title: Kinematic analysis of the lower cervical spine in the protracted and retracted neck flexion positions.
abstract: [Purpose] The aim of this study was to analyze lower cervical spine kinematics in protracted and retracted neck flexion positions in healthy people. [Subjects and Methods] The craniovertebral angle (CVA) and intervertebral body angles of the lower cervical spine of 10 healthy individuals were analyzed using fluoroscopy in a neutral sitting with the head in the neutral (N), protracted (Pro), and retracted (Ret) positions and with the neck in full flexion with the head in the neutral (N-fx), protracted (Pro-fx), and retracted (Ret-fx) positions. [Results] There were significant differences in the CVA and intervertebral body angle at the C3-4 level, and the Ret position showed the highest values followed by the N and Pro positions. Regarding the intervertebral body angle at the C4-5 level, the Pro position showed a higher value than the N and Ret positions. At the C6-7 level, the Pro position showed the lowest value compared with the N and Ret positions. In the CVA, the Ret-fx position showed a higher value than the N-fx and Ret-fx positions. [Conclusion] The results suggest that in the neutral sitting position, protraction is an ineffective posture due to overstress of the C6-7 segment, which is placed in a hyperflexed position at this level. Instead, retraction is the recommend posture for the patient with C6-7 degeneration, which makes for a more flexed position in the upper cervical spine and a less flexed position in the lower cervical spine.
authors: Department of Physical Therapy, Youngsan University, Republic of Korea.
authors: So Hyun
authors: SH
authors: Park
keywords: Head posture; Intervertebral body angle; Lower cervical spine
references: J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47(9):911-8
references: 21174255
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999 Feb 1;24(3):240-7
references: 10025018
references: J Phys Ther Sci. 2013 May;25(5):537-8
references: 24259797
references: Man Ther. 2011 Feb;16(1):74-9
references: 20708429
references: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2002 Jan;17 (1):21-31
references: 11779643
references: Ergonomics. 1994 Oct;37(10):1623-48
references: 7957019
references: Neuroradiology. 1994;36(1):49-53
references: 8107998
references: Ind Health. 2009 Apr;47(2):183-8
references: 19367048
references: Ergonomics. 2003 Jun 10;46(7):714-30
references: 12745683
references: Eur Spine J. 2007 Sep;16(9):1435-44
references: 17464516
references: Ergonomics. 1996 Jul;39(7):933-45
references: 8690010
references: Zhonghua Lao Dong Wei Sheng Zhi Ye Bing Za Zhi. 2013 Aug;31(8):597-9
references: 24053961
references: Ann Rehabil Med. 2013 Apr;37(2):221-8
references: 23705117
references: J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2010;23(3):129-36
references: 20858942