K. Fewster, Jackie D. Zehr, Chad E. Gooyers, R. Parkinson, J. Callaghan
{"title":"Characterizing Lumbar Spine Kinematics and Kinetics During Simulated Low-Speed Rear Impact Collisions.","authors":"K. Fewster, Jackie D. Zehr, Chad E. Gooyers, R. Parkinson, J. Callaghan","doi":"10.1123/jab.2021-0189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nRecent work has demonstrated that low back pain is a common complaint following low-speed collisions. Despite frequent pain reporting, no studies involving human volunteers have been completed to examine the exposures in the lumbar spine during low-speed rear impact collisions.\n\n\nMETHODS\nTwenty-four participants were recruited and a custom-built crash sled simulated rear impact collisions, with a change in velocity of 8 km/h. Randomized collisions were completed with and without lumbar support. Inverse dynamics analyses were conducted, and outputs were used to generate estimates of peak L4/L5 joint compression and shear.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAverage (SD) peak L4/L5 compression and shear reaction forces were not significantly different without lumbar support (compression = 498.22 N [178.0 N]; shear = 302.2 N [98.5 N]) compared to with lumbar support (compression = 484.5 N [151.1 N]; shear = 291.3 N [176.8 N]). Lumbar flexion angle at the time of peak shear was 36° (12°) without and 33° (11°) with lumbar support.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nOverall, the estimated reaction forces were 14% and 30% of existing National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health occupational exposure limits for compression and shear during repeated lifting, respectively. Findings also demonstrate that, during a laboratory collision simulation, lumbar support does not significantly influence the total estimated L4/L5 joint reaction force.","PeriodicalId":54883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2021-0189","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Recent work has demonstrated that low back pain is a common complaint following low-speed collisions. Despite frequent pain reporting, no studies involving human volunteers have been completed to examine the exposures in the lumbar spine during low-speed rear impact collisions.
METHODS
Twenty-four participants were recruited and a custom-built crash sled simulated rear impact collisions, with a change in velocity of 8 km/h. Randomized collisions were completed with and without lumbar support. Inverse dynamics analyses were conducted, and outputs were used to generate estimates of peak L4/L5 joint compression and shear.
RESULTS
Average (SD) peak L4/L5 compression and shear reaction forces were not significantly different without lumbar support (compression = 498.22 N [178.0 N]; shear = 302.2 N [98.5 N]) compared to with lumbar support (compression = 484.5 N [151.1 N]; shear = 291.3 N [176.8 N]). Lumbar flexion angle at the time of peak shear was 36° (12°) without and 33° (11°) with lumbar support.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the estimated reaction forces were 14% and 30% of existing National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health occupational exposure limits for compression and shear during repeated lifting, respectively. Findings also demonstrate that, during a laboratory collision simulation, lumbar support does not significantly influence the total estimated L4/L5 joint reaction force.
期刊介绍:
The mission of the Journal of Applied Biomechanics (JAB) is to disseminate the highest quality peer-reviewed studies that utilize biomechanical strategies to advance the study of human movement. Areas of interest include clinical biomechanics, gait and posture mechanics, musculoskeletal and neuromuscular biomechanics, sport mechanics, and biomechanical modeling. Studies of sport performance that explicitly generalize to broader activities, contribute substantially to fundamental understanding of human motion, or are in a sport that enjoys wide participation, are welcome. Also within the scope of JAB are studies using biomechanical strategies to investigate the structure, control, function, and state (health and disease) of animals.