HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Petersen, C. M Articles by Schendel, M. J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Petersen, C. M Articles by Schendel, M. J Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Pelvic Stabilization Systems on Pelvic Movement During Maximal Isometric Trunk Extension and Flexion Muscle Contractions

Ms. Petersen is Instructor in Clinical Physical Therapy, Programs in Physical Therapy, Northwestern University Medical School, 345 E Superior St, Rm 1323, Chicago, IL 60611 (USA). She was a graduate student, Physical Therapy Program, University of Minnesota, at the time this study was completed.
Dr. Amundsen is Director of Graduate Studies, Physical Therapy Program, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, University of Minnesota.
Mr. Schendel is Research Assistant, Rehabilitation Engineering Center, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and a graduate student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two pelvic fixation systems to limit pelvic movement during isometric trunk extension and flexion muscle strength testing. We developed a prototypal pelvic fixation system and compared it with a pelvic strap stabilization system. The prototypal pelvic fixation system consisted of fixation of the anterior superior iliac spines and sacrum, and the pelvic strap stabilization system consisted of a strap across the anterior superior iliac spines and a posterior pad. Small, but statistically significant, pelvic position changes occurred during isometric trunk extension and flexion muscle strength testing with the two stabilization systems. The pelvic angle changes were greater in extension than in flexion and greater when only the pelvic strap stabilization system rather than the prototypal pelvic fixation system was used. Our findings indicate that a more extensive prototypal pelvic fixation system minimizes pelvic movement to a greater extent during isometric trunk extension and flexion muscle contractions compared with the strap stabilization system.

Key Words: Biomechanics • Pelvis • Physical therapy

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?