Compensatory mechanisms in children with idiopathic lower extremity internal rotational malalignment during walking and running

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
S. Kimberly Byrnes ◽  
Demir Kunic ◽  
Roman Rethwilm ◽  
Harald Böhm ◽  
Thomas Horstmann ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (9) ◽  
pp. 2294-2302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis M. Day ◽  
Edward M. DelSole ◽  
Bryan M. Beaubrun ◽  
Peter L. Zhou ◽  
John Y. Moon ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuelle Ferrero ◽  
Barthelemy Liabaud ◽  
Vincent Challier ◽  
Renaud Lafage ◽  
Bassel G. Diebo ◽  
...  

OBJECT Previous forceplate studies analyzing the impact of sagittal-plane spinal deformity on pelvic parameters have demonstrated the compensatory mechanisms of pelvis translation in addition to rotation. However, the mechanisms recruited for this pelvic rotation were not assessed. This study aims to analyze the relationship between spinopelvic and lower-extremity parameters and clarify the role of pelvic translation. METHODS This is a retrospective study of patients with spinal deformity and full-body EOS images. Patients with only stenosis or low-back pain were excluded. Patients were grouped according to T-1 spinopelvic inclination (T1SPi): sagittal forward (forward, > 0.5°), neutral (−6.3° to 0.5°), or backward (< −6.3°). Pelvic translation was quantified by pelvic shift (sagittal offset between the posterosuperior corner of the sacrum and anterior cortex of the distal tibia), hip extension was measured using the sacrofemoral angle (SFA; the angle formed by the middle of the sacral endplate and the bicoxofemoral axis and the line between the bicoxofemoral axis and the femoral axis), and chin-brow vertical angle (CBVA). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the parameters and correlation with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). RESULTS In total, 336 patients (71% female; mean age 57 years; mean body mass index 27 kg/m2) had mean T1SPi values of −8.8°, −3.5°, and 5.9° in the backward, neutral, and forward groups, respectively. There were significant differences in the lower-extremity and spinopelvic parameters between T1SPi groups. The backward group had a normal lumbar lordosis (LL), negative SVA and pelvic shift, and the largest hip extension. Forward patients had a small LL and an increased SVA, with a large pelvic shift creating compensatory knee flexion. Significant correlations existed between lower-limb parameter and pelvic shift, pelvic tilt, T-1 pelvic angle, T1SPi, and sagittal vertical axis (0.3 < r < 0.8; p < 0.001). ODI was significantly correlated with knee flexion and pelvic shift. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study to describe full-body alignment in a large population of patients with spinal pathologies. Furthermore, patients categorized based on T1SPi were found to have significant differences in the pelvic shift and lower-limb compensatory mechanisms. Correlations between lower-limb angles, pelvic shift, and ODI were identified. These differences in compensatory mechanisms should be considered when evaluating and planning surgical intervention for adult patients with spinal deformity.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. S51
Author(s):  
Samantha R. Horn ◽  
Dennis Vasquez-Montes ◽  
Akhila Suré ◽  
Matthew Y. Siow ◽  
Gregory W. Poorman ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. S75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis M. Day ◽  
Bryan M. Beaubrun ◽  
Peter L. Zhou ◽  
John Y. Moon ◽  
Jared C. Tishelman ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christof Radler ◽  
Andreas Kranzl ◽  
Hans Michael Manner ◽  
Michaela Höglinger ◽  
Rudolf Ganger ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4, 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract To account for the effects of multiple impairments, evaluating physicians must provide a summary value that combines multiple impairments so the whole person impairment is equal to or less than the sum of all the individual impairment values. A common error is to add values that should be combined and typically results in an inflated rating. The Combined Values Chart in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, includes instructions that guide physicians about combining impairment ratings. For example, impairment values within a region generally are combined and converted to a whole person permanent impairment before combination with the results from other regions (exceptions include certain impairments of the spine and extremities). When they combine three or more values, physicians should select and combine the two lowest values; this value is combined with the third value to yield the total value. Upper extremity impairment ratings are combined based on the principle that a second and each succeeding impairment applies not to the whole unit (eg, whole finger) but only to the part that remains (eg, proximal phalanx). Physicians who combine lower extremity impairments usually use only one evaluation method, but, if more than one method is used, the physician should use the Combined Values Chart.


2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-4

Abstract Lesions of the peripheral nervous system (PNS), whether due to injury or illness, commonly result in residual symptoms and signs and, hence, permanent impairment. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fourth Edition, divides PNS deficits into sensory and motor and includes pain in the former. This article, which regards rating sensory and motor deficits of the lower extremities, is continued from the March/April 2000 issue of The Guides Newsletter. Procedures for rating extremity neural deficits are described in Chapter 3, The Musculoskeletal System, section 3.1k for the upper extremity and sections 3.2k and 3.2l for the lower limb. Sensory deficits and dysesthesia are both disorders of sensation, but the former can be interpreted to mean diminished or absent sensation (hypesthesia or anesthesia) Dysesthesia implies abnormal sensation in the absence of a stimulus or unpleasant sensation elicited by normal touch. Sections 3.2k and 3.2d indicate that almost all partial motor loss in the lower extremity can be rated using Table 39. In addition, Section 4.4b and Table 21 indicate the multistep method used for spinal and some additional nerves and be used alternatively to rate lower extremity weakness in general. Partial motor loss in the lower extremity is rated by manual muscle testing, which is described in the AMA Guides in Section 3.2d.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-16
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Kathryn Mueller ◽  
Steven Demeter ◽  
Randolph Soo Hoo
Keyword(s):  

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert H. Haralson

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, was published in November 2000 and contains major changes from its predecessor. In the Fourth Edition, all musculoskeletal evaluation and rating was described in a single chapter. In the Fifth Edition, this information has been divided into three separate chapters: Upper Extremity (13), Lower Extremity (14), and Spine (15). This article discusses changes in the spine chapter. The Models for rating spinal impairment now are called Methods. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, has reverted to standard terminology for spinal regions in the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) Method, and both it and the Range of Motion (ROM) Method now reference cervical, thoracic, and lumbar. Also, the language requiring the use of the DRE, rather than the ROM Method has been strengthened. The biggest change in the DRE Method is that evaluation should include the treatment results. Unfortunately, the Fourth Edition's philosophy regarding when and how to rate impairment using the DRE Model led to a number of problems, including the same rating of all patients with radiculopathy despite some true differences in outcomes. The term differentiator was abandoned and replaced with clinical findings. Significant changes were made in evaluation of patients with spinal cord injuries, and evaluators should become familiar with these and other changes in the Fifth Edition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document