رضا قطب عبد الرازق
أستاذ مساعد
Unilateral Versus Bilateral Hamstring Muscle Tightness on Lumbar Lordotic Angle in Patients with Lumbar Disc Prolapse
Afr.J.Bio.Sc • 2024
معلومات البحث
المؤلفون
Reda K. Abdelrazik1; Hanady Abdallah Mouhamed2; Kamaleldin Ahmed Kamal Ali
Marie3; Mohammed Elsayed4; Ali Essawy Ali Mostafa5; Adel M. E. Zedan1
الكلمات المفتاحية
Hamstrings muscle tightness; cob’s angle; Low back pain; Lumbar disc prolapse;
radiographs; active-knee-extension
المجلة العلمية
Afr.J.Bio.Sc
الناشر
Not Available
المجلد
6
العدد
2
الصفحات
564-572
publication.type
International
رابط البحث
Open Link
المواد المرفقة
Not Available
الملخص
Background: Hamstring muscle tightness is blamed for lumbar disc prolapse. There is a
lack of consistency about effect of hamstring muscle tightness on lumbar angle. This may be attributed
to variations in laterality of the hamstring tightness; being unilateral or bilateral.
Purpose: to examine the effect of laterality of hamstring muscle tightness on lumbar angle in adults
with lumbar disc prolapse (LDP).
Methods: This cross-sectional study included forty-five patients of both genders complained from
lumbar disc prolapse (LDP). They were divided into three groups; group A included 15 patients with
bilateral hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle >-20 in both legs), group B included 15
patients with unilateral hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle >-20 in one leg), and group
C included 15 patients with normal hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle ≤-20 in both legs).
Lumbar curve angle was measured by Cobb, s angle (on lateral radiographs) and hamstring muscle
tightness was measured with a standard goniometer using active knee extension test.
Results: Lumbar lordotic angle not significantly differs between the three groups of hamstring muscle
tightness (unilateral, bilateral, and normal) (P-value = 0.87).
Conclusion: Hamstring muscle tightness does not seem to affect lumbar lordotic angle even after
controlling for laterality in patients with LDP. Stretching of hamstring muscle may be not important
for these patients, but this needs further randomized clinical trial to prove
lack of consistency about effect of hamstring muscle tightness on lumbar angle. This may be attributed
to variations in laterality of the hamstring tightness; being unilateral or bilateral.
Purpose: to examine the effect of laterality of hamstring muscle tightness on lumbar angle in adults
with lumbar disc prolapse (LDP).
Methods: This cross-sectional study included forty-five patients of both genders complained from
lumbar disc prolapse (LDP). They were divided into three groups; group A included 15 patients with
bilateral hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle >-20 in both legs), group B included 15
patients with unilateral hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle >-20 in one leg), and group
C included 15 patients with normal hamstring tightness (active knee extension angle ≤-20 in both legs).
Lumbar curve angle was measured by Cobb, s angle (on lateral radiographs) and hamstring muscle
tightness was measured with a standard goniometer using active knee extension test.
Results: Lumbar lordotic angle not significantly differs between the three groups of hamstring muscle
tightness (unilateral, bilateral, and normal) (P-value = 0.87).
Conclusion: Hamstring muscle tightness does not seem to affect lumbar lordotic angle even after
controlling for laterality in patients with LDP. Stretching of hamstring muscle may be not important
for these patients, but this needs further randomized clinical trial to prove
