1985
DOI: 10.3109/17453678509154154
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stereo radiography of lumbar spine motion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
121
1
2

Year Published

2000
2000
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 199 publications
(138 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
14
121
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Although smaller RoFs and larger RoEs were generally observed using Epionics SPINE, these results could be due to the small shift of the sensor relative to the back during flexion and extension movements. Here, since the sensors are located at a distance from the neutral axis of the spine, a certain degree of [24] a Mean minimum and maximum of female and male age classes slippage between the spine and the sensor is present, with the sensor segments overlaying a smaller length of the spine at maximum flexion, and a larger length during extension, than compared to standing. Any possible bias in the determination of curvature based on the height of the subject (and therefore the amount of back covered by the sensors) is therefore unavoidable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although smaller RoFs and larger RoEs were generally observed using Epionics SPINE, these results could be due to the small shift of the sensor relative to the back during flexion and extension movements. Here, since the sensors are located at a distance from the neutral axis of the spine, a certain degree of [24] a Mean minimum and maximum of female and male age classes slippage between the spine and the sensor is present, with the sensor segments overlaying a smaller length of the spine at maximum flexion, and a larger length during extension, than compared to standing. Any possible bias in the determination of curvature based on the height of the subject (and therefore the amount of back covered by the sensors) is therefore unavoidable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The anatomical bone-embedded frame of a vertebra has been previously defined by Pearcy (1985). As the spinous process is the only palpable anatomical landmark available for the non-invasive estimation of the in vivo angular kinematics of the lumbar spine, it was not possible to precisely reconstruct the anatomical boneembedded frame of the vertebra in this experiment.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These techniques are mostly based on the direct linear transformation (DLT) algorithm [1], optimized [18] or modified [2,4,6,11,12,21,22], making it possible to reconstruct a point using its projections on two X-ray films. Although quite accurate on the vertebral body of non-pathological vertebrae, these techniques are far from being optimal on scoliotic vertebrae [3,20], because of the lack of identifiable stereo-corresponding points in certain vertebral regions, e.g., the posterior arch.…”
Section: A Mitulescu W Skalli D Mitton J a De Guisementioning
confidence: 99%