Morphological investigation of low back erector spinae muscle: Historical data populations

Gungor, Celal; Tang, Ruoliang; Sesek, Richard; Foreman, K. Bo; Gallagher, Sean; Davis, Gerard A.

doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2015.02.001

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding that gait belt transfers exceed the NIOSH-recommended safe limit for compressive force is consistent with prior reports (Garg et al, 1991a, 1991b; Marras et al, 1999). In addition, some studies have reported associations between body anthropometry and the geometry of lumbar spine and paraspinal muscles (Gungor et al, 2015a, 2015b; Tang, 2013; Tang et al, 2016; Tang et al, manuscript submitted for publication); however, the relationships between anthropometric characteristics and risk of low back pain remain unclear (Frymoyer, 1992; Manchikanti, 2000; Rubin, 2007; Sesek et al, 2014), and must be addressed in future investigations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Evaluations of Bed-to-Wheelchair Transfer: Gait Belt Versus Walking Belt

Tang

Holland

Milbauer

et al. 2018

Workplace Health Saf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nursing personnel, particularly caregivers who frequently perform manual patient transfer tasks, are at risk for work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs). The purpose of this study was to perform biomechanical evaluations of bed-to-wheelchair transfer using two low-cost assistive devices: walking belt and gait belt. Twenty-eight college students, serving as caregivers, transferred 14 students, serving as patients. "Caregiver" spinal loading and strength requirements at major joints were measured using a 3D Static Strength Prediction Model. "Caregiver"-perceived stresses were assessed using the Borg CR-10 Scale. "Patient" safety and comfort ratings were determined using Likert-type scales. The findings indicated that transferring "patients" using walking belts with a pulling technique produced significantly lower biomechanical stress than using gait belts. "Patients" also felt more comfortable and safer during walking belt transfers. It is recommended that health care facilities should consider use of walking belts in place of gait belts to transfer partially weight-bearing patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Evaluations of Bed-to-Wheelchair Transfer: Gait Belt Versus Walking Belt

Tang

Holland

Milbauer

et al. 2018

Workplace Health Saf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, in literature, there has been little effort to comprehensively measure and compare the vertical dimensions associated with the vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs simultaneously using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology, compared to the growing interests in the transverse dimensions in both spinal structures (Tang, et al, 2016;Tang, et al, 2019;Tang, et al, 2020) and paraspinal muscles (Gungor, et al, 2015a;Gungor, et al, 2015b;Gungor, et al, 2019). In addition, few studies have focused on the reliability and accuracy of MRI-derived measurement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological Analysis of the Human Lumbar Spine Using Sagittal Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Wen

et al. 2021

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sagittal morphological dimensions of the human lower lumbar structures are critical inputs for the comprehensive biomechanical modeling of spinal motions and the risk assessment of work-related low back pain. In this new quantitative exploration of sagittal morphology across the lower lumbar region (i.e., from L3/L4 to L5/S1), intervertebral disc (IVD) height, vertebral body (VB) height, endplate concavity was measured from two samples of subjects, including 1) archived medical records (AMR) collected from 57 patients and 2) 43 asymptomatic subjects with no history of low back pain (ASYM), independently by four individuals on a monthly basis. First, the current study achieved good inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. In addition, the current results also revealed that AMR sample had greater anterior-to-posterior vertebral body height ratio in vertebra L3 and L5. On the other hand, ASYM sample had significantly greater endplate concavity.

show abstract

“…Therefore, high BMI reported in this study cohort may possibly reflect greater muscle mass rather than adipose tissue. In addition, some studies have reported the associations between body anthropometry and the geometry of lumbar spine and paraspinal muscles (Gungor et al, 2015a, 2015b, Gungor et al, 2019; Tang et al, 2016, 2019); however, the relationships between anthropometric characteristics and risk of negative low back health outcomes remain unclear (Frymoyer, 1992; Manchikanti, 2000; Rubin, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Different Measures of Low Back Pain Among U.S. Manual Materials Handling Workers: Comparisons of Demographic, Psychosocial, and Job Physical Exposure

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine differences in demographic, psychosocial, and job physical exposure risk factors between multiple low back pain (LBP) outcomes in a prospective cohort of industrial workers. Background LBP remains a leading cause of lost industrial productivity. Different case definitions involving pain (general LBP), medication use (M-LBP), seeking healthcare (H-LBP), and lost time (L-LBP) are often used to study LBP outcomes. However, the relationship between these outcomes remains unclear. Method Demographic, health status, psychosocial, and job physical exposure risk factors were quantified for 635 incident-eligible industrial workers. Incident cases of LBP outcomes and pain symptoms were quantified and compared across the four outcomes. Results Differences in age, gender, medical history, and LBP history were found between the four outcomes. Most incident-eligible workers (67%) suffered an LBP outcome during follow-up. Cases decreased from 420 for LBP (25.4 cases/100 person-years) to 303 for M-LBP (22.0 cases/100 person-years), to 151 for H-LBP (15.6 cases/100 person-years), and finally to 56 for L-LBP (8.7 cases/100 person-years). Conversely, pain intensity and duration increased from LBP to H-LBP. However, pain duration was relatively lower for L-LBP than for H-LBP. Conclusion Patterns of cases, pain intensity, and pain duration suggest the influence of the four outcomes. However, few differences in apparent risk factors were observed between the outcomes. Further research is needed to establish consistent case definitions. Application Knowledge of patterns between different LBP outcomes can improve interpretation of research and guide future research and intervention studies in industry.

show abstract

Morphological investigation of low back erector spinae muscle: Historical data populations

Cited by 11 publications

References 39 publications

Biomechanical Evaluations of Bed-to-Wheelchair Transfer: Gait Belt Versus Walking Belt

Biomechanical Evaluations of Bed-to-Wheelchair Transfer: Gait Belt Versus Walking Belt

Morphological Analysis of the Human Lumbar Spine Using Sagittal Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Evaluating Different Measures of Low Back Pain Among U.S. Manual Materials Handling Workers: Comparisons of Demographic, Psychosocial, and Job Physical Exposure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About