| Literature DB >> 35795314 |
Anna Brzęk1, Andrzej Knapik2, Bogusław Brzęk3, Paweł Niemiec4, Piotr Przygodzki5, Ryszard Plinta2, Karol Szyluk1.
Abstract
Reduced physical activity or inappropriate training can cause the development of postural abnormalities. The aim of the present study was to determine the relationship between intensive, controlled physical activity, such as karate, and postural parameters. The study group consisted of 57 young karate competitors aged 9-12 years. The control group included 76 healthy, active children in similar age. The children's posture, activity level, and time in front of electronic devices were evaluated. The following body posture assessments were carried out: Adams' test, evaluation of the plumb line, evaluation of the kyphosis, and lordosis angles using a digital inclinometer and shoulder blade position measurements using a pediscoliometer. In the majority of cases, despite evidence of an increase or decrease in the values of the plumb line and scapulae level, the results were still within the normal ranges. In 71.93% of the examined karate-training children, a decrease in torso rotation was noted. The study revealed a visible difference in postural muscle strength by the Mathiass screening test (P < 0.00001). The children in the control group spent more time in front electronic devices than the karate-training children did (P < 0.007). Postural defects regression was more often observed in the study group than in the controls (P < 10-8). The frequency of postural defects stabilization was also significantly higher in the study group than in the control children (P = 0.001). Conversely, postural defects progression was significantly more frequent in the control group than in young karate competitors (P < 10-8). These differences remained significant in subgroups of girls and boys. Physical activity performed regularly and under the direction of a professional trainer can prevent postural disorders.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35795314 PMCID: PMC9251088 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5432743
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Figure 1Flow diagram for selection and inclusion criteria.
Figure 2The body posture assessment with classical certified tools in both groups: (a) torso rotation angle (ATR) by pediscoliometer; (b) the depth of thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis angles by a digital Sunders inclinometer TMX–127; (c) the plumb line; (d) position of the scapulas; (e) Mathiass test [30].
Comparison of pre- and postobservation values of measured parameters in the study group (karate training children).
| Parameter | First (initial) observation | Second (final) observation |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD (range) | 95% CI | Mean ± SD (range) | 95% CI | ||
| Plumb–line anal cleft (cm) | 0.24 ± 0.2 (0–0.5) | 0.13–0.26 | 0.29 ± 0.39 (0–1.5) | 0.19–0.40 | >0.051 |
| Scapulae level (°) | 0.98 ± 0.76 (0–2) | 0.77–1.18 | 2.17 ± 0.96 (0–4) | 1.92–2.43 | <0.000012 |
| Kyphosis angle (°) | 33.24 ± 3.33 (25–36) | 32.36–34.13 | 29.31 ± 2.53 (25–35) | 28.64–29.99 | <0.000011 |
| Lordosis angle (°) | 25.64 ± 2.08 (24–32) | 25.09–26.21 | 25.84 ± 1.52 (22–35) | 25.44–26.26 | >0.051 |
| Angle of trunk rotation C7–Th1 (°) | 1.47 ± 0.94 (0–3) | 1.23–1.17 | 0.59 ± 0.82 (0–3) | 0.37–0.81 | <0.000011 |
| Angle of trunk rotation Th (°) | 1.66 ± 1.07 (0–3) | 1.38–1.95 | 0.82 ± 0.8 (1–3) | 0.58–1.06 | <0.000011 |
| Angle of trunk rotation Th-L/L (°) | 1.98 ± 0.86 (1–3) | 1.75–2.2 | 2.07 ± 0.86 (0–4) | 1.84–2.29 | >0.051 |
| Sum of trunk rotation SHS (°) | 2.17 ± 0.82 (1–3) | 1.95–2.39 | 2.01 ± 1.66 (0–7) | 1.57–2.45 | >0.052 |
1Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables with nonnormal distribution; 2Student's t test for continuous variables with normal distribution; abbreviations: C: cervical spine; Th: thoracic spine; L: lumbar spine, Th–L: thoraco–lumbar spine; NORM of: plumb line anal cleft (0-0.5 cm), scapulae level (0-2°), kyphosis and lordosis angle (24-36°), angle of trunk rotation C7 – Th1 (0-3°), angle of trunk rotation Th (0-3°), and angle of trunk rotation Th-L/L (0-3°).
Comparison of pre- and postobservation values of measured parameters in the control group (active children).
| Parameter | First (initial) observation | Second (final) observation |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD (range) | 95% CI | Mean ± SD (range) | 95% CI | ||
| Plumb–line anal cleft (cm) | 0.37 ± 0.21 (0–0.5) | 0.32–0.42 | 0.71 ± 0.53 (0–2) | 0.59–0.83 | <0.000011 |
| Scapulae level (°) | 0.69 ± 0.68 (0–2) | 0.54–0.85 | 0.38 ± 0.84 (0–4) | 0.19–0.57 | <0.0011 |
| Kyphosis angle (°) | 30.02 ± 3.1 (24–36) | 29.31–30.73 | 32.29 ± 4.5 (23–42) | 31.26–33.32 | <0.000012 |
| Lordosis angle (°) | 31.42 ± 2.46 (24–32) | 30.86–31.98 | 32.87 ± 1.89 (22–35) | 32.44–33.31 | <0.000012 |
| Angle of trunk rotation C7–Th1 (°) | 1.84 ± 0.89 (1–3) | 1.63–2.04 | 2.84 ± 1.33 (0–6) | 2.59–3.19 | <0.000012 |
| Angle of trunk rotation Th (°) | 2.54 ± 0.7 (1–3) | 2.38–2.69 | 3.59 ± 1.85 (0–7) | 3.17–4.02 | <0.000012 |
| Angle of trunk rotation Th-L/L(°) | 2.35 ± 0.81 (1–3) | 2.17–2.54 | 3.19 ± 1.93 (1–7) | 2.76–3.64 | <0.000012 |
| Sum of trunk rotation SHS (°) | 2.77 ± 0.41 (2–3) | 2.68–2.87 | 5.68 ± 1.81 (0–9) | 5.27–6.09 | <0.000012 |
1Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables with nonnormal distribution; 2Student's t test for continuous variables with normal distribution; abbreviations: C: cervical spine; Th: thoracic spine; L: lumbar spine, Th–L: thoraco–lumbar spine; NORM of: plumb line anal cleft (0-0.5 cm), scapulae level (0-2°), kyphosis and lordosis angle (24-36°), angle of trunk rotation C7–Th1 (0-3°), angle of trunk rotation Th (0-3°), and angle of trunk rotation Th-L/L (0-3°).
Percentage values of body postural defects regression, stabilization, and progression in the study group (karate training children) and the control group (active children).
| Group | Sex |
| Postural defects | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | Stabilization | Progression | ||||||
|
| % |
| % |
| % | |||
| Study group | Girls | 33 | 17∗ | 51.52 | 8∗∗ | 24.24 | 8∗ | 24.24 |
| Boys | 24 | 10∗ | 41.67 | 7∗∗ | 29.17 | 7∗ | 29.17 | |
| Both sexes | 57 | 27∗ | 47.36 | 15∗ | 26.32 | 15∗ | 26.32 | |
| Control group | Girls | 32 | 1 | 3.13 | 1 | 3.13 | 30 | 93.75 |
| Boys | 44 | 2 | 4.58 | 3 | 6.82 | 39 | 88.64 | |
| Both sexes | 76 | 3 | 4.11 | 4 | 5.26 | 69 | 90.79 | |
∗ P < 0.05 vs. control group. ∗∗Not statistically significant (P > 0.025) after Bonferroni correction vs. control group.
Figure 3Number distribution of hours sitting at school (top) and at home (bottom), in both groups: study (a) and control (b).