Effects of dynamic office chairs on trink kinematics, trunk extensor EMG, and spinal shrinkage

Seated work has been shown to be a risk factor for low-back pain. This is attributed to the prolonged and monotonous low-level mechanical load imposed by a seated posture. To evaluate the potential health effects with respect to the low back of office chairs with a movable seat and back rest, trunk kinematics, erector spinae EMG, spinal shrinkage and local discomfort were assessed in 10 subjects performing simulated office work (word processing, computer-aided design and reading). Three chairs were used, one with a fixed seat and back rest and two dynamic chairs, one with a seat and back rest movable in a fixed ratio with respect to each other, and one with a freely movable seat and back rest. Spinal shrinkage measurements showed a larger stature gain when working on the two dynamic chairs as compared with working on the chair with fixed seat and back rest. Trunk kinematics and erector spinae EMG were strongly affected by the task performed but not by the chair type. The results imply that dynamic office chairs offer a potential advantage over fixed chairs, but the effects of the task on the indicators of trunk load investigated were more pronounced than the effects of the chair

Hip Function after Surgically Treated Isolated Traumatic Acetabular Fracture: A Prospective Series of Consecutive Cases.

PURPOSE: Isolated acetabular fractures can occur as a result of a high energy impact on the hip joint. Surgery is required for most patients with an isolated acetabular fracture in order to alleviate pain, restore joint stability, and regain hip function. This study was conducted in order to examine the course of hip function in patients after surgical treatment of an isolated traumatic acetabular fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective series of consecutive cases included patients who underwent surgery for treatment of an isolated acetabular fracture in a European level one trauma center between 2016 and 2020. Patients with relevant concomitant injuries were excluded. Scoring of hip function was performed by a trauma surgeon using the Modified Merle d'Aubigné and Postel score at six-week, 12-week, six-month, and one-year follow-up. Scores between 3-11 indicate poor, 12-14 fair, 15-17 good, and 18 excellent hip function. RESULTS: Data on 46 patients were included. The mean score for hip function was 10 (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.09-12.91) at six-week follow-up (23 patients), 13.75 (95% CI 10.74-16.76) at 12-week follow-up (28 patients), 16 (95% CI 13.40-18.60) at six-month follow-up (25 patients), and 15.50 (95% CI 10.55-20.45) at one-year follow-up (17 patients). After one-year follow-up, the scores reflected an excellent outcome in 11 patients, good in five patients, and poor in one patient. CONCLUSION: This study reports on the course of hip function in patients who have undergone surgical treatment for isolated acetabular fractures. Restoration of excellent hip function takes six months