Sue A Ferguson1, William S Marras. 1. Biodynamic Laboratory, Department of Integrated Systems Engineering, The Ohio State University, 210 Baker Systems, 1971 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. ferguson.4@osu.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine thresholds for low back kinematic measures for the amount of functional recovery necessary to reduce the risk of recurrent pain symptoms or lost time. METHODS: Low back kinematic ability measures were collected at baseline when the workers returned to work for full duty. The range of motion, velocity, and acceleration were collected using the lumbar motion monitor. RESULTS: Follow-up data was collected on 196 of the 206 workers. Workers with sagittal extension velocity of <40 deg./s at baseline were twice as likely to report recurrent low back pain symptoms. Workers with sagittal flexion velocity <34 deg./s were 3 times more likely to report lost time. CONCLUSIONS: Kinematic functional performance measures may be used as recovery criteria in low back pain patients to minimize recurrence risk.
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine thresholds for low back kinematic measures for the amount of functional recovery necessary to reduce the risk of recurrent pain symptoms or lost time. METHODS:Low back kinematic ability measures were collected at baseline when the workers returned to work for full duty. The range of motion, velocity, and acceleration were collected using the lumbar motion monitor. RESULTS: Follow-up data was collected on 196 of the 206 workers. Workers with sagittal extension velocity of <40 deg./s at baseline were twice as likely to report recurrent low back pain symptoms. Workers with sagittal flexion velocity <34 deg./s were 3 times more likely to report lost time. CONCLUSIONS: Kinematic functional performance measures may be used as recovery criteria in low back painpatients to minimize recurrence risk.
Authors: W S Marras; S A Ferguson; P Gupta; S Bose; M Parnianpour; J Y Kim; R R Crowell Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 1999-10-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Kari K Dunning; Kermit G Davis; Chad Cook; Susan E Kotowski; Chris Hamrick; Gregory Jewell; James Lockey Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: William S Marras; Sue A Ferguson; Deborah Burr; Pete Schabo; Anthony Maronitis Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: W S Marras; M Parnianpour; S A Ferguson; J Y Kim; R R Crowell; S Bose; S R Simon Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 1995-12-01 Impact factor: 3.468