| Literature DB >> 26068106 |
Amanda M Agnew1, Tracy K Betsinger2, Hedy M Justus3.
Abstract
Traumatic injuries can be used as general indicators of activity patterns in past populations. This study tests the hypothesis that contemporaneous (10th-12th century) rural and urban populations in medieval Poland will have a significantly different prevalence of non-violent fractures. Traumatic injuries to the post-cranial skeleton were recorded for 180 adults from rural Giecz and for 96 adults from urban Poznań-Śródka. They were statistically analyzed by body region and individual skeletal element. Results reveal that Giecz had a significantly higher rate of trunk fractures than Poznań-Śródka (Fisher's exact, p<0.05). In particular, rib and vertebral fractures were more common in Giecz males and females than in their Poznań-Śródka counterparts. Traumatic injuries in the extremities were comparable between the two samples, suggesting similar risks of trauma to these regions. These results indicate that in early medieval Poland, activities associated with a rural lifestyle resulted in more injuries. These stress or accidental fractures, which are related to a high-risk setting, were not consistent with an urban lifestyle. Overall, agricultural populations like Giecz were engaged in a laborious lifestyle, reflected in a variety of injuries related to repetitive, high-risk activities. Although urban populations like Poznań engaged in craft specialization participated in repetitive activities, their lifestyle resulted in lesser fracture-risk.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26068106 PMCID: PMC4466240 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129458
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Medieval map of Wielkopolska, Poland.
The map is based on Magocsi [13], showing locations of 4 major centers.
Sex distribution of individuals in medieval Polish samples (adults only) .
| Site | Total Sample | Males | Females | Unsexed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | n | n | n | |
|
| 180 | 104 | 56 | 20 |
|
| 96 | 26 | 36 | 34 |
1N, total number of skeletons in the sample; n, number of skeletons for which sex could be determined
Age distribution of individuals in medieval Polish samples (adults only) .
| Site | Total Sample | Young Adult | Middle adult | Older Adult | Undetermined Adult |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (18–30 years) | (30–50 years) | (50+ years) | (18+ years) | ||
| N | n | n | n | n | |
|
| 180 | 50 | 84 | 15 | 31 |
|
| 96 | 12 | 21 | 7 | 56 |
1N, total number of skeletons in the sample; n, number of skeletons for which age could be estimated. Young Adult = 18–30 years, Middle Adult = 30–50 years, Older Adult = 50+ years
Fig 2Vertebral trauma in Giecz: compression.
Spine segment (T12-L2) illustrating representative examples of vertebral compression fractures in T12 (moderate anterior wedging) and L2 (severe anterior wedging and complete collapse) vertebrae of an older adult female from the Giecz Collection. Scale is in cm.
Fig 3Vertebral trauma in Giecz: spondylolysis.
L4 vertebrae illustrating bilateral fractures of the pars interarticularis of a middle adult female from the Giecz Collection. Scale is in cm.
Fracture frequencies of anatomical regions and individual skeletal elements in Giecz and Poznań-Sródka .
| Giecz | Poznań-Sródka | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Fractures | N | Fractures |
| |||
| n | % | n | % | ||||
|
| 137 | 15 | 10.9 | 47 | 1 | 2.1 | 0.0751 |
| Clavicle | 135 | 3 | 2.2 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 0.5661 |
| Humerus | 151 | 0 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 1.0000 |
| Ulna | 150 | 9 | 6.0 | 50 | 1 | 2.0 | 0.4564 |
| Radius | 151 | 3 | 2.0 | 47 | 1 | 2.1 | 1.0000 |
| Hand/wrist | 167 | 6 | 3.6 | 53 | 0 | 0 | 0.3397 |
|
| 135 | 7 | 5.2 | 50 | 1 | 2.0 | 0.6847 |
| Femur | 149 | 2 | 1.3 | 51 | 0 | 0 | 1.0000 |
| Tibia | 142 | 1 | 0.7 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 1.0000 |
| Fibula | 142 | 4 | 2.8 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.5737 |
| Foot/ankle | 148 | 4 | 2.7 | 58 | 1 | 1.7 | 1.0000 |
|
| 142 | 63 | 44.4 | 73 | 2 | 2.7 | <0.0001 |
| Ribs | 142 | 32 | 22.5 | 57 | 1 | 1.8 | 0.0001 |
| Vertebrae | 126 | 53 | 42.1 | 60 | 1 | 1.7 | <0.0001 |
1N, total number of individuals with observed elements; n, number of individuals with fractured elements;
*significant, 95% confidence interval
Fracture frequencies of skeletal elements and regions by sex in Giecz and Poznań-Sródka .
| Giecz | Poznań-Sródka | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | Males | Females | ||||||||||
| Region | Element | N | n | % | N | n | % | N | n | % | N | n | % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Clavicle | 81 | 3 | 3.7 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 0 | |
| Humerus | 92 | 0 | 0 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ulna | 89 | 7 | 7.9 | 52 | 2 | 3.9 | 19 | 1 | 5.3 | 24 | 0 | 0 | |
| Radius | 89 | 2 | 2.3 | 53 | 1 | 1.9 | 18 | 1 | 5.6 | 22 | 0 | 0 | |
| Hand/wrist | 99 | 5 | 5.1 | 55 | 1 | 1.8 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Femur | 92 | 2 | 2.2 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | |
| Tibia | 82 | 1 | 1.2 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | |
| Fibula | 82 | 3 | 3.7 | 49 | 1 | 2.0 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | |
| Foot/ankle | 87 | 4 | 4.6 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Ribs | 86 | 27 | 31.4 | 49 | 5 | 10.2 | 20 | 1 | 5.0 | 26 | 0 | 0 | |
| Vertebrae | 78 | 39 | 50.0 | 47 | 14 | 29.8 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 3.7 | |
1N, total number of individuals with observed elements; n, number of individuals with fractured elements
Fracture frequencies of skeletal elements and regions by age group in Giecz and Poznań-Sródka .
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
| ||||||||
| Region | Element | N | n | % | N | n | % | N | n | % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Clavicle | 42 | 0 | 0 | 69 | 2 | 2.9 | 12 | 1 | 8.3 | |
| Humerus | 46 | 0 | 0 | 77 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ulna | 44 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 6 | 7.3 | 16 | 3 | 20.0 | |
| Radius | 45 | 1 | 2.2 | 81 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 13.3 | |
| Hand/wrist | 48 | 2 | 4.2 | 82 | 3 | 3.7 | 15 | 1 | 6.7 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Femur | 46 | 0 | 0 | 79 | 2 | 2.5 | 14 | 0 | 0 | |
| Tibia | 44 | 0 | 0 | 71 | 1 | 1.4 | 13 | 0 | 0 | |
| Fibula | 44 | 1 | 2.3 | 72 | 2 | 2.8 | 13 | 1 | 7.7 | |
| Foot/ankle | 43 | 1 | 2.3 | 73 | 3 | 4.1 | 13 | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Ribs | 45 | 4 | 8.9 | 75 | 23 | 30.7 | 14 | 4 | 28.6 | |
| Vertebrae | 41 | 12 | 24.5 | 70 | 34 | 48.6 | 13 | 6 | 46.2 | |
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
| ||||||||
| Region | Element | N | n | % | N | n | % | N | n | % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Clavicle | 10 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Humerus | 10 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ulna | 11 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 1 | 5.6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
| Radius | 10 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 1 | 5.9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
| Hand/wrist | 10 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Femur | 10 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Tibia | 7 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
| Fibula | 6 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Foot/ankle | 7 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Ribs | 12 | 1 | 8.3 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
| Vertebrae | 10 | 1 | 10.0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
1N, total number of individuals with observed elements; n, number of individuals with fractured elements
Statistical results (p-value) of fracture frequency comparison between Giecz and Poznań-Sródka, for all individuals, males, and females .
| Giecz | Poznań-Sródka | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | n | % | N | n | % |
| ||
|
| Trunk | 142 | 63 | 44.4 | 73 | 2 | 2.7 | <0.0001 |
| Vertebrae | 126 | 53 | 42.1 | 60 | 1 | 1.7 | <0.0001 | |
| Ribs | 142 | 32 | 22.5 | 57 | 1 | 1.8 | 0.0001 | |
|
| Trunk | 86 | 49 | 57.0 | 23 | 1 | 4.4 | <0.0001 |
| Vertebrae | 78 | 39 | 50.0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | <0.0001 | |
| Ribs | 86 | 27 | 31.4 | 20 | 1 | 5.0 | 0.0216 | |
|
| Trunk | 49 | 14 | 28.6 | 30 | 1 | 3.3 | 0.0065 |
| Vertebrae | 47 | 14 | 29.8 | 27 | 1 | 3.7 | 0.0069 | |
| Ribs | 49 | 5 | 10.2 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0.1567 | |
1N, total number of individuals with observed elements; n, number of individuals with fractured elements,
*statistically significant, 95% confidence interval
Statistical results (p-value) of fracture frequency comparison between Giecz and Poznań-Sródka for young adults, middle adults, and older adults .
| Giecz | Poznań-Sródka | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | n | % | N | n | % |
| ||
|
| Trunk | 45 | 13 | 28.9 | 12 | 2 | 16.7 | 0.4854 |
| Vertebrae | 41 | 12 | 24.5 | 10 | 1 | 10.0 | 0.4190 | |
| Ribs | 45 | 4 | 8.9 | 12 | 1 | 8.3 | 1.0000 | |
|
| Trunk | 75 | 41 | 54.7 | 21 | 0 | 0 | <0.0001 |
| Vertebrae | 70 | 34 | 48.6 | 18 | 0 | 0 | <0.0001 | |
| Ribs | 75 | 23 | 30.7 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0052 | |
|
| Trunk | 14 | 8 | 57.1 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0419 |
| Vertebrae | 13 | 6 | 46.2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.2374 | |
| Ribs | 14 | 4 | 28.6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.2675 | |
1N, total number of individuals with observed elements; n, number of individuals with fractured elements,
* statistically significant, 95% confidence interval