Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32502794›Full record

ArticleGait & posture2020

Infant carrying method impacts caregiver posture and loading during gait and item retrieval.

Kathryn L Havens, Anna C Severin, David B Bumpass, Erin M Mannen

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gait & posture, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kathryn L HavensDivision of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 East Alcazar Street, CHP-155, Los Angeles, CA 90033, United States. Electronic address: khavens@usc.edu.
Anna C SeverinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Slot 531, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States. Electronic address: aseverin@uams.edu.
David B BumpassDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Slot 531, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States. Electronic address: erinmannen@boisestate.edu.
Erin M MannenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Slot 531, Little Rock, AR 72205, United States; Center for Orthopaedic Biomechanics, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, University of Denver, 2115 East Wesley Avenue, Denver, CO 80208, United States. Electronic address: emannen@uams.edu.
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences · USUniversity of Denver · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

Understanding the Negative Prognostic Impact of Intraosseous Focal Lesions in Multiple MyelomaP20GM125503 · NIGMS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI Sanja Novak · 2018 to 2026
$23.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM125503
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman babies are carried by their caregivers during infancy, and the use of ergonomic aids to wear the baby on the body has recently grown in popularity. However, the effects of wearing or holding a baby in-arms on an individual's mechanics during gait and a common object retrieval task are not fully understood. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the differences in: 1) spatiotemporal, lower extremity kinematics, and ground reaction force variables during gait, and 2) technique, center of mass motion, and kinematics during an object retrieval task between holding and wearing an infant mannequin?

methodsIn this prospective biomechanics study, 10 healthy females performed over-ground walking and an object retrieval task in three conditions, holding: (1) nothing (unloaded), (2) an infant mannequin in-arms, and (3) an infant mannequin in a baby carrier. Mechanics were compared using repeated measures ANOVA.

resultsDuring gait, greater vertical ground reaction force and impulse and braking force was found during the in-arms and carrier conditions compared to unloaded. Significant but small (<5°) differences were found between conditions in lower extremity kinematics. Increased back extension was found during carrier and in-arms compared to unloaded. Step length was the only spatiotemporal parameter that differed between conditions. During object retrieval, most participants used a squatting technique to retrieve the object from the floor. They maintained a more upright posture, with less trunk flexion and anteroposterior movement of their center of mass, and also did not try to fold forward over their hips during the two loaded conditions. Lower extremity kinematics did not differ between unloaded and carrier, suggesting that babywearing may promote more similar lower extremity mechanics to not carrying anything. SIGNIFICANCE: Holding or wearing an infant provides a mechanical constraint that impacts the forces and kinematics, which has implications for caregivers' pain and dysfunction.

Indexed as

CaregiversGaitPostureWeight-BearingAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaErgonomicsFemaleHumansInfantLower ExtremityProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularTorsoYoung AdultAttachment parentingBabywearingCarryingLoad carriageLow back pain

Identifiers

PMID32502794
PMCPMC9423689
OpenAlexW3024559106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.