Predictive model of intersegmental mobility of lumbar spine in the sagittal plane from skin markers

Yh, Lee; Chiou, W-K; Wj, Chen; Lee, MY; Lin, Y-H

doi:10.1016/0268-0033(95)00012-x

Cited by 33 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluation of the segmental rotations from skin markers is recognized to involve errors in the identification of vertebral positions, skin movement relative to the underlying vertebrae and deformability of vertebrae themselves [14,56,60,87,106]. Due to these inherent errors, the measurements were used to evaluate temporal variations of pelvic tilt and thorax rotation while the intervening lumbar segmental rotations were evaluated based on the partitioning of the difference between foregoing measured rotations using the relative values reported in the literature.…”

Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of squat and stoop dynamic liftings: muscle forces and internal spinal loads

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the well-recognized role of lifting in back injuries, the relative biomechanical merits of squat versus stoop lifting remain controversial. In vivo kinematics measurements and model studies are combined to estimate trunk muscle forces and internal spinal loads under dynamic squat and stoop lifts with and without load in hands. Measurements were performed on healthy subjects to collect segmental rotations during lifts needed as input data in subsequent model studies. The model accounted for nonlinear properties of the ligamentous spine, wrapping of thoracic extensor muscles to take curved paths in flexion and trunk dynamic characteristics (inertia and damping) while subject to measured kinematics and gravity/ external loads. A dynamic kinematics-driven approach was employed accounting for the spinal synergy by simultaneous consideration of passive structures and muscle forces under given posture and loads. Results satisfied kinematics and dynamic equilibrium conditions at all levels and directions. Net moments, muscle forces at different levels, passive (muscle or ligamentous) forces and internal compression/shear forces were larger in stoop lifts than in squat ones. These were due to significantly larger thorax, lumbar and pelvis rotations in stoop lifts. For the relatively slow lifting tasks performed in this study with the lowering and lifting phases each lasting~2 s, the effect of inertia and damping was not, in general, important. Moreover, posterior shift in the position of the external load in stoop lift reaching the same lever arm with respect to the S1 as that in squat lift did not influence the conclusion of this study on the merits of squat lifts over stoop ones. Results, for the tasks considered, advocate squat lifting over stoop lifting as the technique of choice in reducing net moments, muscle forces and internal spinal loads (i.e., moment, compression and shear force).

show abstract

Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of squat and stoop dynamic liftings: muscle forces and internal spinal loads

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Calculation of the trunk and pelvic rotations from skin markers, despite non-invasiveness and ease of measurements, is recognized to have important errors involving identification of anatomical landmarks, skin movement relative to the underlying bony landmarks, and deformability of vertebrae themselves (Lee et al, 1995;Shirazi-Adl, 1994;Zhang and Xiong, 2003). Due to inherent errors, in this work, the measurements were used only to evaluate pelvic tilt and trunk T1-T12 rotations with the intervening lumbar segmental rotations evaluated based on relative values reported in the literature.…”

Section: Article In Pressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model and in vivo studies on human trunk load partitioning and stability in isometric forward flexions

Arjmand

Shirazi‐Adl

2006

Journal of Biomechanics

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Static measurements, mainly based on CT and fluoroscopy, allowed for the computation of the vertebral ranges of motions (ROMs) and the reconstruction of the vertebral morphology (Pearcy et al, 1984;Nissan and Gilad, 1986;Lee et al, 1995;Bifulco et al, 2002;Zheng et al, 2003). Non-invasive techniques, based on optoelectronic systems and surface markers, were proposed for in vivo computation of the 3D gross spine and intersegmental planar motions (Sicard and Gagnon, 1993;Gracovetsky et al, 1995;Crawford et al, 1996;Lundberg, 1996;Faber et al, 1999;Whittle et al, 2000;Schache et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary optimization for robust hierarchical computation of the rotation centres of kinematic chains from reduced ranges of motion the lower spine case

Cerveri

Pedotti

Ferrigno

2004

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predictive model of intersegmental mobility of lumbar spine in the sagittal plane from skin markers

Cited by 33 publications

References 22 publications

Analysis of squat and stoop dynamic liftings: muscle forces and internal spinal loads

Analysis of squat and stoop dynamic liftings: muscle forces and internal spinal loads

Model and in vivo studies on human trunk load partitioning and stability in isometric forward flexions

Evolutionary optimization for robust hierarchical computation of the rotation centres of kinematic chains from reduced ranges of motion the lower spine case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About