Spine
-
The interexaminer reliability of an inclinometer procedure to measure lumbar rotation was evaluated by two chiropractic clinicians who examined 25 chronic (greater than 6 months) low-back pain patients and 25 subjects without low-back pain. These groups were compared for differences in mean left, right, and total rotation. Patients who had lumbar spinal surgery were excluded. ⋯ Also, there was significantly more total rotation in the asymptomatic subjects (F = 4.143; df = 1; P less than 0.048). However, because of the large error attributed to this procedure, it is not possible to say whether the difference between the two groups is a result of the large error or some "real" difference. Therefore, the procedure described in this study should not be used as a clinical outcome measure.
-
Comparative Study
An analysis of errors in kinematic parameters associated with in vivo functional radiographs.
A pair of functional radiographs, taken at each end of the range of motion, are used to determine spinal motions. Graphic construction and computer-assisted methods are available for the radiographic analysis. The later provides many more motion parameters. ⋯ There were only minimal differences, however, between the digitizers when the radiographic films were remarked and redigitized. The error ranges (2 x SD) for the motion parameters were 1) rotation = +/- 1.25 degrees; 2) translation of the inferior posterior vertebral body corner = +/- 0.86 degrees; and 3) coordinates for the center of rotation = +/- 4.3 mm. Both the spinal level and radiographic quality affected the magnitude of errors in all motion parameters.
-
Comparative Study
The Steffee variable screw placement system using different methods of bone grafting.
Two groups of patients with diseased lumbar spines treated by the Steffee variable screw placement system were studied, in order to compare concomitant posterolateral fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. The use of posterolateral fusion resulted in less invasiveness than posterior lumbar interbody fusion, with regard to operating time and blood loss. With the posterolateral fusion method, correction of olisthesis or kyphotic deformity, if attained at all, was difficult to maintain. ⋯ Breakage or loosening of screws occurred in 14% of the posterolateral fusion group. Deep wound infection and adhesive arachnoiditis, which were never seen in the posterolateral fusion group, developed in 3% of the posterior lumbar interbody fusion group. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion is considered to be a better method of bone grafting than posterolateral fusion, when used with the Steffee variable screw placement system.