Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Lower spinal mobility and external immobilization in the normal and pathologic condition.

R A Miller1, P Hardcastle, S E Renwick

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of New Mexico Hospital, Albuquerque.

Orthopaedic Review
|June 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Disc degeneration and the young fast bowler in cricket.

Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)·2013
Same author

Anterior cervical fusion using the IntExt combined cage/plate.

Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong)·2008
Same author

Social Security fixes--beware of conjurers!

Employee benefits journal·2001
Same author

Re: The graf ligamentoplasty procedure. Comparison with posterolateral fusion in the management of low-back pain.

Spine·2000
Same author

Diaphyseal medullary stenosis with malignant fibrous histiocytoma: a hereditary bone dysplasia/cancer syndrome maps to 9p21-22.

American journal of human genetics·1999
Same author

Is there a role for expert systems in diagnostic anatomic pathology?

Human pathology·1997

This study evaluated lumbosacral orthotics for immobilizing the spine in healthy individuals and spondylolisthesis patients. While braces reduced motion, none fully immobilized the L5-S1 spinal level.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic biomechanics
  • Spinal imaging analysis
  • Spinal fusion and bracing

Background:

  • Spondylolisthesis often requires spinal immobilization to prevent further progression.
  • Effective bracing is crucial for managing spinal instability and promoting healing.
  • Assessing the efficacy of different orthotics in limiting lumbosacral motion is clinically significant.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the effectiveness of three orthotics in immobilizing the lumbosacral spine.
  • To compare spinal motion in healthy individuals versus patients with spondylolisthesis.
  • To determine if specific orthotics can significantly reduce lumbosacral motion.

Main Methods:

  • Lateral flexion and extension roentgenograms were used to measure lumbosacral motion.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Measurements were taken on healthy volunteers and patients with spondylolisthesis.
  • Three orthotics were tested: lumbosacral corset, Jewett extension brace, and plastic thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO).

    • Main Results:

    • No significant difference in lower lumbar motion was observed between healthy individuals and spondylolisthesis patients.
    • The lumbosacral corset failed to immobilize the L3-S1 spinal levels.
    • The Jewett brace and TLSO significantly reduced motion at L3-4 and L4-5 (P < .01), but did not eliminate it.
    • No tested orthotic could adequately immobilize the L5-S1 level, with some showing increased motion.

    Conclusions:

    • Current orthotics provide limited immobilization of the lumbosacral spine, particularly at the L5-S1 level.
    • Further development of spinal bracing is needed for effective management of conditions like spondylolisthesis.
    • Individual variations in spinal motion necessitate personalized bracing strategies.