The effect of age on lumbar range of motion: A systematic review

Intolo, Pattariya; Milosavljevic, Stephan; Baxter, G. David; Carman, Allan; Pal, Poonam; Munn, Joanne

doi:10.1016/j.math.2009.08.006

Cited by 87 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…And so, it is possible to be quite flexible in one movement at a given joint and, at the same time, presenting with a very poor mobility in other joint movements (Dickinson 1968;Harris 1969). While there is no question that range of motion tends to diminish with aging (Araújo 2008;Barnes et al 2001;Beighton et al 1973;Doriot and Wang 2006;Intolo et al 2009;Roach and Miles 1991), it is still unclear if all major joints behave similarly and if so, what is the rate of loss along the years. In this context, using a large set of Flexitest data, the main objective of this study was to assess if the rate of age-related mobility loss differs among several major body joints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related mobility loss is joint-specific: an analysis from 6,000 Flexitest results

Medeiros

Araújo

2013

AGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although aging is commonly linked to a reduction in joint range of motion, it is unclear if all body joints behave similarly. To address this issue, the main purpose of this study was to compare age-related loss of mobility of seven body joints. A total of 6,000 participants (3,835 men and 2,165 women) aged 5 to 92 years took part in this study. The maximal passive range of motion of 20 movements was evaluated by Flexitest, and each movement was scored from 0 to 4. Composite scores were obtained for each of seven joints and for overall flexibility (Flexindex (FLX)) by adding individual movement scores. Confirming previous findings, FLX systematically decreased with aging (p<.001), with female participants being more flexible for all ages (p<0.001) and having a more gradual, 0.6 % vs. 0.8 %/year, age reduction (p<.001). Starting at 30 and 40 years, respectively, for male and female participants, the relative contribution of each composite joint score to FLX dramatically changed. Shoulder contribution to FLX male's score went from 13.9 % at 28 years of age to only 5.2 % at 85 years of age. In general, proportionally, shoulder and trunk became less flexible, while elbow and knee mobility was preserved to a greater extent. Our findings indicated that age-related loss of mobility is rather joint-specific, which could be related to distinct routine usage patterns of the major body joints along life.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related mobility loss is joint-specific: an analysis from 6,000 Flexitest results

Medeiros

Araújo

2013

AGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, this decrease in spinal mobility was present above the age of 40 in the study of Finnsback and Mannerkorpi 12 and above 50 in the study of Intolo et al 16 We think that lumbar spinal mobility may decrease in association with changes such as levels of activity declining with age, increased degenerative changes, atrophy and weakness in the muscles and weakening in the ligaments. While not a one-to-one comparison, Mellin 17 investigated the relationship between age and anthropometric factors and spinal mobility.…”

Section: -14mentioning

confidence: 60%

Chest Expansion and Modified Schober Measurement Values in a Healthy, Adult Population

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:This study aims to demonstrate chest expansion and lumbar mobility using modified Schober measurement values in healthy male and female populations aged 15 and over, and to identify factors affecting these measurements. Patients and methods:The prospective study included 444 volunteers (195 males, 249 females; mean age 47.13 years; range 15 to 88 years) from among patients presenting to the Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine Hospital Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinic. Participants were divided into seven 10-year age groups: group 1: 15-24 years, group 2: 25-34, group 3: 35-44, group 4: 45-54, group 5: 55-64, group 6: 65-74, and group 7: over 75. Exclusion criteria comprised factors potentially influencing spinal mobility and chest expansion. All volunteers' chest measurements were performed in three planes (circumferential with a tape measure, and anteroposteriorly and transversely with calipers) and lumbar mobility was measured using the modified Schober method. The same physician performed the measurements. Results: Chest expansion measurements using tape and calipers varied considerably in all age groups and in both sexes. While there was no difference between males and females in circumferential chest expansion measurement, there was a significant difference decrease in both sexes from group 3 and onward. The only difference between the sexes in terms of modified Schober measurement was in group 4, in favor of male sex. Age-related change in both sexes was higher at age 55 and above compared to the young age groups. Conclusion: We may conclude that chest expansion measurement in the circumferential plane is sufficient when appropriate conditions are established and provides the most accurate result by permitting measurement in all planes.

show abstract

“…Several other studies focusing on typical movement patterns in older adults with LBP identified increased postural sway and decreased lumbar spine motion [33,34]. It has been reported that individuals with LBP demonstrate significantly decreased postural stability during one-leg standing and other clinical balance tests [7,8,14].…”

Section: Postural Deficits and Integrated Balance Performancementioning

confidence: 97%

The Quantified Indices for Compensatory Patterns for Low Back Pain and Outcome Measures

Sung¹,

Danial²

2017

Innovations in Spinal Deformities and Postural Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quantification of balance stability is valuable to a number of populations, including older adults with low back pain (LBP). Investigations into postural stability and oneleg standing should be performed to integrate balance performance using kinematic and kinetic indices. The comparison of postural control between older adults with LBP and healthy older adults might contribute to a further understanding of postural adaptations, especially when considering visual condition. The one-leg standing test would highlight the differences in kinematic and kinetic stabilities between groups. Because the eyes-closed condition results in significantly decreased spinal stability, the normalized kinematic and kinetic indices could be utilized to compare postural integration as well as proprioceptive responses. Older adults with LBP demonstrated higher lumbar spine stability in the eyes-open condition, which might be due to a possible pain avoiding strategy from the standing limb. Clinicians need to consider both kinetic and kinematic indices and visual condition when addressing lumbar spine stability. Quantified indices for compensatory patterns might provide further understanding of optimal injury prevention and rehabilitation strategies for individuals with LBP.

show abstract

The effect of age on lumbar range of motion: A systematic review

Cited by 87 publications

References 36 publications

Age-related mobility loss is joint-specific: an analysis from 6,000 Flexitest results

Age-related mobility loss is joint-specific: an analysis from 6,000 Flexitest results

Chest Expansion and Modified Schober Measurement Values in a Healthy, Adult Population

The Quantified Indices for Compensatory Patterns for Low Back Pain and Outcome Measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About