Cargando…

Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle

BACKGROUND: Prolonged static sitting in a wheelchair is associated with an increased risk of lower back pain. The wheelchair seating system is a key factor of this risk because it affects spinal loading in the sitting position. In this study, 7 dynamic sitting strategies (DSSs) are examined: lumbar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Chun-Ting, Peng, Yao-Te, Tseng, Yen-Ting, Chen, Yen-Nien, Tsai, Kuen-Horng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5148897/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27938365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1358-3
_version_ 1782473905101864960
author Li, Chun-Ting
Peng, Yao-Te
Tseng, Yen-Ting
Chen, Yen-Nien
Tsai, Kuen-Horng
author_facet Li, Chun-Ting
Peng, Yao-Te
Tseng, Yen-Ting
Chen, Yen-Nien
Tsai, Kuen-Horng
author_sort Li, Chun-Ting
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Prolonged static sitting in a wheelchair is associated with an increased risk of lower back pain. The wheelchair seating system is a key factor of this risk because it affects spinal loading in the sitting position. In this study, 7 dynamic sitting strategies (DSSs) are examined: lumbar prominent dynamic sitting (LPDS), back reclined dynamic sitting (BRDS), femur upward dynamic sitting (FUDS), lumbar prominent with back reclined dynamic sitting (LBDS), lumbar prominent with femur upward dynamic sitting (LFDS), back reclined with femur upward dynamic sitting (BFDS), and lumbar prominent with back reclined with femur upward dynamic sitting (LBFDS). The objective of this study was to analyze the biomechanical effects of these sitting strategies on lumbar-pelvic angles. METHODS: Twenty able-bodied participants were recruited for the study. All participants performed LPDS, BRDS, FUDS, LBDS, LFDS, BFDS, and LBFDS in a random order. All lumbar-pelvic angle parameters, including the static lumbar angle, static pelvic angle, lumbar range of motion, and pelvic range of motion were measured and compared. RESULTS: Results show that LBDS and LBFDS enabled the most beneficial lumbar movements, although the difference between the 2 strategies was nonsignificant. BRDS and BFDS enabled the most beneficial pelvic movements, although the difference between the 2 strategies was nonsignificant. Among all the upright DSSs, LPDS and LFDS enabled the most beneficial lumbar and pelvic movements, although no significant difference was observed between these 2 strategies. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the effects and differences among 7 DSSs on lumbar-pelvic angles. Wheelchair users can choose the most suitable DSS that meets their needs. These findings may serve as a reference for practicing physicians or wheelchair users to choose an appropriate dynamic wheelchair seating system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12389808, 18th November 2016, retrospectively registered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5148897
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51488972016-12-16 Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle Li, Chun-Ting Peng, Yao-Te Tseng, Yen-Ting Chen, Yen-Nien Tsai, Kuen-Horng BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Prolonged static sitting in a wheelchair is associated with an increased risk of lower back pain. The wheelchair seating system is a key factor of this risk because it affects spinal loading in the sitting position. In this study, 7 dynamic sitting strategies (DSSs) are examined: lumbar prominent dynamic sitting (LPDS), back reclined dynamic sitting (BRDS), femur upward dynamic sitting (FUDS), lumbar prominent with back reclined dynamic sitting (LBDS), lumbar prominent with femur upward dynamic sitting (LFDS), back reclined with femur upward dynamic sitting (BFDS), and lumbar prominent with back reclined with femur upward dynamic sitting (LBFDS). The objective of this study was to analyze the biomechanical effects of these sitting strategies on lumbar-pelvic angles. METHODS: Twenty able-bodied participants were recruited for the study. All participants performed LPDS, BRDS, FUDS, LBDS, LFDS, BFDS, and LBFDS in a random order. All lumbar-pelvic angle parameters, including the static lumbar angle, static pelvic angle, lumbar range of motion, and pelvic range of motion were measured and compared. RESULTS: Results show that LBDS and LBFDS enabled the most beneficial lumbar movements, although the difference between the 2 strategies was nonsignificant. BRDS and BFDS enabled the most beneficial pelvic movements, although the difference between the 2 strategies was nonsignificant. Among all the upright DSSs, LPDS and LFDS enabled the most beneficial lumbar and pelvic movements, although no significant difference was observed between these 2 strategies. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the effects and differences among 7 DSSs on lumbar-pelvic angles. Wheelchair users can choose the most suitable DSS that meets their needs. These findings may serve as a reference for practicing physicians or wheelchair users to choose an appropriate dynamic wheelchair seating system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12389808, 18th November 2016, retrospectively registered. BioMed Central 2016-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5148897/ /pubmed/27938365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1358-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Li, Chun-Ting
Peng, Yao-Te
Tseng, Yen-Ting
Chen, Yen-Nien
Tsai, Kuen-Horng
Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title_full Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title_fullStr Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title_short Comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
title_sort comparing the effects of different dynamic sitting strategies in wheelchair seating on lumbar-pelvic angle
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5148897/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27938365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1358-3
work_keys_str_mv AT lichunting comparingtheeffectsofdifferentdynamicsittingstrategiesinwheelchairseatingonlumbarpelvicangle
AT pengyaote comparingtheeffectsofdifferentdynamicsittingstrategiesinwheelchairseatingonlumbarpelvicangle
AT tsengyenting comparingtheeffectsofdifferentdynamicsittingstrategiesinwheelchairseatingonlumbarpelvicangle
AT chenyennien comparingtheeffectsofdifferentdynamicsittingstrategiesinwheelchairseatingonlumbarpelvicangle
AT tsaikuenhorng comparingtheeffectsofdifferentdynamicsittingstrategiesinwheelchairseatingonlumbarpelvicangle