extension moment. These effects were examined by the following measurable quantitative parameters: 1) trunk bending angle, 2) knee flexion angle, 3) distance between the centers of gravity (COGs) of the caregiver and patient, representing the distance between the caregiver and patient, and 4) the vertical component of the ground reaction force representing the amount of the weight-bearing load on the caregiver' s low back during transfers with and without assistive devices. Twenty students each took the role of caregiver, and one healthy adult simulated a patient. The participants performed three different transfer tasks: without any assistive device, with the patient wearing a low back belt, and with the caregiver using a transfer board. We found that the distance between the COGs and the vertical component of the ground reaction force, but not the trunk bending and knee flexion angles, were the variables that affected the low back joint extension moment. Our results suggest that the general principle of decreasing the distance between COGs is most effective for decreasing the low back joint extension moment during transfers under all conditions.

show abstract

Section: Low Back Joint Extension Momentsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of General Principles of Person Transfer Techniques on Low Back Joint Extension Moment

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We calculated dynamic triaxial low back joint moments as reported in a previous study ( Figure 3A ). 29 We calculated low back compression force referring to the report of Yamazaki et al . 30 They calculated moment arms adjusted to Japanese physical dimensions from the center of rotation to the resultant force vectors of muscles associated with low back extension, lateral bending, and rotation, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Mental Processing on Low Back Load While Lifting an Object

Katsuhira

Matsudaira

Iwakiri

et al. 2013

Spine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Psychological benefits are likely associated with the perceived mechanical support derived from the LB[ 3 ], while any neuromuscular likely involves mechanisms that influence lumbar stability, such as lumbar proprioception, trunk muscle feedforward and reflex activity[ 5 – 8 ]. The direct biomechanical benefits of LB, on the other hand, are likely related to the mechanical stiffness of the LB, leading to decreased lumbar range of motion (ROM)[ 3 , 4 , 9 ], reduced stresses in the passive tissues of the posterior lumbar spine[ 10 , 11 ] and potentially to reduced compressive loading of the lumbar spine[ 12 ]. The direct biomechanical impact of LB is the focus of the current study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of different lumbar belt designs on the lumbopelvic rhythm in healthy subjects

Larivière

Caron

Preuss

et al. 2014

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundResearch suggests that in some patients with low back pain, lumbar belts (LB) may derive secondary prophylactic benefits. It remains to be determined, however, which patients are most likely to benefit from prophylactic LB use, and which LB design is optimal for this purpose. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of different lumbar belts designs on range of motion and lumbopelvic rhythm.MethodsHealthy subjects (10 males; 10 females) performed five standing lumbar flexion/extension cycles, with knees straight, during a control (no belt) and four lumbar belt experimental conditions (extensible, with and without dorsal and ventral panels; non-extensible). Motion of the pelvis and lumbar spine was measured with 3D angular inertial sensors.ResultsThe results suggest that adding dorsal and ventral panels to an extensible LB produces the largest lumbar spine restrictions among the four tested lumbar belt designs, which in turn also altered the lumbopelvic rhythm. On a more exploratory basis, some sex differences were seen and the sex × experimental condition interaction just failed to reach significance.ConclusionsLB may provide some biomechanical benefit for patients with low back disorders, based on the protection that may be provided against soft tissue creep-based injury mechanisms. More comprehensive assessment of different LB designs, with additional psychological and neuromuscular measurement outcomes, however, must first be conducted in order to produce sound recommendations for LB use. Future research should also to take sex into account, with sufficient statistical power to clearly refute or confirm the observed trends.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-307) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Comparison of low back joint moment using a dynamic 3D biomechanical model in different transferring tasks wearing low back belt

Cited by 14 publications

References 17 publications

Effects of General Principles of Person Transfer Techniques on Low Back Joint Extension Moment

Effects of General Principles of Person Transfer Techniques on Low Back Joint Extension Moment

Effect of Mental Processing on Low Back Load While Lifting an Object

The effect of different lumbar belt designs on the lumbopelvic rhythm in healthy subjects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About