medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Anales de Radiología, México

  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2011, Number 4

<< Back

Anales de Radiología México 2011; 10 (4)

Radiological criteria for exclusion, by simple study of lumbar spine, of employment candidates to perform work involving physical effort

García HGD, Guerrero AG
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 319-327
PDF size: 268.94 Kb.


Key words:

exclusion criteria in lumbar spine, asymptomatic lumbar condition, lumbar spine screening.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. One of the leading causes of missed work days in patients whose work requires continuous physical effort are lumbar spine injuries, which can cause disabilities of between 4 and 12 weeks’ duration; such injuries can become chronic and prevent the worker from returning to his or her employment. This in turn lowers productivity and causes increasingly burdensome healthcare expenses for companies that are obliged to conduct screening and exclusion studies for “asymptomatic” potential employment candidates, in order to detect preexisting injuries that could eventually present complications and lead to permanent injury.
Material and methods. Conventional lumbar spine studies were performed, with anteroposterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) projections, on 5,664 patients (men and women) between 18 and 45 years of age. The patients were positioned in standing position, barefoot; measurements were taken to rule out scoliosis with Cobb’s method, hyperlordosis, and unstable spine. Ferguson’s angle and pelvic tilt were measured and patients were checked for alterations such as reduction of intervertebral spaces, spondylolisthesis, marginal osteophytes, and ligamentous calcifications, as well as congenital alterations: hemivertebrae, vertebral fusion, sacralization of transverse apophysis of L5, transverse megaapophysis, lack of closure of spinal apophysis, and occult spina bifida.
Discussion. The type of alterations found in each individual was variable, from an alteration that excludes a person as a candidate for work with physical effort, such as listhesis in any degree, or a combination of alterations such as scoliosis plus hyperlordosis or scoliosis, sacralization of transverse apophysis, and pelvic tilt, among many other possible combinations.
Conclusion. Based on the results, we can affirm that conventional study of the lumbar spine is a useful tool to rule out preexisting injuries in asymptomatic patients. Analysis can help reduce disabilities and work absenteeism due to future injuries and lower healthcare costs, in addition to serving as a prophylactic procedure for the benefit of employment candidates.


REFERENCES

  1. Quint, U, Wilke H, Shirazi-ADL A, Pamianpour M, Löer F, Claes LE. Importance of the intersegmental trunk muscles for the stability of the lumbar spine. Spine 1998; 23: 1937-1945.

  2. Pollock ML, Feigenbaum MS, Brechue WF. Exercise prescription for physical fitness. Quest 1995;47:320-337.

  3. Casimiro AJ. Comparación, evolución y relación de hábitos saludables y nivel de condición física-salud en escolares, al finalizar los 22 estudios de Educación Primaria (12 años) y de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria (16 años). Tesis Doctoral. Universidad de Granada. 1999;1:30-37.

  4. López Miñarro PA, Medina J. Mitos y creencias erróneas acerca de la actividad física y el deporte (I): descripción. Revista de Educación Física 1999;74:5-12.

  5. McGILL SM. The biomechanics of low back injury: implications on current practice in industry and the clinic. Journal of Biomechanics 1997;30:465-475.

  6. Cholewicki J, McGILL SM, Norman R. Comparison of muscle forces and joint load from an optimization and EMG assisted lumbar spine model: towards development of a hybrid approach. Journal of Biomechanics 1995;28:321-331.

  7. Brereton LC, McGILL SM. Effects of physical fatigue and cognitive challenges on the potential for low back injury. Human Movement Science 1999;18:839-857.

  8. Marras WS, Granata KP. The development of an EMGassisted model to assess spine loading during whole-body free dynamic lifting. Journal of Electromyographic Kinesiology 1997;7:259-268.

  9. Cassinelli EH, Hall RA, Kang JD. Biochemistry of intervertebral disc degeneration and the potential for gene therapy applications. The Spine Journal 2001;1:205-214.

  10. Cholewicki J, Juluru K, McGill SM. Intra-abdominal pressure mechanism for stabilizing the lumbar spine. Journal of Biomechanics 1999;32:13-17.

  11. Yingling VR, McGILL SM. Mechanical properties and failure mechanics of the spine under posterior shear load: Observations from a porcine model. Journal of Spinal Disorders 1999;12:501- 508.

  12. Harinton PR. The etiology of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin. Orthop 1977;126:17-26.

  13. Kittleson AC. Lim LW. Mesurement of escoliosis. AJR 1970;108:775-777.

  14. Hellems HK, Kaets TE. Mesurements of the normal lumbosacral angle”, AJR 1971;113:642-644.

  15. Epstein BS. Epstein JA and Jones, MD. Lumbar spondylolisthesis with isthimic defect. Radiol Clin North Amer 1977;15: 261-273.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Anales de Radiología México. 2011;10