Affiliations: [a] Biomechanics/Sports Medicine Laboratory, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA | [b] Anthropometry and Biomechanics Facility, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, USA | [c] Tennessee Sports Medicine Group, Knoxville, TN, USA
Correspondence:
[*]
Address for correspondence: Songning Zhang, PHD, Director Biomechanics/Sports Medicine Laboratory, Department of Exercise, Sport and Leisure Studies, The University of Tennessee, 1914 Andy Holt Avenue, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA. Tel.: +1 865 974 4716; Fax: +1 865 974 8981; E-mail: szhang@utk.edu
Abstract: The purpose for this study was to examine efficacy of two spinal ortheses, a lumbar orthosis (LO) and a lumbosacral orthoses (LSO), in limiting spinal range of motion (ROM). Seventeen healthy male participants were instructed to perform three trials for trunk flexion, extension, and lateral bending in two orthoses, ProLign LO and UltraLign LSO (DeRoyal Industries, Inc.), and in an un-braced condition. A digital video camera was used to obtain kinematic data from the right sagittal and posterior views. Retroreflective markers and/or wands were used to monitor the motions of the hip, 1st thoracic vertebra (C7-T1), and 1st (T12-L1) and 5th (L5-S1) lumbar vertebrae during trunk flexion and extension as well as the motions of the C7-T1, T12-L1 and L5-S1 during lateral flexion. Selected variables were evaluated using a one-way analysis of variance with post hoc comparisons (P<0.05). Both orthoses were effective in restricting intervertebral movements in the three trunk movements. UltraLign LSO provided greater spinal restriction on ROM in all three trunk movements. ProLign LO offered less restriction on the lumbar movements compared to UltraLign LSO, but was still effective in the reduction of lumbar intervertebral segmental mobility compared to the no-brace trials.
Keywords: Orthoses, lumbar orthoses, lumbosacral orthoses, range of motion, spine
