Content area
Full text
Eur Spine J (2015) 24:513520 DOI 10.1007/s00586-014-3626-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Documenting female spine motion during coituswith a commentary on the implications for the low back pain patient
Natalie Sidorkewicz Stuart M. McGill
Received: 28 February 2014 / Revised: 14 October 2014 / Accepted: 15 October 2014 / Published online: 24 October 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
AbstractPurpose To describe female lumbar spine motion and posture characteristics during coitus and compare these characteristics across ve common coital positions. Exacerbation of low back pain during coital movements and positions is a prevalent issue reported by female low back pain (LBP) patients. To address this problem, the rst study to examine lumbar spine biomechanics during coitus was conducted.
Methods Ten healthy males and females performed coitus in the following pre-selected positions and variations: QUADRUPED (fQUAD1 and fQUAD2 where the female is supporting her upper body with her elbows and hands, respectively), MISSIONARY (fMISS1 and fMISS2 where the female is minimally and more exed at the hips and knees, respectively), and SIDELYING. An electromagnetic motion capture system was used to measure three-dimensional lumbar spine angles that were normalized to maximum active range of motiona transmitter and receiver were afxed to the skin overlying the lateral aspect of the pelvis and the spinous process of the twelfth thoracic vertebra, respectively. To determine if each coital position had distinct spine kinematic proles (i.e., amplitude probability distribution function and total range of lumbar spine motion), separate univariate general linear models followed by Tukeys honestly signicant difference post hoc analysis were used. The presentation of coital positions was randomized.
Results Female lumbar spine movement varied depending on the coital position; both variations of QUADRUPED, fQUAD1 and fQUAD2, were found to use a signicantly greater range of spine motion than fMISS2 (p = 0.017 and p = 0.042, respectively). With the exception of both variations of MISSIONARY, fMISS1 and fMISS2, the majority of the range of motion used was in extension. These ndings are most pertinent to patients with LBP that is exacerbated by motions or postures. Based on the spine kinematic proles of each position, the least-to-most recommended positions for a female exion-intolerant patient are: fMISS2, fMISS1, fQUAD1, fSIDE, and fQUAD2. These recommendations would be contra-indicated for the extension-intolerant patient. Conclusions The ndings provided...