Effects of adjustments to wheelchair seat to back support angle on head, neck, and shoulder postures in subjects with cerebral palsy.

A wheelchair is usually a source of mobility for people with moderate to severe cerebral palsy, who are unable to walk. They spend long periods of time sitting in their wheelchair, which can affect their head and neck alignment. Opening the seat to back support angle of the wheelchair can modify realignment of body segments and improve posture. Aims: To examine the effect of seat to back support angle adjustments on head, neck, and shoulder postural alignment in people with cerebral palsy. Methods: Nine participants with cerebral palsy who use a wheelchair for mobility sat in a research wheelchair. Sagittal head angle (SHA), cervical angle (CVA), and shoulder angle (SA) from photographs were examined using the Coach's Eye device during three different seat to back support angles of the wheelchair (90°, 100°, 110°). Results: There were significant differences in mean SHA and CVA among the different seat to back support angles (p < .001). However, there was no significant difference in mean SA. Conclusion: Head (SHA) and (CVA) alignment was closest to neutral posture with seat to back support angles set at 110°. Thus, adjusting the wheelchair back support to a 110º would provide the most appropriate sagittal head and cervical angle for this population.

Validity and reliability of wheelchair sitting posture measures using Coach's Eye in abled subjects.

People in wheelchairs spend a long time in the sitting position and often incur alignment problems resulting in neck and back pain. This study: (1) assessed the validity/reliability of Coach's Eye (CE) smart device application, (2) examined the effect of seat to back support angle adjustments on head, neck, and shoulder posture in the sitting position, and (3) compared changes in cervical rotation at each back support angle. Abled subjects sat in a wheelchair with back support angles positioned at 90°, 100°, and 110°. CE, as well as ImageJ software, was used to analyze three angles: sagittal head angle (SHA), cervical angle (CVA), and shoulder angle (SA). There were highly significant differences for CVA and SA (p < 0.001) among the three seat to back support angles. Validity of CE was examined by correlating CE with ImageJ scores. CE had high validity for all angles (r = 0.99, 0.98, 0.99 respectively, p < 0.001). Inter-rater reliability for SHA, CVA, and SA was high (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] ranged from 0.95 to 0.99). Head (CVA) and shoulder (SA) alignment was closest to neutral posture with back support angles set at 110° and 90°, respectively.

Contrast in usage of FCAT-approved anatomical terminology between members of two anatomy associations in North America.

Almost 12 years since the publishing of Terminologia Anatomica (TA) by the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology (FCAT), there has yet to be a unified adoption of FCAT-recommended anatomical terms by North American anatomists. A survey was sent to members of the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society (HAPS) to compare the frequency of FCAT term usage with a previous study involving the American Association of Anatomists (AAA). The HAPS differed from AAA in being composed mostly of biologists (56.5%) who teach anatomy with only 18.3% of respondents having terminal degrees in anatomy. The survey included the same 25 sets of synonymic names for selected gross anatomical structures or related terms used for the AAA survey. Overall results indicate that the FCAT preferred term had the highest frequency of usage in only 40.0% of the survey questions, demonstrating 4% lower compliance than AAA respondents. Compliance with FCAT preferred terms ranged from 92.2% to 1.7% usage. When compared with AAA anatomists, there were reversals in predominant usage between FCAT and non-FCAT terms for six sets of anatomical structures: HAPS respondents predominantly used non-FCAT terms for adrenal gland (88.7%), antecubital fossa (57.4%), patellar tendon (65.2%), ligamentum capitis femoris (36.5%), while preferring the FCAT anterior circumflex humeral artery (45.2%) and anterior/posterior preferred over ventral/dorsal (41.7%). Almost 54% of HAPS anatomists were not familiar with the FCAT, nearly 21% higher than the AAA.

Frequency in usage of FCAT-approved anatomical terms by North American anatomists.

It has been 10 years since the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology (FCAT) published Terminologia Anatomica (TA), the current authority on anatomical nomenclature. There exists a perceived lack of unity among anatomists to adopt many FCAT recommended anatomical terms in TA. An e-mail survey was sent to members of the American Association of Anatomists (AAA) to determine the frequency of FCAT term usage by North American anatomists. The survey consisted of 29 questions, including 25 different sets of synonymic names for selected gross anatomical structures or related terms. Overall results indicate that the FCAT preferred term had the highest frequency of usage in only 44.0% of the survey questions. As frequency of use of FCAT terms decreased, the corresponding frequency of use of non-FCAT terms increased. Some questions showed almost complete compliance with the FCAT preferred terms (highest = 98.4% usage) to almost complete disregard for the FCAT terms (lowest = 0.8% usage). A slight association (P = 0.06) may exist between FCAT familiarity and concern for usage of synonymic terms. The more familiar anatomists were with the FCAT, the more concerned they were with anatomic synonyms.