Isokinetic trunk strength and lifting strength measures : differences and similarities between low-back-injured and noninjured workers

• Published in: Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Pa. 1976), 1993-12, Vol.18 (16), p.2491-2501
• Main Authors: MANDELL, P. J, WEITZ, E, BERNSTEIN, J. I, LIPTON, M. H, MORRIS, J, BRADSHAW, D, BODKIN, K. P, MATTMILLER, B
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Back Injuries; Biological and medical sciences; Body Height; Body Weight; Diseases of the osteoarticular system; Diseases of the spine; Female; Humans; Isometric Contraction - physiology; Lifting; Low Back Pain - physiopathology; Lumbar Vertebrae - physiopathology; Male; Medical sciences; Muscle Contraction - physiology; Muscles - physiopathology; Physical Fitness; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology; Work Capacity Evaluation
• ISSN: 0362-2436; 1528-1159
• DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199312000-00019

Fifty-eight back pain patients and 21 entry-level Postal Service workers without low-back pain were evaluated using a variety of lumbar function measures. Isolated trunk strength and full lifting strength were gauged with isokinetic and isometric methods. Lumbar range-of-motion was computed using toe-touch and goniometers. Conventional clinical techniques such as toe touch and straight leg raise were effective in distinguishing back-injured from normal subjects. Isometric and isokinetic peak force and torque tests failed to show significant differences between low-back pain and job applicant groups. When compared with published norms, our job applicant group was significantly deconditioned. Our data suggest that asymptomatic, deconditioned subjects could be mistaken for back-impaired patients or symptom magnifiers.