Accelerometer Assessment of Spinal Joint Crepitus Before and After Spinal Manipulation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The objective of this IRB‐approved project was to assess spinal joint [facet joint, zygapophyseal (Z) joint] vibrations/sounds (crepitus) during lumbar motion before and after side‐posture spinal manipulation (SM). Methods Using methods previously developed to assess joint cavitation, 9 accelerometers were applied to the lumbar region of 5 healthy and 5 low back pain (LBP) subjects, allowing assessment of crepitus. Subjects underwent full lumbar ranges of motion, SM, and repeated ranges of motion, while accelerometer recordings were made. Subjects were also divided into 3 age groups for comparisons (18–25, 26–45, and 46–65 years). Primary outcomes included: incidence of crepitus, crepitus prevalence (average number of crepitus events/subject), crepitus amplitude, and motion(s) producing the most crepitus. Results The accelerometry methods were successfully implemented on all subjects. Crepitus was identified as simultaneous deviations from baseline of multiple accelerometers. As in previous work, artifacts had a distinct appearance and were easily distinguished from crepitus. Overall, 23 instances of crepitus were recorded from 15 different Z joints. Crepitus prevalence decreased pre‐ to post‐SM (average pre= 1.4 crepitus/subject, range 0–7 crepitus/subject vs. post= 0.9, range 0–2). Crepitus prevalence progressively increased from the youngest to oldest age groups (pre‐SM= 0.0, 1.67, and 2.0, respectively, range 0–10; and post‐SM= 0.5, 0.83, and 1.5, range 1–5). Prevalence was higher in LBP subjects compared to healthy (pre‐SM‐LBP= 2.0, range 0–7, vs. pre‐SM‐healthy= 0.8, range 0–4; post‐SM‐LBP= 1.0, range 0–2 vs. post‐SM‐healthy= 0.8, range 0–2), even though healthy subjects were older than LBP (40.8 years vs. 27.8 years). Crepitus amplitude was <0.16 mV. Average pre‐SM crepitus amplitude was 0.08 mV, which was greater than post‐SM crepitus, which was 0.03 mV. The pre‐ vs. post‐SM crepitus difference was greater in LBP (pre‐SM 0.09 mV, post‐SM 0.04) than healthy subjects (pre‐SM 0.04 mV, post‐SM 0.03 mV). Flexion produced the most crepitus (pre‐SM eight, 57.1%, post‐SM six, 66.7%, and overall fourteen, 60.9%). For pre‐SM, flexion was followed by right lateral flexion (three, 21.4%) with extension, left lateral flexion and left rotation all producing the same amount of crepitus (one each, 7.1%). Post‐SM flexion was followed by extension (two, 22.2%) and right rotation (one, 11.1%), with no crepitus recorded in the other motions. Conclusions Crepitus was greatest in flexion; prevalence increased with age, was higher in LBP than healthy subjects, and overall decreased following SM; crepitus amplitude was lower post‐SM than pre‐SM. Support or Funding Information NIH/NCCIH Grant# – 3R01AT000123‐06S2
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».