Search

Introduction: The amount of thoracic kyphosis and its mobility may be affected by gender in older adults. This study investigates gender differences in thoracic kyphosis and thoracic spine mobility in healthy older adults. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 36 participants among which 21 were female and 15 were male with an age range of 65-80 years participated. The amount of thoracic spine kyphosis was measured in a relaxed standing position and the position of maximum correction of thoracic kyphosis using a flexible ruler between the spinous processes of T12 and C7. The difference between the thoracic kyphosis of the relaxed state and the condition of the maximum correction is used to determine the degree of thoracic spine mobility. Finally, men and women were compared in terms of thoracic kyphosis and thoracic spine mobility. The student t-test was employed to compare kyphosis and spinal mobility between men and women, and the paired student t-test was used to compare kyphosis angle in a relaxed posture and maximum kyphosis correction status. Meanwhile, the Pearson test was utilized to evaluate the relationship between variables. Results: Although there was no statistically significant difference in the mean thoracic kyphosis of relaxation (P=0.13) and maximal correction (P=0.18) status of healthy old men and women, there was a significant positive relationship between the rate of kyphosis angle and the amount of mobility of thoracic kyphosis (P=0.003; r=0.48). Conclusion: There is no difference in the degree of kyphosis and thoracic spine mobility in older men and women. In addition, people with more thoracic kyphosis had more spinal mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Some accurate tools exist to assess fear-avoidance behavior, such as the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK) in individuals with musculoskeletal problems. The current research aims to compare the psychometric characteristics of the original 17-items TSK questionnaire and its 11-item brief version in chronic non-specific low-back pain (CNSLBP). Materials and Methods: In this test development study, 295 patients with CNSLBP referred to the physiotherapy clinic of Milad Hospital in Tehran city, Iran were evaluated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and α Cronbach was conducted to assess the validity and reliability of the original and brief version of the TSK, respectively. For goodness-of-fit, the Χ²/df, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and comparative fit index (CFI) indices were used. Results: Internal consistency specified by Cronbach's α was 0.949 for the original version of the questionnaire and 0.927 for the brief one. Based on the CFA findings, the goodness-of-fit indices for the brief version were GFI=0.921, RMSEA=0.078 (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.062%-0.094%), comparative fit index (CFI)=0.981, and Χ²/df=2.791. These indices for the original one were 0.882, 0.066 (90% CI, 0.055%-0.076%), 0.983, and 2.270, respectively. A significant correlation was found between these two versions (P<0.001). These findings confirm the adequacy of the brief version of the TSK. Conclusion: The brief version of TSK can be considered a reliable and valid tool to evaluate somatic focus and activity avoidance in patients with CNSLBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Identifying the contributing factors to a specific learning disorder and comparing these factors in different types of this disorder will lead to using more proper interventions in the future. Therefore, this study aimed to compare sensory processing skills and perceived motor competence between three groups of students with specific learning disabilities (reading and writing disorders, math disorders, and combination disorders). Materials and Methods: The present study was a cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study. The participants were 48 children (16 in each group, aged 8-12 years). They were selected from Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Province, Iran, by the simple convenience sampling method. The participants’ sensory processing was measured with sensory profile 2 and their perceived motor competency with Marsh perceived motor competence questionnaire. Results: The results showed a significant difference between the three groups in the sensory sensitivity, low registration sensory patterns and processing of tactile, and body position senses (P <0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between groups in other components of sensory processing and perceived motor competence (P> 0.05). Conclusion: The results indicate that therapeutic interventions in the group with reading and writing disorders should focus on increasing sensory registration and processing of tactile and body position senses and reducing sensory sensitivity in the mathematical group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]