scholarly journals Socket Versus Bone-Anchored Trans-Femoral Prostheses: Hip Range of Motion and Sitting Comfort

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Hagberg ◽  
E. Häggström ◽  
M. Uden ◽  
R. Brånemark
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Prosthetic Socket ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Motion ◽  
Hip Flexion

This is the first study to report on hip range of motion (ROM) among active prosthesis users, when wearing and not wearing a trans-femoral socket prosthesis and to compare with individuals rehabilitated with an osseointegrated bone-anchored prosthesis. In addition, discomfort when sitting with the prosthesis is reported in both groups. The study group all had a non-vascular amputation and were divided into those supplied with a socket prosthesis (S group) ( n = 43, mean age 51 years, 74% men) or a bone-anchored prosthesis (OI group) ( n = 20, mean age 46 years, 75% men). Active hip ROM was measured with a goniometer, and self-reported problems with discomfort when sitting were recorded. The hip motion decreased in all directions when wearing the socket prosthesis compared to without it ( P < 0.001 for all directions), and 37% of the subjects had less than 90° of hip flexion when wearing their prosthesis. Discomfort when sitting was reported among 44% ( n = 19) in the S group and was more common among individuals with less than 90° of hip flexion motion ( P = 0.025). In the OI group, no restriction in hip motion was measured with the prosthesis, and no subject had less than 90° of flexion and 5% ( n = 1) reported discomfort when sitting. This study shows that a trans-femoral prosthetic socket significantly reduces the ROM of the hip and that discomfort when sitting is common among individuals wearing such prostheses. Further, the study confirms that individuals using a bone-anchored prosthesis have no restricted hip motion with the prosthesis and report very few problems with discomfort when sitting.

scholarly journals Do hip-abduction braces work?—A biomechanical evaluation of a commercially available hip brace

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roman Michalik ◽  
Katrin Essing ◽  
Ben Rohof ◽  
Matthias Gatz ◽  
Filippo Migliorini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Joint ◽  
Inertial Sensor ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Abduction ◽  
Hip Motion ◽  
Biomechanical Evaluation ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Hip Flexion

Abstract Introduction Dislocations of the hip joint are a common and clinically relevant complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Hip-abduction braces are currently used following operative or non-operative treatment of THA dislocations to prevent re-dislocations. However, the clinical and biomechanical effectiveness of such braces is still controversial. Material and methods A total of 30 volunteers were measured during standing and during sitting up and down from a chair task wearing a hip brace set at 70°, 90° or no hip flexion limitation. Range of motion of the hip joint was measured in all directions by an inertial sensor system. Further it has been evaluated if the range of motion would be reduced by the additional use of an arthrodesis cushion. Results The use of a hip brace set up with flexion limitation did reduce hip ROM in all directions significantly compared to unhinged brace (p < 0.001–0.035). Performing the “sit down and stand-up task” the brace set up at 70° flexion limitation did reduce maximum hip flexion significantly (p = 0.008). However, in most cases the measured hip flexion angles were greater than the settings of the hip brace should have allowed. The additional use of a cushion can further limit hip motion while sitting up and down from a chair. Conclusion This study has demonstrated that hip-abduction braces reduce hip range of motion. However, we also found that to achieve a flexion limitation of the hip to 90°, the hip brace should be set at a 70° hip flexion limitation.

scholarly journals Reliability of hip range of motion measurement among experienced arthroscopic hip preservation surgeons

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D Harris ◽  
Richard C Mather ◽  
Shane J Nho ◽  
John P Salvo ◽  
Allston J Stubbs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Pelvic Tilt ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Motion Measurement ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Asymptomatic Volunteers ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
Hip Internal Rotation ◽  
Intra Class Correlation Coefficient

Abstract The aim of this study was to determine (i) the reliability of hip range of motion measurement among experienced arthroscopic hip preservation surgeons and (ii) the magnitude of hip flexion change with posterior pelvic tilt. Five experienced arthroscopic hip preservation surgeons (5–18 years of hip surgery experience) performed passive hip range of motion (internal and external rotation), flexion (contralateral hip extended) and flexion with posterior pelvic tilt (contralateral hip maximally flexed) on five young healthy asymptomatic volunteers (three males, two females; 34.4 ± 10.7 years of age). Motion was measured via digital photography and goniometry. Inter-observer reliability was calculated via two-way mixed, single measures, intra-class correlation coefficient. Paired t-test was utilized to compare hip flexion (with contralateral hip extended) to hip flexion with posterior pelvic tilt (with contralateral hip in forced flexion). The reliabilities of measurements of hip flexion with posterior pelvic tilt and external rotation were excellent, that of hip flexion was fair, and that of hip internal rotation was poor. The magnitude of hip flexion increase with posterior pelvic tilt was 17.0° ± 3.0° (P &lt; 0.001). The reliability of hip range of motion measurement by five experienced arthroscopic hip preservation surgeons was excellent for measures of hip flexion with posterior pelvic tilt and external rotation. Contralateral maximal hip flexion significantly increased ipsilateral hip flexion (approximately 17°). Level of Evidence: Diagnostic, level III (without consistently applied reference standard)

Normal Adult Hip Range of Motion Focusingon Hip Flexion

2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 361
Author(s):  
Keun Woo Kim ◽  
Tae Hoon Lee ◽  
Woo Dong Nam ◽  
Kee Hyung Rhyu
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Normal Adult ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Flexion

scholarly journals Relationship Between Upper Limb Injuries and Hip Range of Motion in Elementary and Junior High School Baseball Players

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 232596712097091
Author(s):  
Noritaka Hamano ◽  
Hitoshi Shitara ◽  
Tsuyoshi Tajika ◽  
Takuro Kuboi ◽  
Tsuyoshi Ichinose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Junior High School ◽  
Junior High ◽  
Baseball Players ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Elbow Injuries ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dominant Side

Background: Shoulder and elbow injuries are major problems in baseball players. Tightness of the upper extremities has been reported as a risk factor for shoulder and elbow injuries in elementary and junior high school baseball players. However, few studies have been conducted on the relationship between decreased hip range of motion (ROM) and shoulder and elbow injuries. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to prospectively examine the relationship between hip ROM and throwing-related shoulder and elbow injuries in elementary and junior high school baseball players. The hypothesis was that players with unrestricted ROM in the hip would have a reduced risk of upper extremity injuries. Methods: The study included 263 baseball players (mean ± SD age, 10.5 ± 1.3 years; range, 7-14 years). The following physical parameters were assessed: (1) hip flexion ROM measured in the supine position and (2) hip internal and external rotation in the prone position. After the season, players completed questionnaires regarding shoulder and/or elbow injuries. For comparison, the players were classified as injured (not able to play for ≥8 days because of shoulder and/or elbow problems) or noninjured. Results: During the season, 52 players had shoulder and/or elbow injuries. When the injured and noninjured groups were compared, hip flexion on the dominant side (121.5° ± 12.0° vs 126.7° ± 9.8°, respectively; P < .01), hip flexion on the nondominant side (119.6° ± 11.7° vs 126.0° ± 9.9°, respectively; P < .01), and internal rotation on the dominant side (52.5° ± 11.3° vs 56.8° ± 10.8°, respectively; P = .01) were significantly reduced in the injured group. Conclusion: We identified preseason decreases in flexion bilaterally and internal rotation on the dominant side as risk factors for shoulder and elbow injuries in elementary and junior high school baseball players. Further studies are required to prevent disabilities in elementary and junior high school baseball players through development of prevention and intervention programs.

scholarly journals Less hip range of motion is associated with a greater alpha angle in people with longstanding hip and groin pain

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
August Estberger ◽  
Anders Pålsson ◽  
Ioannis Kostogiannis ◽  
Eva Ageberg
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Groin Pain ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Good Sensitivity ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Flexion

Abstract Purpose A higher alpha angle has been proposed to correlate with lower hip range of motion, but the association in people with longstanding hip and groin pain is currently unclear. The aims were to: (1) assess the association between range of motion and alpha angle in patients with longstanding hip and groin pain; (2) examine if a cut-off value in range of motion variables could identify patients with an alpha angle above or below 60°. Methods Seventy-two participants were consecutively recruited from an orthopaedic department after referral for hip- and groin-related pain. Passive hip range of motion was measured in flexion, internal rotation with 90° hip flexion, internal rotation in neutral hip position, external rotation with 90° hip flexion, and abduction. The alpha angle was calculated from a frog-leg lateral radiograph. Linear regression examined the association between range of motion and alpha angle, and an ROC-curve analysis was performed to identify the sensitivity and specificity of range of motion cut-offs. Results Lower range of motion in internal rotation in flexion, external rotation, and abduction were associated with higher alpha angle. Internal rotation of 27° or less displayed good sensitivity (81%) and specificity (85%) to detect an alpha angle above 60°, while a cut-off of 41° in external rotation and 27° in abduction showed a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 50% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion Less internal rotation in flexion, external rotation, and abduction are associated with a greater alpha angle in a cohort of people with longstanding hip and groin pain. A cut-off of 27° in internal rotation has good sensitivity and specificity to identify people with an alpha angle above or below 60° and have the potential to be used in the clinical setting to identify patients that require further imaging, or that are unlikely to have cam morphology. Level of evidence II.

Legal Update: North Dakota Supreme Court: Third Edition of Guides is “Most Current”

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-7
Author(s):  
James J. Mangraviti
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Hip Motion ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
Hip Rotation ◽  
Hip Extension

Abstract The accurate measurement of hip motion is critical when one rates impairments of this joint, makes an initial diagnosis, assesses progression over time, and evaluates treatment outcome. The hip permits all motions typical of a ball-and-socket joint. The hip sacrifices some motion but gains stability and strength. Figures 52 to 54 in AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fourth Edition, illustrate techniques for measuring hip flexion, loss of extension, abduction, adduction, and external and internal rotation. Figure 53 in the AMA Guides, Fourth Edition, illustrates neutral, abducted, and adducted positions of the hip and proper alignment of the goniometer arms, and Figure 52 illustrates use of a goniometer to measure flexion of the right hip. In terms of impairment rating, hip extension (at least any beyond neutral) is irrelevant, and the AMA Guides contains no figures describing its measurement. Figure 54, Measuring Internal and External Hip Rotation, demonstrates proper positioning and measurement techniques for rotary movements of this joint. The difference between measured and actual hip rotation probably is minimal and is irrelevant for impairment rating. The normal internal rotation varies from 30° to 40°, and the external rotation ranges from 40° to 60°.

Determinants of passive hip range of motion in adult Greyhounds

2007 ◽  
Vol 85 (6) ◽  
pp. 217-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
HL Nicholson ◽  
PG Osmotherly ◽  
BA Smith ◽  
CM McGowan
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document