Cargando…
The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. OBJECTIVE: To identify the radiographic differences between the standard upright position and the natural and comfortable upright position. METHODS: The radiographic data of 50 young and healthy adults were evaluated, and parameters including the global cervical angl...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7576756/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33081779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03715-2 |
_version_ | 1783598077499670528 |
---|---|
author | Xue, Rui Liu, Dai Shen, Yong |
author_facet | Xue, Rui Liu, Dai Shen, Yong |
author_sort | Xue, Rui |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. OBJECTIVE: To identify the radiographic differences between the standard upright position and the natural and comfortable upright position. METHODS: The radiographic data of 50 young and healthy adults were evaluated, and parameters including the global cervical angle (GCA), global thoracic angle (GTA), global lumbar angle (GLA) were used to depict the spine profile; the distance from the cranial center to the posterior corner of S1 (CSVA-S), the center of the hip (CSVA-H), the center of the knee (CSVA-K) and the center of the ankle (CSVA-A) were measured in both the standard and the natural and comfortable upright positions to assess whole-body balance. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed in the GCA (17.39 ± 6.90 vs. 10.90 ± 3.77, p < .001), GTA (25.63 ± 7.27 vs. 45.42 ± 8.15 p < .001), GLA (42.64 ± 8.05 vs. 20.21 ± 7.47 p < .001), CSVA-S (0.33 ± 2.76 cm vs. 8.54 ± 3.78 cm, p < 0.001), CSVA-H (1.53 ± 3.11 cm vs. 5.71 ± 3.26 cm, p < 0.001), CSVA-K (3.58 ± 2.47 cm vs. 5.22 ± 2.69 cm, p = 0.002) and CSVA-A (1.79 ± 1.92 cm vs. 4.79 ± 2.51 cm, p < 0.001) between the two different standing postures. Compared with the standard upright position, the natural and comfortable upright position results in a more kyphotic spine profile. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in sagittal radiographic parameters were found between the standard upright position and the natural and comfortable upright position; the latter served as a marker for energy conservation during standing and revealed a more kyphotic spinal profile. The standard upright position and natural and comfortable upright position are equally important and should be addressed before a surgical plan is developed for patients who need surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7576756 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75767562020-10-21 The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults Xue, Rui Liu, Dai Shen, Yong BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. OBJECTIVE: To identify the radiographic differences between the standard upright position and the natural and comfortable upright position. METHODS: The radiographic data of 50 young and healthy adults were evaluated, and parameters including the global cervical angle (GCA), global thoracic angle (GTA), global lumbar angle (GLA) were used to depict the spine profile; the distance from the cranial center to the posterior corner of S1 (CSVA-S), the center of the hip (CSVA-H), the center of the knee (CSVA-K) and the center of the ankle (CSVA-A) were measured in both the standard and the natural and comfortable upright positions to assess whole-body balance. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed in the GCA (17.39 ± 6.90 vs. 10.90 ± 3.77, p < .001), GTA (25.63 ± 7.27 vs. 45.42 ± 8.15 p < .001), GLA (42.64 ± 8.05 vs. 20.21 ± 7.47 p < .001), CSVA-S (0.33 ± 2.76 cm vs. 8.54 ± 3.78 cm, p < 0.001), CSVA-H (1.53 ± 3.11 cm vs. 5.71 ± 3.26 cm, p < 0.001), CSVA-K (3.58 ± 2.47 cm vs. 5.22 ± 2.69 cm, p = 0.002) and CSVA-A (1.79 ± 1.92 cm vs. 4.79 ± 2.51 cm, p < 0.001) between the two different standing postures. Compared with the standard upright position, the natural and comfortable upright position results in a more kyphotic spine profile. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in sagittal radiographic parameters were found between the standard upright position and the natural and comfortable upright position; the latter served as a marker for energy conservation during standing and revealed a more kyphotic spinal profile. The standard upright position and natural and comfortable upright position are equally important and should be addressed before a surgical plan is developed for patients who need surgery. BioMed Central 2020-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7576756/ /pubmed/33081779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03715-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Xue, Rui Liu, Dai Shen, Yong The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title | The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title_full | The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title_fullStr | The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title_full_unstemmed | The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title_short | The differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
title_sort | differences in whole-body sagittal alignment between different postures in young, healthy adults |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7576756/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33081779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03715-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT xuerui thedifferencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults AT liudai thedifferencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults AT shenyong thedifferencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults AT xuerui differencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults AT liudai differencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults AT shenyong differencesinwholebodysagittalalignmentbetweendifferentposturesinyounghealthyadults |