Literature DB >> 23540377

Cervical spine intervertebral kinematics with respect to the head are different during flexion and extension motions.

William J Anderst1, William F Donaldson, Joon Y Lee, James D Kang.   

Abstract

Previous dynamic imaging studies of the cervical spine have focused entirely on intervertebral kinematics while neglecting to investigate the relationship between head motion and intervertebral motion. Specifically, it is unknown if the relationship between head and intervertebral kinematics is affected by movement direction. We tested the hypothesis that there would be no difference in sagittal plane intervertebral angles at identical head orientations during the flexion and extension movements. Nineteen asymptomatic subjects performed continuous head flexion-extension movements while biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second. A previously validated model-based volumetric tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral position with sub-millimeter accuracy throughout the flexion-extension motion. Head movement was recorded at 60 Hz using conventional motion analysis and reflective markers. Intervertebral angles were determined at identical head orientations during the flexion and extension movements. Cervical motion segments were in a more extended orientation during flexion and in a more flexed orientation during extension for any given head orientation. The results suggest that static radiographs cannot accurately represent vertebral orientation during dynamic motion. Further, data should be collected during both flexion and extension movements when investigating intervertebral kinematics with respect to global head orientation. Also, in vitro protocols that use intervertebral total range of motion as validation criteria may be improved by assessing model fidelity using continuous intervertebral kinematics in flexion and in extension. Finally, musculoskeletal models of the head and cervical spine should account for the direction of head motion when determining muscle moment arms because vertebral orientations (and therefore muscle attachment sites) are dependent on the direction of head motion.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23540377      PMCID: PMC3767970          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.03.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  40 in total

1.  Adjacent level effects of bi level disc replacement, bi level fusion and disc replacement plus fusion in cervical spine--a finite element based study.

Authors:  Ahmad Faizan; Vijay K Goel; Ashok Biyani; Steven R Garfin; Christopher M Bono
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  Three-dimensional dynamic in vivo motion of the cervical spine: assessment of measurement accuracy and preliminary findings.

Authors:  Colin P McDonald; Casey C Bachison; Victor Chang; Stephen W Bartol; Michael J Bey
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  Model-based tracking of the hip: implications for novel analyses of hip pathology.

Authors:  Daniel E Martin; Nicholas J Greco; Brian A Klatt; Vonda J Wright; William J Anderst; Scott Tashman
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Subject-specific inverse dynamics of the head and cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.097

5.  Segmental percentage contributions of cervical spine during different motion ranges of flexion and extension.

Authors:  Shyi-Kuen Wu; Li-Chieh Kuo; Haw-Chang H Lan; Sen-Wei Tsai; Fong-Chin Su
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2010-06

6.  In-vivo dynamic and static three-dimensional joint space distance maps for assessment of cartilage thickness in the radiocarpal joint.

Authors:  M Foumani; S D Strackee; M van de Giessen; R Jonges; L Blankevoort; G J Streekstra
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Simulation of the effects of different pilot helmets on neck loading during air combat.

Authors:  R Mathys; S J Ferguson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  The effects of femoral graft placement on in vivo knee kinematics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  E S Abebe; G M Utturkar; D C Taylor; C E Spritzer; J P Kim; C T Moorman; W E Garrett; L E DeFrate
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Validation of a noninvasive technique to precisely measure in vivo three-dimensional cervical spine movement.

Authors:  William J Anderst; Emma Baillargeon; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Six-degrees-of-freedom cervical spine range of motion during dynamic flexion-extension after single-level anterior arthrodesis: comparison with asymptomatic control subjects.

Authors:  William J Anderst; Joon Y Lee; William F Donaldson; James D Kang
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  5 in total

1.  Subject-specific inverse dynamics of the head and cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  Role of muscle damage on loading at the level adjacent to a lumbar spine fusion: a biomechanical analysis.

Authors:  Masoud Malakoutian; John Street; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Ian Stavness; Marcel Dvorak; Sidney Fels; Thomas Oxland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Impact of cervical sagittal balance and cervical spine alignment on craniocervical junction motion: an analysis using upright multi-positional MRI.

Authors:  Permsak Paholpak; Andrew Vega; Blake Formanek; Koji Tamai; Jeffrey C Wang; Zorica Buser
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-08-07       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Cervical spine reposition errors after cervical flexion and extension.

Authors:  Xu Wang; René Lindstroem; Niels Peter Bak Carstens; Thomas Graven-Nielsen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  The global end-ranges of neck flexion and extension do not represent the maximum rotational ranges of the cervical intervertebral joints in healthy adults - an observational study.

Authors:  Victoria Andersen; Xu Wang; Mark de Zee; Lasse Riis Østergaard; Maciej Plocharski; René Lindstroem
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2021-05-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.