ArticlesStatic trunk posture in sitting and standing during pregnancy and early postpartum☆,☆☆,★,★★
Section snippets
Methods
Nine maternal women (age range, 28–40y; height, 154–172.5cm; postpartum test mass, 51–81kg) and 12 nulliparous women (age range, 21–35y; height, 160–176.5cm; mass at third test, 52–75.5kg) volunteered and were included in the study, which was approved by the University of Sydney Ethics Committee. Maternal subjects included 5 primigravidas and 4 multigravidas. The maternal group was tested at 18 weeks or less, 24 weeks, 32 weeks, and 38 weeks of gestation and again at 8 weeks postpartum
Sitting
The sagittal plane postural alignment in sitting, as shown by the control group (table 2), showed that the right hip joint was flexed and that the sagittal plane orientation of the pelvic and head segments was slightly posterior, whereas the thoracic segment was slightly anteriorly aligned.The thoracolumbar and cervicothoracic spines were in slight flexion. The magnitude of the sagittal plane displacements for the segments was small, indicting that the thoracolumbar and cervicothoracic spines
Effect of pregnancy on upper-body posture during sitting
In early pregnancy and postpartum, the sagittal plane postural alignment of the upper body during sitting was similar to that of the control subjects. The control group postural alignments were also similar to those reported in previous studies.19, 20
As pregnancy progressed, small, nonsignificant changes were seen in the group mean from test to test, particularly for the pelvic segment (to a more posterior orientation) and for the thoracolumbar spine (which tended to become more flexed). The
Conclusions
There was no significant effect of pregnancy on the upper-body postural alignment in the sagittal plane during sitting and standing, although there was a tendency for a flatter spinal curve in sitting as pregnancy progressed. Poor repeatability with retesting may have affected the results for seated postural variables. Individuals may also vary in their postural response as pregnancy progresses. Postpartum, in standing, the pelvic segment had a smaller anterior orientation, and the
Acknowledgements
We thank Ray Patton, School of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Sydney, for technical assistance, and Dr. Roger Adams, School of Physiotherapy, University of Sydney, for advice concerning statistical analysis.
References (29)
- et al.
Back pain and pregnancy: a review
Pain
(1996) - et al.
The relationship of low back pain to postural changes during pregnancy
Aust J Physiother
(1987) - et al.
Exercise, posture, and back pain during pregnancy
Clin Biomech
(1995) - et al.
Postural changes associated with pregnancy and their relationship with low-back pain
Clin Biomech
(1990) - et al.
The importance of ‘lumbar lordosis measurement device’ application during pregnancy and post-partum isometric exercise
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
(1989) - et al.
A comparison of sitting posture adaptations of pregnant and non-pregnant females
Int J Indust Ergon
(1999) - et al.
Fatigability of back extensors after pregnancy
Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Society of Biomechanics
(1998 July 8-11) Postural alignment in standing: a repeatability study
Aust J Physiother
(1993)- et al.
Biomechanical measurements of back shape and interface pressures in unsupported sitting
Clin Biomech
(1988) - et al.
Influence of some biomechanical factors on low-back pain in pregnancy
Spine
(1993)
An analysis of posture and back pain in the first and third trimester of pregnancy
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
Changes in posture associated with pregnancy and the early post-natal period measured in standing
Physiother Theory Pract
Biomechanische modellen in het bestek van rugklachten tijdens de zwangerschap
Tijdschr Soc Gezondheidsz
Seating for pregnant workers based on subjective symptoms and motion analysis
Cited by (51)
Shoulder and elbow requirements during sagittal reach as a result of changing anthropometry throughout pregnancy
2021, Applied ErgonomicsCitation Excerpt :Although this is inconsistent with some reports (Haddox et al., 2020; Whitcome et al., 2007), the literature surrounding gestational lordosis is equivocal. Our findings followed the same trends with other previous studies (Bivia-Roig et al., 2018; Gilleard et al., 2002; Moore et al., 1990), where no difference in gestational lordosis was observed when compared to a control group. Tracking thoracic and lumbar curvature earlier in pregnancy may have produced different results, as would adding a nongravid control (Haddox et al., 2020; Whitcome et al., 2007).
Torso kinematics during gait and trunk anthropometry in pregnant fallers and non-fallers
2020, Gait and PostureEstimation of inertial parameters of the lower trunk in pregnant Japanese women: A longitudinal comparative study and application to motion analysis
2016, Applied ErgonomicsCitation Excerpt :The center of mass (COM) location shifts and the alignment of the spine exhibits compensatory changes (Franklin and Conner-Kerr, 1998; Gaymer et al., 2009; Ostgaard et al., 1993). These changes in alignment differ between individuals (Gilleard et al., 2002) and can affect the musculoskeletal and postural control systems (Nagai et al., 2009; Ponnapula and Boberg, 2010), cause low back pain (Bastiaanssen et al., 2005; Cheng et al., 2009; Gutke et al., 2010; Lisi, 2006) and make it difficult for pregnant women to perform some activities of daily living (Garshasbi and Faghih Zadeh, 2005). Previous biomechanical studies involving pregnant women have assessed changes in postural control during pregnancy.
The pregnant "waddle": An evaluation of torso kinematics in pregnancy
2014, Journal of BiomechanicsCitation Excerpt :These results are supported by the findings of others. Gilleard et al. stated that pregnant subjects displayed 4.5° greater thoracic extension and 13° greater anterior pelvic tilt during quiet standing when compared to post-partum (Gilleard et al., 2002b). In gait, Foti et al. reported 4° greater maximum anterior pelvic tilt during pregnancy compared to post-partum (Foti et al., 2000).
Ground reaction forces during stair locomotion in pregnancy
2013, Gait and PostureCitation Excerpt :Numerous anatomical, physiological, and hormonal alterations occur during pregnancy [1–6] and are related to modifications to gait [7], sit-to-stand biomechanics [8–10], and changes in mechanical loading and joint kinetics [4,11].
- ☆
No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organization with which the authors are associated.
- ☆☆
Correspondence to Wendy L. Gilleard, PhD, School of Exercise Science and Sport Management, Southern Cross University, PO Box 157, Lismore, 2480, NSW, Australia, e-mail: [email protected]. Reprints are not available.
- ★
Supplier
- ★★
a. Motion Analysis Corp, 3617 Westwind Blvd, Santa Rosa, CA 95403.