Hip rotation range of motion in people with and without low back pain who participate in rotation-related sports.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether passive hip rotation motion was different between people with and without low back pain (LBP) who regularly participate in sports that require repeated rotation of the trunk and hips. We hypothesized that people with LBP would have less total hip rotation motion and more asymmetry of motion between sides than people without LBP. DESIGN: Two group, case-control. SETTING: University-based musculoskeletal analysis laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-eight subjects (35 males, 13 females; mean age: 26.56+/-7.44 years) who reported regular participation in a rotation-related sport participated. Two groups were compared; people with LBP (N=24) and people without LBP (N=24; NoLBP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were collected on participant-related, LBP-related, sport-related and activity-related variables. Measures of passive hip rotation range of motion were obtained. The differences between the LBP and NoLBP groups were examined. RESULTS: People with and without a history of LBP were the same with regard to all participant-related, sport-related and activity-related variables. The LBP group had significantly less total rotation (P=.035) and more asymmetry of total rotation, right hip versus left hip, (P=.022) than the NoLBP group. Left total hip rotation was more limited than right total hip rotation in the LBP group (P=.004). There were no significant differences in left and right total hip rotation for the NoLBP group (P=.323). CONCLUSIONS: Among people who participate in rotation-related sports, those with LBP had less overall passive hip rotation motion and more asymmetry of rotation between sides than people without LBP. These findings suggest that the specific directional demands imposed on the hip and trunk during regularly performed activities may be an important consideration in deciding which impairments may be most relevant to test and to consider in prevention and intervention strategies.

The immediate effect of passive scapular elevation on symptoms with active neck rotation in patients with neck pain.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of elevating the scapulae on symptoms during neck rotation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical records was conducted. One physical therapist examined 46 patients with neck pain (30 women, 16 men; mean age 45.89+14.39 y) using a standardized examination. Patients had a long-standing history of neck pain with a moderate level of symptoms and disability. Reports of symptoms were obtained in 2 scapulae position conditions: a patient-preferred scapulae position and a passively elevated scapulae position. RESULTS: In the patient-preferred positions, 29 (63%) of the 46 patients reported an increase in symptoms with neck rotation in at least one direction. In the scapulae elevated position, a significant percentage of patients reported a decrease in symptoms with neck rotation, right (82%) and left (76%) (both comparisons, P

Balance Recovers Within 20 Minutes After Exertion as Measured by the Balance Error Scoring System.

OBJECTIVE: To determine a balance recovery timeline after a functional exertion protocol using the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS). DESIGN AND SETTING: Five subject groups (4 test, 1 control) were tested 3 times during 1 session: once before the exertion protocol (pretest) and twice after the exertion protocol (posttest I and posttest II). Posttest I occurred at staggered intervals of 0, 5, 10, and 15 minutes, depending on experimental group assignment, and posttest II occurred at 20 minutes. SUBJECTS: One hundred subjects (80 test, 20 control) volunteered to participate in this study. None of the subjects had a balance disorder, mild head injury, or lower extremity injury in the 6 months before testing. MEASUREMENTS: We assessed balance using the BESS, assigning a score for each stance-surface condition. RESULTS: We found a significant decrease in BESS performance after the exertion protocol in all test groups, with exertion having the greatest effect on the tandem and single-leg stance conditions. All subjects recovered by posttest II, which was administered 20 minutes after cessation of the exertion protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Athletic trainers need to be aware of the effect of exertion when administering the BESS after physical activity. Athletic trainers can expect the BESS performance of healthy athletes to return to baseline levels within 20 minutes of rest.