Cargando…
Comparison of segmental spinal movement control in adolescents with and without idiopathic scoliosis using modified pressure biofeedback unit
BACKGROUND: Postural rehabilitation emphasizing on motor control training of segmental spinal movements has been proposed to effectively reduce the scoliotic spinal deformities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, information regarding the impairments of segmental spinal movement contr...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5533341/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753636 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181915 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Postural rehabilitation emphasizing on motor control training of segmental spinal movements has been proposed to effectively reduce the scoliotic spinal deformities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). However, information regarding the impairments of segmental spinal movement control involving segmental spinal stabilizers in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis remains limited. Examination of segmental spinal movement control may provide a window for investigating the features of impaired movement control specific to spinal segments that may assist in the development of physiotherapeutic management of AIS. OBJECTIVES: To compare segmental spinal movement control in adolescents with and without idiopathic scoliosis using modified pressure biofeedback unit. METHODS: Segmental spinal movement control was assessed in twenty adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AISG) and twenty healthy adolescents (CG) using a modified pressure biofeedback unit. Participants performed segmental spinal movements that primarily involved segmental spinal stabilizing muscles with graded and sustained muscle contraction against/off a pressure cuff from baseline to target pressures and then maintained for 1 min. Pressure data during the 1-minute maintenance phase were collected for further analysis. Pressure deviation were calculated and compared between groups. RESULTS: The AISG had significantly greater pressure deviations for all segmental spinal movements of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine than the CG. CONCLUSION: Pressure biofeedback unit was feasible for assessing segmental spinal movement control in AIS. AISG exhibited poorer ability to grade and sustain muscle activities for local movements of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, suggesting motor control training of segmental spinal movements involving segmental spinal stabilizing muscles on frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes were required. |
---|