ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2023
A prophylactic lumbosacral brace and the biomechanics of parachute landing.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumbar injuries are common among paratroopers during landing maneuvers. Although bracing is widely advocated to increase spine stability, the effect of lumbar bracing on parachuting has yet to be quantified and the Chinese parachutist does not have a uniform prophylactic brace. The aim is to compare the effects of a novel, self-designed and self-manufactured lumbosacral brace with two ordinary lumbar braces based on biomechanical assessment of the lumbar and lower extremity joints during parachute landing. Methods: The study cohort consisted of 30 elite male paratroopers. Each participant was instructed to jump off a platform at two different heights (60 and 120 cm, respectively) and land on the force plate in a half-squat posture. Participants at each height were tested under four different conditions (no brace, elastic brace, semi-rigid brace, and lumbosacral brace). The Vicon 3D motion capture system and force plate were used to record and calculate biomechanical data, such as vertical ground reaction forces (vGRFs), joint angles, moments, and energy absorption. After the experiment, every participant completed the study questionnaires. Results: The increase of the jumping height raised all the parameters significantly (P<0.01). The use of all three braces slightly decreased vGRF, and reduced the lumbar angle, moment, and angular velocity in the sagittal plane. The use of lumbosacral and semi-rigid braces restricted lumbar flexion more efficiently (P<0.05), and significantly increased the energy absorption of the hip joints (P<0.01) and hip flexion (P<0.01) at 120 cm. No significant effect of braces was found on the motion of knee and ankle joints. The subjective scores suggested that the lumbosacral brace was softer and more comfortable than the semi-rigid brace, and more effective than the elastic brace. Conclusions: The lumbosacral brace markedly restricted the lumbar motion in the sagittal plane than the elastic brace and was more comfortable than the semi-rigid brace. Therefore, the innovative design, high efficiency, and comfortable landing of the lumbosacral brace represent a reliable option for parachute jumping and training.
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.