Purpose and Background. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSD) can affect 56–80% of physiotherapists. Patient handling is reported as a significant risk factor for developing WRMSD with the back most frequently injured. Physiotherapists perform therapeutic handling to manually assist and facilitate patients’ movement to aid rehabilitation, which can increase physiotherapists risk of experiencing high forces during patient handling. Methods and Results. A descriptive cross-sectional study was completed to explore and quantitatively measure the movement of ten physiotherapists during patient handling, over one working day, in a neurological setting. A wearable 3-dimensional motion analysis system, Xsens (Movella, Henderson, NV), was used to measure physiotherapist movement and postures in the ward setting during patient treatment sessions. The resulting joint angles were reported descriptively and compared against a frequently used ergonomic assessment tool, the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Physiotherapists adopted four main positions during patient handling tasks: 1) kneeling; 2) half-kneeling; 3) standing; and 4) sitting. Eight patient handling tasks were identified and described: 1) Lie-to-sit; 2) sit-to-lie; 3) sit-to-stand; facilitation of 4) upper limb; 5) lower limb; 6) trunk; and 7) standing treatments; and 8) walking facilitation. Kneeling and sitting positions demonstrated greater neck extension and greater lumbosacral flexion during treatments which scores highly with the RULA. Conclusion. This research identified that patient treatment tasks were more often performed in kneeling or sitting positions than standing. Current moving and handling guidance teaches moving and handling in a standing position; loading and stresses experienced by the physiotherapists may differ in sitting or kneeling positions. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. None. This work has been presented as a poster at the CSP conference Glasgow 2023

Spinal Biomechanics Lab, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. Documenting the patterns and frequency of collapse in non-operatively managed spine fractures, using a motion analysis software. Retrospective analysis of prospective case series. 105 patients with thoracic or lumbar fractures, were neurologically intact, and treated non-operatively for the ‘stable’ injury at our unit between June 2003 and May 2006. The mean age of the cohort was 46.9 yrs. Serial radiographs (mean 4 radiographs/patient; range 2 – 9) were analysed using motion analysis software for collapse at the fracture site. We defined collapse as a reduction of anterior or posterior vertebral body height greater than 15% of the endplate AP width, or a change in the angle between the inferior and superior endplates > 5°. The changes were assessed on serial radiographs performed at a mean of 5.6 mo (95% CI 4.1 – 7.1 mo) after the initial injury. 11% showed anterior collapse, 7.6% had posterior collapse, 14% had collapse apparent as vertebral body wedging, and 17% had any form of collapse. ODI scores were obtained in 35 patients at the time of the last available radiograph. There were no significant differences in ODI scores that could be associated with the presence of any form of collapse (p > 0.8 for anterior collapse; and p = 0.18 for posterior collapse). This pilot study with the motion analysis software demonstrates that some fractures are more likely to collapse with time. We hope to carry this work forward by way of a prospective study with a control on other variables that are likely to affect the pattern and probability of post-fracture collapse, including age, bone density, vertebral level, activity level, fracture type

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of the Aspen, Aspen Vista, Philadelphia, Miami-J and Miami-J Advanced collars at restricting cervical spine movement in the sagittal, coronal and axial planes.

Background. Trunk muscle activity and thoraco-lumbar kinematics have been shown to discriminate non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) subgroups from healthy controls. Thoracic spine kinematics and muscle activity whilst intuitively associated with NSCLBP, has received less attention and the possibility of intra-regional interactions remains an area for exploration. Purpose. Determine relationships between muscle activation and kinematics in active extension pattern (AEP) and flexion pattern (FP) subgroups and no-low back pain controls during a sagittal bending task. Methods. Fifty NSCLBP subjects (27 FP, 23 AEP) and 28 healthy controls underwent 3D motion analysis (Vicon™) and surface electromyography whilst bending to retrieve a pen from the floor. Mean sagittal angle for the upper and lower thoracic and lumbar regions (UTx, LTx, ULx, LLx) were compared with normalised mean amplitude electromyography of 4 bilateral trunk muscles. Pearson correlations were computed to assess relationships. Results. Significant relationships between lumbar multifidus and ULx/LLx were identified in AEP during bending and return (p<0.01). FP exhibited multiple significant interactions including between longissimus thoracis and lumbar multifidus and LLx/LTx (p<0.035); and external oblique activity and UTx/LTx (p<0.05) during bending and return (and LLx during bending). Correlations were moderate to strong (r= −0.812 to 0.664). Conclusion. Kinematic and trunk muscle activity measurements differentiated between NSCLBP sub-groups and controls, especially between LLx kinematics and lumbar multifidus activity. Contrasting muscle activation patterns between LLx and LTx regions in FP highlights the importance of regional thoracic measurements, and suggests likely compensation strategies. Replication during other tasks should be evaluated in future studies. No conflicts of interest. Funding provided by Versus Arthritis (Formerly Arthritis Research UK)

Background and Purpose of Study:. Differences in regional lumbar angles in sitting have been observed between subgroups of NSCLBP patients exhibiting motor control impairments (MCI) (O'Sullivan, 2005; Dankaerts et al, 2006). However, differences in standing posture and other spinal regions are unknown. This study aimed to compare regional spinal angles in healthy and MCI subgroups in sitting and standing. Methods:. An observational, cross-sectional study investigated spinal kinematics of 28 Flexion Pattern (FP), 23 Active Extension Pattern (AEP) (O'Sullivan, 2005) and 28 healthy controls using 3D motion analysis (Vicon) during usual sitting and standing. Mean sagittal angle for Total Lumbar (TotLx), Total Thoracic (TotTx), Upper Thoracic (UTx), Lower Thoracic (LTx), Upper Lumbar (ULx) and Lower Lumbar (LLx) regions between groups were compared using one-way ANOVA. Results:. No differences in total thoracic and lumbar regions were observed, except TotLx in sitting between FP and AEP (Mean Difference (MD)=15.81°, p=0.003). Significant differences were observed in ULx and LTx for standing and sitting between FP and AEP (ULx Standing MD=9.89°, p=0.003; ULx Sitting MD=12.32°, p=0.000; LTx Standing MD=7.57°, p=0.05; LTx Sitting MD=11.72°, p=0.001) with AEP demonstrating greater extension in these regions. FP exhibited greater flexion compared to controls in ULx and LTx, except LTx in standing (ULx Standing MD=7.69°, p=0.018; ULx Sitting MD=6.96°, p=0.014; LTx Sitting MD=11.28°, p=0.001). No differences between AEP and controls were observed in sitting or standing. Conclusion:. Observing subdivided regional spinal angles is key to identifying MCI sub-group differences, with ULx and LTx able to discriminate between FP and AEP, and FP and healthy controls. This abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national meeting. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: Arthritis Research UK / Presidents Research Scholarship, Cardiff University

Objectives

Many studies have investigated the kinematics of the lumbar spine and the morphological features of the lumbar discs. However, the segment-dependent immediate changes of the lumbar intervertebral space height during flexion-extension motion are still unclear. This study examined the changes of intervertebral space height during flexion-extension motion of lumbar specimens.