Asj 9 416
Asj 9 416
Asj 9 416
416
ASJ ASJ
Introduction
Spine with a lateral S-shaped curve is an important com-
Received Sep 28, 2014; Revised Nov 25, 2014; Accepted Nov 25, 2014 Corresponding author: Mohammad-Reza Nikoo
Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hamedan University of Medical Sciences, Shahid
Fahmideh Street, Hamadan 6517838736, Iran Tel: +98-81-8381571, Fax: +98-81-8381572, E-mail:
[email protected]
Sedigheh-Sadat Mirbagheri et al. 416 Asian Spine J 2015;9(3):416-422
Copyright C 2015 by Korean Society of Spine Surgery This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted
non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Asian Spine
Journal • pISSN 1976-1902 eISSN 1976-7846 • www.asianspinejournal.org
Results
Mean values of lordotic and kyphotic angles are shown in Table 1. Mean value of the lumbar arch was
34.46°±12.61°
Frequency (%)
Female Male Total
<30 59 (37.6) 60 (71.4) 119 (49.83) >30 & <50 78 (49.7) 23 (27.4) 101 (41.9)
>50 20 (12.7) 1 (1.2) 21 (8.71)
and 22.46°±9.9° in female students and male students, respectively. Lumbar lordosis showed a significant dif-
ference between the two student groups (p<0.001), while there was no difference in the thoracic curvature (p=0.288)
(Table 1).
Table 2 indicates the prevalence of kyphosis accord- ing to gender and angles of <20, >20 & <40, and >40. In
brief, 36.9% and 67.9% kyphotic angles of <20, 16.8% and 67.9% kyphotic angles of >20 & <40, and 1.3% and
2.4% kyphotic angles of >40, were identified in female students and male students, respectively (Table 2).
Prevalence of lordosis based on gender and angles clas- sified as <30, >30 & <50, and >50 is presented in Table 3.
In brief, 37.6% and 71.4 % <30 lordosis, 49.7% and 27.4% >30 & <50 lordosis, and 12.7% and 1.2% >50 lor-
dosis, were found in female students and male students, respectively (Table 3).
Table 4 indicates the relationship between kyphosis and interscapular pain severity in male students, female stu-
419
Table 4. Results of Kendall correlation test for investigating the relationship of kyphasis and lordosis with lumbar and
inter-scapular pain in the whole sample
Inter-scapular pain (p-value) Back pain (p-value)
Female (n=157) Male (n=84) Total (n=241) Female (n=157) Male (n=84) Total (n=241)
Kyphosis 0.799 0.283 0.946 Lordosis 0.808 0.508 0.006
Table 5. Results of the Kendall correlation test for investigating the relationship of kyphosis and lordosis with
frequency of the lumber and inter- scapular pain in the whole sample
Inter-scapular pain frequency (p-value) Back pain frequency (p-value)
Female (n=157) Male (n=84) Total (n=241) Female (n=157) Male (n=84) Total (n=241)
Kyphosis 0.798 - 0.572 Lordosis 0.872 - 0.068
Table 6. Results of the Kendall correlation test for investigating the relationship of kyphosis and lordosis
Kyphosis (p-value)
Female (n=157) Male (n=84) Total (n=241)
Lordosis 0.416 0.101 0.331
dents, and both, as well as the relationship between lordo- sis and lumbar pain severity.
No significant relationship was observed between ky- phosis measured by using a flexible ruler and inter-scap-
ular pain in both student groups (p=0.946), whereas the relationship between lordosis and lumbar pain severity in the
whole study sample was significant (p=0.006).
There was no relationship between kyphosis and inter- scapular pain frequency in male students and female stu-
dents and also in the whole study sample (p=0.068) (Table 5).
No significant relationship was found between kyphosis and lordosis in the whole study sample based on gender
(p=0.331, Table 6).
Discussion
The goal of this study was to investigate the prevalence of kyphosis and lordosis by using a flexible ruler and also of
musculoskeletal pain and their relationship with pain severity and frequency in male and female students of
Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.
According to the results, the mean values of lordosis
and kyphosis were 34.46°±12.61° and 22.57°±7.08° in fe- male students and 22.46°±9.9° and 23.56°±6.57° in male
students, respectively.
Many studies have proved the validity and reliability of using flexicurve in comparison with radiographic data. A
systematic review of validity and reliability of the non- radiographic method showed high to very high levels of
reliability of the Flexicurve. This study suggested that flexicurve is an easy to use, hand-held tool, and it could
replace radiography in evaluating lumbar lordosis [17]. However, with respect to cervical lordosis, there are some
studies that showed that the flexicurve sagittal skin con- tour measurement has poor concurrent validity compared to
radiographic measurements [20]. It seems that postural or X-ray positioning and radiographic analysis lead to
appearance of confounding variables, which affects the results. Also, obesity, muscular development, previous
trauma, and biomechanical complexities of the cervical spine could result in some differences in the measurement of
surface contour compared to lateral radiographs [20]. According to previous research, the flexicurve kyphosis angle
provides strong validity and reliability. Furthermore, it is inexpensive and can be easily used by the entry-level
research staff, requires short measurement time, and does not expose the patients to high radiation risk. It seems that
the use of this measurement method for detection of spine abnormalities and examination of the posture in healthy
subjects is quite beneficial [21].
On the other hand, postural age-related changes include a forward head, rounded shoulders, increased thoracic
kyphosis, decreased lumbar lordosis, and flexed hips and
Conclusions
According to the results, lordosis may play a key role in low back pain, which might result from muscular imbal-
ance and overstretching of the muscles and ligaments. Low back pain may also be caused by psychological fac- tors,
which usually cannot be controlled by the researcher in most studies. It could be concluded that through a simple
examination of the spine, such abnormalities can be identified as well as chronic spinal pain can be pre- vented.
Findings of this study indicate the importance of pos- tural evaluation in youth, in which chronic pain is rarely
related to other diseases, and hence, the pain could be considered to occur as a result of inappropriate posture and
can be managed by performing corrective exercises.
Involvement of a team of professionals in occupational therapy, physical therapy, ergonomics, and orthopedic
surgery is recommended in order to provide information to individuals about the anatomy and biomechanics of the
spine, risk factors that contribute to abnormalities, accurate positions for sitting, standing, lying, carrying objects,
and using instruments, and performing exercises to strengthen the weak muscles and correct the abnormal
421
posture, known as back school program for musculoskel- etal pain.
Conflict of Interest
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
References
1. Griegel-Morris P, Larson K, Mueller-Klaus K, Oatis CA. Incidence of common postural abnormalities in the
cervical, shoulder, and thoracic regions and their association with pain in two age groups of healthy subjects. Phys
Ther 1992;72:425-31. 2. Kendall FP, McCreary EK, Provance PG, Rodgers MM, Romani WA. Muscles: testing and
function with posture and pain. Baltimore: Lippincott Wil- liams & Wilkins; 2005. 3. Nitzschke E, Hildenbrand M.
Epidemiology of ky- phosis in school children. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1990;128:477-81. 4. Afshari F, Salari F.
Prevalence of vertebral deformi- ties among high school students in Tehran. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University of
Medical Science; 2000. 5. Herring JA, Tachdjian MO; Texas Scottish Rite Hos- pital for Children. Tachdjian’s
pediatric orthopaedics: from the Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2013. 6.
Liebenson C. Rehabilitation of the spine: a practitio- ner’s manual. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;
1996. 7. Kisner C, Colby LA. Therapeutic exercise founda- tions and techniques foundations and techniques.
Philadelphia: F. A. Davis Company; 2012. 8. Moe JH, Lonstein JE. Moe's textbook of scoliosis and other spinal
deformities. Philadelphia: W.B. Saun- ders; 1996. 9. Vaz G, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Sagit- tal
morphology and equilibrium of pelvis and spine. Eur Spine J 2002;11:80-7. 10. Jang JS, Lee SH, Min JH, Maeng
DH. Influence of lumbar lordosis restoration on thoracic curve and sagittal position in lumbar degenerative kyphosis
pa- tients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:280-4. 11. Roussouly P, Nnadi C. Sagittal plane deformity: an overview of
interpretation and management. Eur
Spine J 2010;19:1824-36. 12. Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP, Lafage V. Adult spinal
deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key pa- rameters in
assessing alignment and planning correc- tive surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:2224-31. 13. During J,
Goudfrooij H, Keessen W, Beeker TW, Crowe A. Toward standards for posture. Postural characteristics of the lower
back system in normal and pathologic conditions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1985;10:83-7. 14. Franklin ME,
Conner-Kerr T. An analysis of posture and back pain in the first and third trimesters of pregnancy. J Orthop Sports
Phys Ther 1998;28:133-8. 15. Leroux MA, Zabjek K, Simard G, Badeaux J, Coillard C, Rivard CH. A noninvasive
anthropometric tech- nique for measuring kyphosis and lordosis: an appli- cation for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine
(Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:1689-94. 16. Lovell FW, Rothstein JM, Personius WJ. Reliability of clinical measurements
of lumbar lordosis taken with a flexible rule. Phys Ther 1989;69:96-105. 17. Barrett E, McCreesh K, Lewis J.
Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: a systematic review. Man
Ther 2014; 19:10-7. 18. Magee DJ. Orthopedic physical assessment. Princ-
eton: Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic; 2002. 19. Post RB, Leferink VJ. Spinal mobility: sagittal range of
motion measured with the SpinalMouse, a new non-invasive device. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2004; 124:187-92.
20. Harrison DE, Haas JW, Cailliet R, Harrison DD, Hol- land B, Janik TJ. Concurrent validity of flexicurve
instrument measurements: sagittal skin contour of the cervical spine compared with lateral cervical radiographic
measurements. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2005;28:597-603. 21. Hinman MR. Comparison of thoracic kyphosis
and postural stiffness in younger and older women. Spine J 2004;4:413-7. 22. Been E, Kalichman L. Lumbar
lordosis. Spine J 2014;
14:87-97. 23. Boyle JJ, Milne N, Singer KP. Influence of age on cer- vicothoracic spinal curvature: an ex vivo
radiographic survey. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2002;17:361-7. 24. Jackson RP, McManus AC. Radiographic
analysis
Asian Spine Journal Asian Spine Journal
Relationship between kyphosis and lordosis and thoracic and lumbar pain
Sedigheh-Sadat 422 Mirbagheri et al. Asian Spine J 2015;9(3):416-422
of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex,
and size: a prospective controlled clinical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994;19:1611-8. 25. Christie HJ, Kumar S,
Warren SA. Postural aber- rations in low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995;76:218-24. 26. McKenzie R. The
cervical and thoracic spine: me-
chanical diagnosis and therapy. Waikanae: Spinal Publications (N.Z.) Ltd.; 1990. 27. Lau KT, Cheung KY, Chan
KB, Chan MH, Lo KY, Chiu TT. Relationships between sagittal postures of thoracic and cervical spine, presence of
neck pain, neck pain severity and disability. Man Ther 2010;15:457-62.