Thesis (Ph. D.)--Victoria University (Melbourne, Vic.), 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (MSc)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / Bibliography. Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Michigan State University, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 307-322). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2009. / Title from title page (Digital Archive@GSU, viewed June 25, 2010) Lindsey L. Cohen, committee chair; Erin Tone, Chris Henrich, committee members. Includes bibliographical references (p. 40-44).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Michigan State University, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 307-322)

A dynamic lumbar spinal stabilizer with a helical machined spring element was created in the first stage. The stabilizer was built with 30 N/mm of axial stiffness because if the human body is moved to flexion and extension, this amount of a compressive and tensile load would be applied to the intervertebral disc. The stabilizer supports the loads instead of the disc. The stiffness was influenced by the number of coils, the thickness of coils, and length of the coil element. The stiffness can be determined by analytical equations or by finite element analysis (FE), such as ANSYS Workbench. In the second stage, the lumbar spine FE model was successfully constructed by using Autodesk Inventor 2010. There were three different analyzed models; (1) intact model, (2) fused model, and (3) dynamically stabilized model. This intact model is a simplified and basic model used for fused model and dynamically stabilized model. The range of motion (ROM) was the key term in this study. In other words, examination of each model was based on how much ROM was shown when the flexion, extension, and bending moments have been applied on the spine. The ROM of each model with three moments produced appropriate values compared to the references. The stress analysis is also important to optimize the design of the dynamic stabilizer. The maximum stress was 472 MPa on the stabilizer that is less than yield strength of Titanium alloy.

Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition that affects all age groups and sexes. Although the development of LBP is multifactorial, the performance of lifting-based manual material handling (MMH) tasks are recognized as a primary risk factor. Many occupations that involve MMH tasks are performed in hazardous environments, where personal protective equipment (PPE) must be worn. Among the most commonly prescribed forms of PPE in Canada are CSA Grade 1 steel-toed work boots. According to the hazards present on the jobsite, workers may need to wear steel-toed work boots with/without a metatarsal guard or be able to wear steel-toed shoes (no upper). However, the amount of research on the interaction between protective footwear and human motion is limited. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis was to assess the effects of steel-toed shoes (unlaced), steel-toed boots (work boot), and steel-toed boots with a metatarsal guard (MET) on lifting mechanics. Specifically, three-dimensional kinematics of the lower limbs and trunk, sagittal net reaction moments of the low back, and local dynamic stability (LDS) of the lower limbs, lower back, and upper back were analyzed. Twelve males and 12 females were recruited to participate in this research project. Participants performed a repetitive lifting task at 10% of their maximum back strength, under three block-randomized footwear conditions. Ankle dorsiflexion was negatively affected by footwear type, where dorsiflexion was reduced the most in the MET condition compared to the unlaced condition (p < 0.01). However, there were no other main effects of footwear type on any other variable tested, and both male and female participants were able to maintain similar lifting mechanics and LDS values when moving up the kinematic chain. It is possible that participants were able to preserve their kinematics and stability through the appropriate recruitment of muscles, which may have implications for an increase in compressive and shear force on the spine and should be explored further in the future.

Lacrosse, Canada’s national summer sport, is a sport anchored in first nations’ tradition. Its growing popularity in North America has not been reflected by a similar interest in the scientific literature more specifically on the biomechanics of the lumbar spine with its throwing motion. The aim of this study was to describe the motions, forces and muscle actions of the lumbar spine with the hybrid, overhand and sidearm throw. Twelve subjects were asked to throw at maximal speed while captured by a 3D motion analysis system. Flexion, extension and axial rotation angular velocities as well as positive and negative powers in the two planes were calculated. The first research question pertained to consistency in angular velocities and powers between trials of a given throwing technique. Subjects showed a fairly high variation on all variables but mostly with the angular velocities in extension and the peak positive power in flexion/extension which had high coefficient of variations (CVs). The contralateral rotation velocity and the positive rotation power had the lowest CVs. Overall the CVs for powers exceeded the angular velocities’. The second research question addressed if a difference in variables was present between the three throwing methods. A significant difference was observed in the peak negative power in flexion/extension and the peak positive power in rotation. The contralateral rotation angular velocity also showed a significant difference but the sphericity assumption failed. No other variable showed a significant difference but the observed power for those variables was also quite small. Due to the lack of power and the further need for controlling some unforeseen sources of error, this study can be used as a pilot study to further define and improve future studies in the field of lacrosse biomechanics.

M.Tech. (Chiropractic) / Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if inversion therapy is beneficial for participants with lower back pain and if there is an additive effect when combining it with manipulation. Three treatment approaches were utilized: inversion therapy, lumbar spine manipulations and a combination of inversion therapy with lumbar spine manipulations. Method: Thirty participants who qualified for the study were randomly divided into three equal groups consisting of ten participants each. Depending in which group the participant was allocated, determined if they received lumbar spine manipulation (Group 1), inversion therapy (Group 2), or a combination of inversion therapy performed after the lumbar spine manipulation (Group 3). Procedure: Each participant was treated a total of six times over a course of three weeks, furthermore there was a seventh day of final data collection. The measurements were taken on the first, fourth and seventh visit. Subjective measurements consisted of the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) and the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index. Objective measurements were done with the inclinometer (lumbar range of motion) and the flexicurve (lumbar lordosis measurement). Results: It is clear that there were statistically significant improvements in all three of the groups in both the NPRS and the Oswestry disability index. The inversion therapy group performed the best with the NPRS and the Oswestry disability index, with the spinal manipulation and combination group following narrowly. However, there were no statistically significant differences on the intergroup analysis with regards to the subjective results. The results of the subjective measurements indicated that there was a relative decrease in lumbar spine lordosis measurements, over the trial period, but with no statistical significance. With the lumbar range of motion-flexion measurements it was clear that the spinal manipulation group and the inversion therapy group had superior results compared to the combination group, with both indicating statistical significance over the trial period. Extension, lateral flexion and rotation did not show any statistical significance over the trial period. Conclusion: There were statistically significant improvements within each of the three groups on intragroup analysis, but no statistically significant differences were found on intergroup analysis. Therefore, none of the groups could be singled out as being the superior treatment for mechanical lower back pain. All three groups’ demonstrated improvement. There was no significant additive effect by combining the two treatments. Therefore there is no benefit to adding inversion therapy to the treatment protocol. Manipulation alone demonstrated to have similar effects. However, should a patient not be able to see a chiropractor for treatment, home based inversion therapy can be beneficial. A concern that should be addressed is that home based treatment wouldn’t be supervised and as such it is not advised to do without some form of professional management. Inversion therapy can definitely be utilized as a home based treatment option for a patient with LBP, patients that can’t make use of regular chiropractic care due too logistical or financial restraints will benefit from inversion therapy home usage. Home usage will provide the patient with regular general traction therapy and can result in patient pain relief, increase overall functioning of the patient and the patient compliance may improve.

Orientadores: Helder Tedeschi, Andrei Fernandes Joaquim / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-27T03:41:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Cruz_HalissonYoshinari_M.pdf: 548904 bytes, checksum: f83210d67f0f8e7df7a28e330c894fb3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015 / Resumo: Introdução: O SLICS (Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System) foi proposto para auxílio na tomada de decisão do traumatismo da coluna cervical sub-axial, contudo poucos trabalhos avaliaram sua segurança e eficácia. Método: comparar coorte histórica de pacientes tratados com base na preferência do cirurgião com pacientes tratados baseando-se no escore obtido com a aplicação do sistema. Foram incluidos pacientes com lesão traumática aguda de C3-7 com exames radiológicos e dados clínicos completos. O status neurológico foi avaliado através do ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS). Resultados: entre 2009-10, 12 pacientes foram incluídos (seguimento médio de 24,5 meses). Na admissão hospitalar 5 pacientes (41,6%) apresentavam AIS E, 1 (8,3%) AIS D, 1 (8,3%) AIS C, 1 (8,3%) AIS B e 4 (33.3%) AIS A. Dois de sete pacientes com déficit incompleto melhoraram durante o seguimento clínico. O SLICS escore variou de 2 a 9 pontos (média de 5.5 e mediana de 5.75), onde dois pacientes tinham escore menor do que 4. Entre 2011-13, 28 pacientes foram incluídos (média de 6,1 meses), com média de idade de 41,5 anos. Na admissão hospitalar 12 pacientes (42,9%) apresentavam AIS E, 4 (14,3%) AIS D, 5 (17,9%) AIS C, 2 (7,15%) AIS B e 5 (17,9%) AIS A. Seis pacientes entre os 11 com déficit incompleto apresentaram melhora. O escore de SLICS variou de 4 a 9 pontos, com média e mediana de 6. Conclusões: observamos que após a aplicação do sistema, houve uma diminuição de indicação cirúrgica nos pacientes com lesões mais estáveis ou menos graves, sem que se detectasse piora neurológica em ambos os grupos. Isso sugere que o SLICS pode ser útil para auxiliar a diferenciação das lesões mais instáveis que acometem a coluna cervical sub-axial que requeiram tratamento cirúrgico / Abstract: Introduction: The SLICS (Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System) was proposed to help in the decision-making process of surgical treatment of sub-axial cervical spine trauma, eventhough the literature assessing its safety and efficacy is scarce. Methods: we compared a cohort series of patients treated based on surgeon¿s preference with patients treated based on the SLICS. We have only included patients with acute spinal trauma from C3-7 that had complete clinical and radiological data. Results: between 2009-10, 12 patients were included (mean 24.5 months of follow-up). The preoperative AIS was: 5 patients (41.6%) were AIS E, 1 (8.3%) AIS D, 1 (8.3%) AIS C, 1 (8.3%) AIS B and 4 (33.3%) AIS A. Two out of seven patients had neurological improvement during follow-up. The SLICS score ranged from 2 to 9 points (mean of 5.5 and median of 5.75 points) with two patients with less than 4 points. From 2011-13, 28 patients were included with a SLICS (mean of 6.1 months of follow-up). The preoperative AIS was: 12 patients (42.9%) with AIS E, 4 (14.3%) AIS D, 5 (17.9%) AIS C, 2 (7.15%) AIS B and 5 (17.9%) AIS A. Six patients out of 11 had some neurological improvement. The SLICS score ranged from 4 to 9 points (mean and median of 6). There was no neurological deterioration in any group. Conclusions: after using the SLICS there was a decrease in the number of patients with less severe injuries that were treated surgically, with no reflection on neurological outcome. This suggests that the SLICS can be helpful in differentiating mild from severe injuries, potentially improving the results of treatment / Mestrado / Neurologia / Mestre em Ciências Médicas