ArticleBiology2022
Application of Wearable Sensors Technology for Lumbar Spine Kinematic Measurements during Daily Activities following Microdiscectomy Due to Severe Sciatica.
Article in Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating Lumbar Spine Foraminal Disc Measurements Using Ultrasound and X-Ray Imaging Through Advanced Image Annotation, Processing, and Mathematical Modeling During Chiropractic Traction Procedures: A Feasibility Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Wearable sensor technologies for individuals with back pain: a scoping review.Pain management · 2025Article
- Bioengineering Support in the Assessment and Rehabilitation of Low Back Pain.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Review Article: Diagnostic Paradigm Shift in Spine Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Optical Devices for the Diagnosis and Management of Spinal Cord Injuries: A Review.Biosensors · 2024Review
- Lumbar Kinematics Assessment of Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain in Three Bridge Tests Using Miniaturized Sensors.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Physical Activity and Ecological Means of Transport-Functional Assessment Methodology.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe recurrence rate of lumbar spine microdiscectomies (rLSMs) is estimated to be 5-15%. Lumbar spine flexion (LSF) of more than 10° is mentioned as the most harmful load to the intervertebral disc that could lead to recurrence during the first six postoperative weeks. The purpose of this study is to quantify LSFs, following LSM, at the period of six weeks postoperatively.
methodsLSFs were recorded during the daily activities of 69 subjects for 24 h twice per week, using Inertial Measurement Units (IMU).
resultsThe mean number of more than 10 degrees of LSFs per hour were: 41.3/h during the 1st postoperative week (P.W.) (29.9% healthy subjects-H.S.), 2nd P.W. 60.1/h (43.5% H.S.), 3rd P.W. 74.2/h (53.7% H.S.), 4th P.W. 82.9/h (60% H.S.), 5th P.W. 97.3/h (70.4% H.S.) and 6th P.W. 105.5/h (76.4% H.S.).
conclusionsLSFs constitute important risk factors for rLDH. Our study records the lumbar spine kinematic pattern of such patients for the first time during their daily activities. Patients' data report less sagittal plane movements than healthy subjects. In vitro studies should be carried out, replicating our results to identify if such a kinematic pattern could cause rLDH. Furthermore, IMU biofeedback capabilities could protect patients from such harmful movements.
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.