000106685 001__ 106685
000106685 005__ 20230519145439.0
000106685 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1038/s41598-021-90052-6
000106685 0248_ $$2sideral$$a124668
000106685 037__ $$aART-2021-124668
000106685 041__ $$aeng
000106685 100__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-7667-2178$$aHidalgo García, César$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000106685 245__ $$aEffects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study
000106685 260__ $$c2021
000106685 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000106685 5203_ $$aThis study compares upper cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in the three cardinal planes before and after occiput-atlas (C0–C1) stabilization. After the dissection of the superficial structures to the alar ligament and the fixation of C2, ten cryopreserved upper cervical columns were manually mobilized in the three cardinal planes of movement without and with a screw stabilization of C0–C1. Upper cervical ROM and mobilization force were measured using the Vicon motion capture system and a load cell respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 19.8° ± 5.2° in flexion and 14.3° ± 7.7° in extension. With stabilization, the ROM was 11.5° ± 4.3° and 6.6° ± 3.5°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 4.7° ± 2.3° in right lateral flexion and 5.6° ± 3.2° in left lateral flexion. With stabilization, the ROM was 2.3° ± 1.4° and 2.3° ± 1.2°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 33.9° ± 6.7° in right rotation and 28.0° ± 6.9° in left rotation. With stabilization, the ROM was 28.5° ± 7.0° and 23.7° ± 8.5° respectively. Stabilization of C0–C1 reduced the upper cervical ROM by 46.9% in the sagittal plane, 55.3% in the frontal plane, and 15.6% in the transverse plane. Also, the resistance to movement during upper cervical mobilization increased following C0–C1 stabilization.
000106685 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
000106685 590__ $$a4.997$$b2021
000106685 592__ $$a1.005$$b2021
000106685 591__ $$aMULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES$$b19 / 74 = 0.257$$c2021$$dQ2$$eT1
000106685 593__ $$aMultidisciplinary$$c2021$$dQ1
000106685 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000106685 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-8292-6613$$aLorente, Ana I
000106685 700__ $$aLópez de Celis, Carlos
000106685 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-9930-3903$$aLucha López, Orosia$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000106685 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-9080-0543$$aMalo Urriés, Miguel$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000106685 700__ $$aRodríguez Sanz, Jacobo
000106685 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-1261-8847$$aMaza Frechín, Mario$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000106685 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-3583-5206$$aTricás Moreno, José Miguel$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000106685 700__ $$aKrauss, John
000106685 700__ $$aPérez Bellmunt, Albert
000106685 7102_ $$15004$$2530$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Ingeniería Mecánica$$cÁrea Ingen.e Infraestr.Transp.
000106685 7102_ $$11006$$2413$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Fisiatría y Enfermería$$cÁrea Fisioterapia
000106685 773__ $$g11 (2021), [13 pp.]$$pSci. rep. (Nat. Publ. Group)$$tScientific reports (Nature Publishing Group)$$x2045-2322
000106685 8564_ $$s1760880$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/106685/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000106685 8564_ $$s2554405$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/106685/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000106685 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:106685$$particulos$$pdriver
000106685 951__ $$a2023-05-18-14:29:31
000106685 980__ $$aARTICLE