Lumbar Sagittal Plane Mobility and Lordosis in the Well Elderly as Related to Gender and Activity Level

Relation between posture and spine and pelvis flexibility: a systematic review

Abstract Introduction: Changes in body structure positioning are associated with muscle flexibility and joint mobility, but evidence of this relationship is still incipient. Objective: To identify evidences of correlation between parameters regarding static body posture in orthostasis and spine and pelvis flexibility and/or mobility. Methods: Systematic review guided by the PRISMA Statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration (PROSPERO: CRD42015026298). A search of the BIREME, EMBASE, PubMed and Science Direct databases was carried out, considering the beginning of the databases until January 16, 2017, with the terms and Boolean operators “posture” AND “spine” OR “pelvis” AND “range of motion, articular” OR “movement”. To be included in the review, studies should present observational or clinical trial methodological designs, have sampled healthy individuals, present correlation or association test results between static posture and mobility/flexibility in the sagittal plane, and be published in Spanish, English or Portuguese. The methodological quality was evaluated by the Downs & Black scale and evidence by the GRADE system. Results: A total of 5,326 studies were obtained, seven of which were included after the establishment of the eligibility criteria. All studies presented high methodological quality, although a considerable heterogeneity regarding the choice of instruments and evaluation protocols was noted, reflecting contradictory results. Therefore, the present systematic review presents a moderate strength of evidence. Conclusion: No definitive evidence is yet available concerning the possible relationship between body posture and spine and pelvis flexibility and mobility.

Effect of age and sex on lumbar lordosis and the range of motion. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Lumbar lordosis (LL) and the range of motion (RoM) are important physiological measurements when initiating any diagnosis and treatment plan for patients with low back pain. Numerous studies reported differences in LL and the RoM due to age and sex. However, these findings remain contradictory. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to synthesize mean values and the differences in LL and the RoM because of age and sex. The quality assessment tool for quantitative studies was applied to assess the methodological quality of the studies included. We identified 2372 papers through electronic (2309) and physical (63) searches. We assessed 218 full-text studies reporting measurements of LL or the RoM. In total, 65 studies were included, and a normative database for LL and the RoM is provided as supplementary material. Among these, 11 were included in the meta-analysis. LL and the RoM displayed non-monotonic variations with significant age and sex differences. Young females showed a significantly greater LL and the range of extension (RoE), whereas young males exhibited a greater range of flexion (RoF). Sex differences in the range of lateral bending (RoLB) were small but were significant for the axial rotation (RoAR). For the RoF, RoE and RoLB, differences because of age were significant among most of the age groups in both sexes, whereas for the RoAR, differences were significant only between the 20s vs the 30s-40s (males) and 40s vs 50s (females). Significant differences because of age/sex were identified. However, the age-dependent reduction in LL and the RoM was non-monotonic and differed in both sexes. These findings will help to better distinguish between functional deficits caused by spinal disorders and natural factors/conditions related to age and sex.

The distribution of lumbar intervertebral angles in upright standing and extension is related to low back pain developed during standing

BACKGROUND

Lumbar lordosis measures are poorly related to clinical low back pain, however using a controlled exposure such as prolonged standing to identify pain groups may clarify this relationship. The purpose of this study was to determine the distribution of lumbar intervertebral angles in asymptomatic persons who do (pain developers) and do not (non-pain developers) develop low back pain during standing.

METHODS

Sagittal plane lumbar spine radiographs of eight pain developers and eight non-pain developers were taken in three poses: upright standing, full extension and full flexion. Measures of vertebral end plate orientations from L1 to S1 were taken in each pose to compute: intervertebral angles, contribution of each level to the total curve, total lordosis, ranges of motion, relative pose positioning within the range of motion, vertebral shape, and lumbar spine recurve. Measures were compared between pain groups and lumbar levels.

FINDINGS

Pain group differences in intervertebral angles and level contributions were greatest in the full extension pose, with pain developers having greater contributions from higher lumbar levels and fewer contributions from lower levels than non-pain developers. Pain group differences in intervertebral angle distributions were less pronounced in upright standing and non-existent in full flexion. No other measures differentiated pain groups.

INTERPRETATIONS

Although participants had similar gross-lumbar spine curvature characteristics, non-pain developers have more curvature at lower levels in upright standing and full extension. These differences in regional vertebral kinematics may partially be responsible for standing-induced low back pain.

Lumbar lordosis

Lumbar lordosis is a key postural component that has interested both clinicians and researchers for many years. Despite its wide use in assessing postural abnormalities, there remain many unanswered questions regarding lumbar lordosis measurements. Therefore, in this article we reviewed different factors associated with the lordosis angle based on existing literature and determined normal values of lordosis. We reviewed more than 120 articles that measure and describe the different factors associated with the lumbar lordosis angle. Because of a variety of factors influencing the evaluation of lumbar lordosis such as how to position the patient and the number of vertebrae included in the calculation, we recommend establishing a uniform method of evaluating the lordosis angle. Based on our review, it seems that the optimal position for radiologic measurement of lordosis is standing with arms supported while shoulders are flexed at a 30° angle. There is evidence that many factors, such as age, gender, body mass index, ethnicity, and sport, may affect the lordosis angle, making it difficult to determine uniform normal values. Normal lordosis should be determined based on the specific characteristics of each individual; we therefore presented normal lordosis values for different groups/populations. There is also evidence that the lumbar lordosis angle is positively and significantly associated with spondylolysis and isthmic spondylolisthesis. However, no association has been found with other spinal degenerative features. Inconclusive evidence exists for association between lordosis and low back pain. Additional studies are needed to evaluate these associations. The optimal lordotic range remains unknown and may be related to a variety of individual factors such as weight, activity, muscular strength, and flexibility of the spine and lower extremities.