Altered erector spinae activity and trunk motion occurs with moderate and severe unilateral hip OA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with hip osteoarthritis (OA) demonstrate altered movement patterns in the hip joint, as well as the pelvis and spine. While kinematic changes have been described in the literature, little is known about the associated erector spinae (ES) activity. Increased or prolonged ES activity may contribute to the low back pain often associated with hip OA. Using a cross-sectional cohort study, 3D trunk motions and ES surface electromyography were recorded on 19 individuals with severe OA (SOA), 20 with moderate hip OA (MOA), and 19 asymptomatic (ASYM) individuals during treadmill walking, using standardized collection and processing procedures. Principal component analysis was used to derive electromyographic amplitude and temporal waveform features. Three-dimensional thoracic motion in a global system, and thoraco-lumbar motion was calculated. Various statistical analyses determined between group differences (α = 0.05). In the sagittal plane, thoracic motion was greater in the SOA group (p < 0.001), whereas the ASYM group used less thoraco-lumbar motion than either OA group (p ≤ 0.002). Greater frontal plane angular excursion during early stance was found in the thoracic region in the SOA group (p ≤ 0.001) . With increasing OA severity, bilateral ES activity increased during the swing phase of gait (p < 0.001), whereas during stance, the SOA ipsilateral ES activity was higher than other groups (p < 0.001). Statement of clinical significance: with moderate and severe OA, sagittal, and frontal trunk motion increases during gait. ES activity during the entire gait cycle is more sustained with increased disease severity, which may aide our understanding of low back pain associated with hip OA. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:1826-1832, 2018.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".