A study on spinal and pelvic sagittal parameters in different sitting postures among healthy adults

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2022.02.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To study the radiographic differences in the sagittal plane parameters of upright sitting posture and comfortable posture among healthy adults.

Methods

Statistically analysis the relevant parameter of GCA, GTA, TLA, GLA, CSVA-S, CSVA-H, SS, PT and PI from sixty healthy adults when they were respectively in upright sitting postures and comfortable postures, and evaluate the overall balance of the spine and pelvis in sitting postures.

Results

Compared with the upright sitting posture, the comfortable sitting posture could make the CSVA-S move forward 7.67cm on average (P<0.001), CSVA-H move forward 4.33cm on average (P<0.001), GCA increase an average of 9.87°(P<0.001), GTA increase an average of 7.72°(P<0.001), TLA increase an average of 9.24°(P<0.001), GLA decrease an average of 22.13°(P<0.001), SS decrease an average of 14.74°(P<0.001), PT increase an average of 14.53°(P<0.001). The thoracolumbar spine deforms into a kyphotic arc of the majortiy of the sixty people when they changed their sitting postures from upright to comfortable, pelves more backward in the meantime.

Conclusion

There were significant differences in spinal sagittal parameters between the upright and comfortable sitting postures: as an energy-saving posture in sitting, the comfortable sitting posture, which showed a more kyphotic spinal profile, was the main spinal weight-bearing posture, being an non-ignorably important factor in orthopedic rehabilitation.

Key words: Sitting Position, Standing position, Bent spine, Spinal Curvatures, Postural balance

Yao Li, Di Zhang, Rui Xue, Xianzhong Meng, Meijuan Cui, Zehao Wu. A study on spinal and pelvic sagittal parameters in different sitting postures among healthy adults[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2022, 08(02): 91-95.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2022.02.004

https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2022/V08/I02/91

Figures/Tables 3

References 26

1	Schwab F, Ungar B, Blondel B, et al. Scoliosis research Society-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: a validation study [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2012, 37(12): 1077-1082.
2	Wdh H, MBBS. Differences in erect sitting and natural sitting spinal alignment-insights into a new paradigm and implications in deformity correction [J]. Spine J, 2017, 17(2): 183-189.
3	Schwab FJ, Smith VA, Biserni M, et al. Adult scoliosis: a quantitative radio graphic and clinical analysis [J]. Spine, 2002, 27(4): 387-92.
4	Mac-Thiong JM, Transfeldt EE, Mehbod AA, et al. Can C7 plumb line and gravity line predict health related quality of life in adult scoliosis? [J]. Spine, 2009, 34(15): E519-27.
5	Daubs MD, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, et al. Does correction of preoperative coronal imbalance make a difference in outcomes of adult patients with deformity? [J]. Spine, 2013, 38(6): 476-83.
6	Yc K, Lenke LG, Lee SJ, et al. The cranial sagittal vertical axis(CrS-VA)is a better Radio graphic measure to predict clinical outcomes in adult spinal deformity surgery than the C7 SVA:a monocentric study [J]. Eur Spine J, 2017, 26(8): 2167–75.
7	Glattes RC, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity following long instrumented posterior spinal fusion: incidence, outcomes, and risk factor analysis [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005, 30(14): 1643-1649.
8	Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformity—postoperative standing imbalance [J]. Spine, 2010, 35: 2224–31.
9	Doubousset J. Three-dimensional analysis of the scoliotic deformity. In: Weinstein S, editor. Pediatric spine: principles and practice. New York: Raven Press; 1994.
10	Dewald CJ, Stanley T. Instrumentation-related complications of multilevel fusions for adult spinal deformity patients over age 65: surgical considerations and treatment options in patients with poor bone quality [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31(19 Suppl): S144-S151.
11	Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity after segmental posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion: minimum five-year follow-up [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2008, 33(20): 2179-2184.
12	Yagi M, King AB, Boachie-Adjei O. Incidence, risk factors, and natural course of proximal junctional kyphosis: surgical outcomes review of adult idiopathic scoliosis. Minimum 5 years of follow-up [J]. Spine, 2012, 37: 1479–89.
13	Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, et al. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005, 30(18): 2024-2029.
14	Lamartina C, Berjano P, Petruzzi M, et al. Criteria to restore the sagittal balance in deformity and degenerative spondylolisthesis [J]. Eur Spine J, 2012, 21(1, 1): S27-S31.
15	Win AM, Yen LW, Tan KH, et al. Patterns of physical activity and sedentary behavior in a representative sample of a multi-ethnic South-East Asian population: a cross-sectional study [J]. BMC Public Health, 2015, 15: 318.
16	Matthews CE, Chen KY, Freedson PS, et al. Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004 [J]. Am J Epidemiol, 2008, 167(7): 875-881.
17	Hey D, Teo A, Tan KA, et al. How the spine differs in standing and in sitting-important considerations for correction of spinal deformity [J]. Spine J, 2017, 17(6): 799-806.
18	Vaughn JJ, Schwend RM. Sitting sagittal balance is different from standing balance in children with scoliosis [J]. J Pediatr Orthop, 2014, 34(2): 202-207.
19	Endo K, Suzuki H, Nishimura H, et al. Sagittal lumbar and pelvic alignment in the standing and sitting positions [J]. J Orthop Sci, 2012, 17(6): 682-686.
20	Lee ES, Ko CW, Suh SW, et al. The effect of age on sagittal plane profile of the lumbar spine according to standing, supine, and various sitting positions [J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2014, 9(1): 11.
21	Hey H, Tan K, Chin BZ, et al. Comparison of whole body sagittal alignment during directed vs natural, relaxed standing postures in young, healthy adults [J]. Spine J, 2019, 19(11): 1832-1839.
22	李伟，楼宇梁，全仁夫．脊柱后路PSO截骨长节段固定治疗Kummells病伴脊柱后凸的临床疗效[J]．中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2019, 5(1): 33-38.
23	Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Hecquet J, et al. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves [J]. Eur Spine J, 1998, 7(2): 99-103.
24	Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, et al. Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2009, 34(17): 1828-1833.
25	Cho IY, Park SY, Park JH, et al. The effect of standing and different sitting positions on lumbar lordosis: radiographic study of 30 healthy volunteers [J]. Asian Spine J, 2015, 9(5): 762-769.
26	陈锴，张子凡，陈乾，等．基于视觉的智能脊柱畸形测量研究方法及临床初探[J]．中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2020, 06(1): 31-38.

项目	直立坐姿	舒适坐姿	t值	P值
GCA°	11.71±5.54	19.49±4.78	-24.752	<0.001
GTA°	22.63±7.92	35.85±9.88	-15.472	<0.001
TLA°	2.68±2.72	15.92±2.86	-33.012	<0.001
GLA°	29.69±5.38	6.76±9.60	42.810	<0.001
SS°	21.36±4.38	5.62±4.23	34.754	<0.001
PT°	30.51±5.95	47.04±6.27	-24.790	<0.001
PI°	53.59±10.53	一	一
CSVA-S (cm)	3.04±2.27	10.28±1.72	-34.314	<0.001
CSVA-H (cm)	2.59±1.68	7.72±2.44	-36.035	<0.001

项目	直立坐姿	舒适坐姿	t值	P值
GCA°	11.71±5.54	19.49±4.78	-24.752	<0.001
GTA°	22.63±7.92	35.85±9.88	-15.472	<0.001
TLA°	2.68±2.72	15.92±2.86	-33.012	<0.001
GLA°	29.69±5.38	6.76±9.60	42.810	<0.001
SS°	21.36±4.38	5.62±4.23	34.754	<0.001
PT°	30.51±5.95	47.04±6.27	-24.790	<0.001
PI°	53.59±10.53	一	一
CSVA-S (cm)	3.04±2.27	10.28±1.72	-34.314	<0.001
CSVA-H (cm)	2.59±1.68	7.72±2.44	-36.035	<0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export