Affiliations: [a] Science and Research Center of Body Posture, Kazimiera Milanowska College of Education and Therapy, Poznań, Poland | [b] University of Silesia in Katowice, Katowice, Poland | [c] Department of Anthropology, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland | [d] Department of Recreology and Biological Regeneration, University School of Physical Education, Cracow, Poland | [e] Department of Informatics and Medical Equipment, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Robert Walaszek, Department of Recreology and Biological Regeneration, University School of Physical Education, Al. Jana Pawła II 78, 31-571, Cracow, Poland. E-mail: robertwalaszek63@gmail.com.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Disturbances in pelvic girdle tilt can cause compensatory changes affecting postural dysfunctions, and can lead to hip and groin strain changes and back pain. However, we still have no clear information on the normative values of pelvic girdle tilt and mobility. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to (1) evaluate the position and mobility of the pelvic girdle in the sagittal and frontal planes in asymptomatic adults aged 19–30, (2) evaluate the possible variation of results according to gender and to develop a proposal for normative values, and (3) evaluate whether body mass, height and BMI are related to the magnitude of hip girdle position and mobility. METHODS: The research was conducted in a sample group consisting of 346 men and women using the scaled form of the anthropometric level of the Duometr® The values of position and mobility of the pelvic girdle in the sagittal and frontal planes were analyzed. RESULTS: Differences were noted in the values of the pelvic tilt (p= 0.033) between the men and women. The women showed slightly higher values of posterior range of motion (p= 0.0002) and total range of motion (p= 0.002). The other parameters did not show any significant variation. There was no clear association between body weight, height and BMI and the study variables, except for a small, significant correlation between BMI and posterior pelvic tilt in women (r= 0.175, p= 0.005). In the frontal plane there were no differences in the analyzed variables in terms of gender or side of the body measured. CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between the anthropometric variables and the pelvic girdle tilt and mobility. No size variation by gender was observed in the frontal plane. Slight differences were observed in the sagittal plane. Normative values are proposed.
Keywords: Pelvic tilt, lateral pelvic tilt, pelvic range of motion, measurements, Duometr
