Range of Active Hip Motion in Low Back Pain Patients and Apparently Healthy Controls

  • Adegoke B
  • Fapojuwo O
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: Findings from previous studies on hip mobility in individuals with low back pain (LBP) have been equivocal and focused almost exclusively on hip rotation. This study compared active range of hip motion and classified its asymmetry in male subjects with and without LBP. Method: The ex-post facto study involved 30 male patients with LBP and 30 age and sex-matched controls. Active ranges of motion (AROM) of both hip joints of subjects in both groups were measured with a universal goniometer and grouped into different pattern categories based on the presence or absence of a difference of 10° or more between the AROM of the two hips. The data were summarized using mean and standard deviation calculations. Further analysis was done with Chi-square test with level of significance set at p˂0.05.Results: There were no significant differences between the AROM of LBP patients and controls except for hip flexion and between corresponding AROM of contralateral limbs in both groups. Patients and controls largely demonstrated symmetry in flexion, extension, abduction and adduction, but asymmetry of hip rotation was more predominant in both groups. There was however no significant differences in the proportions of patients and controls in the four hip rotation AROM patterns (p≥0.344) and the three patterns for other hip movements (p≥ 0.372). Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was found between active hip mobility of subjects with and without LBP. The majority of subjects in both groups exhibited symmetry of hip flexion, extension, abduction and adduction AROMs and more total lateral than total medial rotation AROM.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Adegoke, B., & Fapojuwo, O. (2010). Range of Active Hip Motion in Low Back Pain Patients and Apparently Healthy Controls. Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice. https://doi.org/10.46743/1540-580x/2010.1309

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free