ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2016
A quantitative assessment of the mechanical effects on the lumbar spine and the effects on straight leg raising and lumbar flexion of segmental sustained rotation.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study were to examine the strength and relative direction of the applied force from lumbar segmental sustained rotation (LSSR) on the lumbar spinous process, and to clarify the effects of LSSR on straight leg raising (SLR) and lumbar flexion (LF). [Subjects] 18 pain-free healthy adults volunteered for this study. [Methods] Applied force and direction were measured between the L5-S1 segments using tri-axial pressure sensors. Subjects participated in 3 trials. Subjects underwent localized right rotation, held for 10 seconds, of the L5 in relation to the S1. Sham group subjects followed LSSR group protocols; however L5-S1 rotation was absent. Control subjects rested on a plinth. SLR and LF were measured pre and post-trial. [Results] Outcome data for LSSR forces were as follows; x (0.06N (±0.29)), y (‒5.26N (±0.01)), z (6.16N (±1.33)), and resultant vector magnitude (8.19N (±1.12)). LSSR relative direction results were as follows: x-axis angle, 89. 6 ° (±1.5); y-axis, 130.9 ° (±5.6); and z-axis, 41.6 ° (±4.7). The LSSR group's LF and SLR were significantly increased compared with those of the sham and control groups. [Conclusion] The identified resultant vector magnitude was 8.19N, less than other techniques. LSSR effectively improves LF and bilateral SLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.