Skip to main content

Table 2 Global parameters and literature review comparison in three planes of entire, younger, and older group

From: Evaluation of 3D vertebral and pelvic position by surface topography in asymptomatic females: presentation of normative reference data

Coronal plane

Trunk imbalance (VP–DM)

Maximum apical deviation

Shoulder obliquity

Pelvic obliquity

(mm)

(°)

(mm) (+ max)

(mm) (− max)

(mm)

(°)

(mm)

(°)

EG; n = 100

− 1.9 ± 8.9

− 0.2 ± 1.1

2.9 ± 2.8

− 5.1 ± 3.7

− 8.2 ± 9.6

− 1.2 ± 1.5

− 0.2 ± 2.2

− 0.1 ± 1.2

EG vs. 0

.033*

.033*

.000*

.000*

.000*

.000*

.412

.394

t-value (df = 99)

− 2.2

− 2.2

10.4

− 14.0

− 8.6

− 8.6

− 0.8

− 0.9

Cohen’s d

0.2

0.2

1.0

1.4

0.9

0.9

0.1

0.1

YG

− 2.6 ± 7.5

− 0.3 ± 0.9

3.2 ± 3.0

− 4.4 ± 3.6

− 7.3 ± 8.9

− 1.1 ± 1.3

− 0.2 ± 2.2

− 0.1 ± 1.2

OG

− 1.2 ± 10.2

− 0.2 ± 1.2

2.6 ± 2.6

− 5.8 ± 3.7

− 9.2 ± 10.2

− 1.4 ± 1.6

− 1.2 ± 2.1

− 0.1 ± 1.1

YG vs. OG

.422

.463

.303

.058

.346

.343

.929

.916

Literature comparison

Degenhardt, et al. [10]

1.0 ± 7.2

0.1 ± 0.8

7.9 ± 5.8 ‡

− 5.0 ± 4.1

n.v.

n.v.

0.2 ± 5.9

0.0 ± 3.5

Degenhardt, et al. [11]

1.3 ± 5.6

0.2 ± 0.7

8.0 ± 5.1

− 4.6 ± 2.9

n.v.

n.v.

− 0.1 ± 5.1

− 0.2 ± 2.9

Schröder et al. [12]

6.9 ± 4.6

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

3.1 ± 2.5

n.v.

Hamm [13], Michalik et al. [14]

n.v.

− 0.1 ± 0.9

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

− 0.4 ± 2.8

Sagittal plane

Trunk inclination (VP–DM)

Thoracic kyphosis (ICT–ITL)

Lumbar lordosis (ITL–ILS)

Pelvic inclination (dimples)

(mm)

(°)

(°)

(°)

(°)

EG; n = 100

25.4 ± 17.2

3.1 ± 2.1

47.3 ± 8.5

43.8 ± 9.1

18.7 ± 9.0

EG vs. 0

.000*

.000*

.000*

.000*

.000*

t-value (df = 99)

14.8

14.8

55.8

47.9

20.8

Cohen’s d

1.5

1.5

5.6

4.8

2.1

YG

25.7 ± 16.9

3.2 ± 2.1

44.2 ± 7.9

41.5 ± 9.2

20.5 ± 8.0

OG

25.1 ± 17.6

3.0 ± 2.1

50.4 ± 7.9

46.1 ± 8.6

16.9 ± 9.6

YG vs. OG

.874

.782

.000*

.011*

.042*

Literature comparison

Degenhardt, et al. [10]

26.0 ± 18.7

3.1 ± 2.3

48.1 ± 9.1

35.6 ± 8.4

17.9 ± 6.0

Degenhardt, et al. [11]

n.v.

n.v.

48.5 ± 8.3

35.4 ± 7.6

19.7 ± 7.3 (symm. line)

Schröder et al. [12]

12.3 ± 17.9

n.v.

47.1 ± 8.6

42.7 ± 8.2

21.9 ± 4.8

Hamm [13], Michalik et al. [14]

n.v.

2.1 ± 2.4

44.0 ± 8.6 (VP–T12)

37.4 ± 9.8 (T12–DM)

n.v.

Transversal plane

Maximum surface rotation

Pelvic rotation

(°) (+ max)

(°) (− max)

(°)

EG; n = 100

2.0 ± 2.4

− 3.9 ± 2.7

− 0.1 ± 0.6

EG vs. 0

.000*

.000*

.244

t-value (df = 99)

8.2

− 14.6

− 1.2

Cohen’s d

0.8

1.5

0.1

YG

1.7 ± 1.9

− 3.9 ± 2.8

− 0.1 ± 0.6

OG

2.3 ± 2.8

− 3.9 ± 2.6

− 0.1 ± 0.6

YG vs. OG

.246

.957

.922

Literature comparison

Degenhardt, et al. [10]

5.6 ± 3.4

− 4.6 ± 2.9

− 0.3 ± 2.8

Degenhardt, et al. [11]

5.7 ± 2.8

 − 4.5 ± 2.4

 − 0.3 ± 2.2

Schröder et al. [12]

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

Hamm [13], Michalik et al. [14]

n.v.

n.v.

n.v.

  1. Global parameters (mean ± SD) and literature review comparison in coronal, sagittal, and transversal plane of entire group (EG) and their p -, t-values and Cohen’s d. *: p < 0.05; parameters of the younger (YG) and older group (OG) and their p values; †: Parameter not clearly assigned (compare Discussion), ‡: Uncertain value (compare Discussion) Degenhardt, et al. [10]; n = 30 women and men, 30.2 ± 9.8 years; Degenhardt, et al. [11]; n = 29 women and men, 30.1 ± 10.1 years; Schröder et al. [12], n = 89 women, 26.4 ± 4.5 years; Hamm [13] and Michalik et al. [14], n = 56, women, 23.6 ± 2.0 years