Brecca M M Gaffney1, Cory L Christiansen2, Amanda M Murray2, Bradley S Davidson3. 1. University of Denver, Human Dynamics Laboratory, Denver, CO, USA. 2. University of Colorado Denver, Dept. of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Aurora, CO, USA; VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Aurora, CO, USA. 3. University of Denver, Human Dynamics Laboratory, Denver, CO, USA. Electronic address: bradley.davidson@du.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with transtibial amputation adopt trunk movement compensations that alter effort and increase the risk of developing low back pain. However, the effort required to achieve high-demand tasks, such as step ascent and descent, remains unknown. METHODS: Kinematics were collected during bilateral step ascent and descent tasks from two groups: 1) seven patients with unilateral transtibial amputation and 2) seven healthy control subjects. Trunk kinetic effort was quantified using translational and rotational segmental moments (time rate of change of segmental angular momentum). Peak moments during the loading period were compared across limbs and across groups. FINDINGS: During step ascent, patients with transtibial amputation generated larger sagittal trunk translational moments when leading with the amputated limb compared to the intact limb (P=0.01). The amputation group also generated larger trunk rotational moments in the frontal and transverse planes when leading with either limb compared to the healthy group (P=0.01, P<0.01, respectively). During step descent, the amputation group generated larger trunk translational and rotational moments in all three planes when leading with the intact limb compared to the healthy group (P<0.017). INTERPRETATION: This investigation identifies how differing trunk movement compensations, identified using the separation of angular momentum, require higher kinetic effort during stepping tasks in patients with transtibial amputation compared to healthy individuals. Compensations that produce identified increased and asymmetric trunk segmental moments, may increase the risk of the development of low back pain in patients with amputation.
BACKGROUND:Patients with transtibial amputation adopt trunk movement compensations that alter effort and increase the risk of developing low back pain. However, the effort required to achieve high-demand tasks, such as step ascent and descent, remains unknown. METHODS: Kinematics were collected during bilateral step ascent and descent tasks from two groups: 1) seven patients with unilateral transtibial amputation and 2) seven healthy control subjects. Trunk kinetic effort was quantified using translational and rotational segmental moments (time rate of change of segmental angular momentum). Peak moments during the loading period were compared across limbs and across groups. FINDINGS: During step ascent, patients with transtibial amputation generated larger sagittal trunk translational moments when leading with the amputated limb compared to the intact limb (P=0.01). The amputation group also generated larger trunk rotational moments in the frontal and transverse planes when leading with either limb compared to the healthy group (P=0.01, P<0.01, respectively). During step descent, the amputation group generated larger trunk translational and rotational moments in all three planes when leading with the intact limb compared to the healthy group (P<0.017). INTERPRETATION: This investigation identifies how differing trunk movement compensations, identified using the separation of angular momentum, require higher kinetic effort during stepping tasks in patients with transtibial amputation compared to healthy individuals. Compensations that produce identified increased and asymmetric trunk segmental moments, may increase the risk of the development of low back pain in patients with amputation.
Authors: Anastasia Protopapadaki; Wendy I Drechsler; Mary C Cramp; Fiona J Coutts; Oona M Scott Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2006-11-28 Impact factor: 2.063
Authors: Brecca M M Gaffney; Cory L Christiansen; Amanda M Murray; Anne K Silverman; Bradley S Davidson Journal: Hum Mov Sci Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 2.161
Authors: Kathryn Ziegler-Graham; Ellen J MacKenzie; Patti L Ephraim; Thomas G Travison; Ron Brookmeyer Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Jesse C Christensen; Paul W Kline; Amanda M Murray; Cory L Christiansen Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 2.063