Iman Shojaei1, Brad D Hendershot2, Julian C Acasio3, Christopher L Dearth2, Matthew Ballard1, Babak Bazrgari4. 1. F. Joseph Halcomb III, M.D. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA. 2. DoD-VA Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence, Bethesda, MD, USA; Research and Development Section, Department of Rehabilitation, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Research and Development Section, Department of Rehabilitation, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. F. Joseph Halcomb III, M.D. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA. Electronic address: babak.bazrgari@uky.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alterations and asymmetries in trunk motions during activities of daily living, involving lower extremities, are suggested to cause higher spinal loads in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Given the repetitive nature of most activities of daily living, knowledge of the amount of increase in spinal loads is important for designing interventions aimed at prevention of secondary low back pain due to potential fatigue failure of spinal tissues. The objective of this study was to determine differences in trunk muscle forces and spinal loads between persons with and without lower limb amputation when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit tasks. METHODS: Kinematics of the pelvis and thorax, obtained from ten males with unilateral transfemoral lower limb amputation and 10 male uninjured controls when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit activities, were used within a non-linear finite element model of the spine to estimate trunk muscle forces and resultant spinal loads. FINDINGS: The peak compression force, medio-lateral (only during stand-to-sit), and antero-posterior shear forces were respectively 348 N, 269 N, and 217 N larger in person with vs. without amputation. Persons with amputation also experienced on average 171 N and 53 N larger mean compression force and medio-lateral shear force, respectively. INTERPRETATION: While spinal loads were larger in persons with amputation, these loads were generally smaller than the reported threshold for spinal tissue injury. However, a rather small increase in spinal loads during common activities of daily living like walking, sit-to-stand, and stand-to-sit may nevertheless impose a significant risk of fatigue failure for spinal tissues due to the repetitive nature of these activities.
BACKGROUND: Alterations and asymmetries in trunk motions during activities of daily living, involving lower extremities, are suggested to cause higher spinal loads in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Given the repetitive nature of most activities of daily living, knowledge of the amount of increase in spinal loads is important for designing interventions aimed at prevention of secondary low back pain due to potential fatigue failure of spinal tissues. The objective of this study was to determine differences in trunk muscle forces and spinal loads between persons with and without lower limb amputation when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit tasks. METHODS: Kinematics of the pelvis and thorax, obtained from ten males with unilateral transfemoral lower limb amputation and 10 male uninjured controls when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit activities, were used within a non-linear finite element model of the spine to estimate trunk muscle forces and resultant spinal loads. FINDINGS: The peak compression force, medio-lateral (only during stand-to-sit), and antero-posterior shear forces were respectively 348 N, 269 N, and 217 N larger in person with vs. without amputation. Persons with amputation also experienced on average 171 N and 53 N larger mean compression force and medio-lateral shear force, respectively. INTERPRETATION: While spinal loads were larger in persons with amputation, these loads were generally smaller than the reported threshold for spinal tissue injury. However, a rather small increase in spinal loads during common activities of daily living like walking, sit-to-stand, and stand-to-sit may nevertheless impose a significant risk of fatigue failure for spinal tissues due to the repetitive nature of these activities.
Authors: Pieter Coenen; Idsart Kingma; Cécile R L Boot; Paulien M Bongers; Jaap H van Dieën Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Brad D Hendershot; Iman Shojaei; Julian C Acasio; Christopher L Dearth; Babak Bazrgari Journal: J Biomech Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Julian C Acasio; Iman Shojaei; Rajit Banerjee; Christopher L Dearth; Babak Bazrgari; Brad D Hendershot Journal: J Biomech Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 2.712