ons we
larged
tives.
libra-
elvis,
shape.
rmally
Cross
e with
bject-
stment
lcula-
al al-
inally
1 pro-
inical
tions,
4. THE COLLECTIV
All pilots were consulted about back pain during
or after flight exposure. Out of 30 pilots 16
told us that they had no pain at all, 14 pilots
answered in the affirmative. Out of this group we
chose 13 persons, 7 without back pain called col-
lectiv I and 6 with pain (collectiv II). All the
pilots without pain had an average flight expo-
sure of 1575 hours, the chosen 7 pilots had an
average flight exposure of 1513 hours. The pilots
with pain had an average flight time of 2607
hours, the chosen group flew on an average of
2660 hours.
The group of the pilots with spinal pain was ol-
der than the other group. On the day we took the
orthopaedic and photogrammetric examination there
was no flight exposure for all pilots and the
surrounding conditions during our examination
were the same for all pilots. None of them had
an acute disease of the locomotion system or a
common illness.
5. RESULTS
5.1 Results of the clinical examination
In the clinical orthopaedic examination of the 30
pilots we couldn’t find a statistic relevant re-
sult. The lumbar and thoracal back pain was most-
ly based on local segmental functional disorders.
This we could find as well in the rest of the
population too. Only the accumulation of mal-
function of the caudal thoracal spine made the
pilots stand out but it is not possible to make
an exact statistical statement because up to now
there is no other group with which we can compare
it.
5.2 Results of the photogrammetric measurement
The results of our photogrammetric analysis were
3-dimensional objectcoordinates with standard
deviations of 0,7 mm in x and z and 1,7 mm in y
(receiving direction). A priori we expected an
accuracy of some mm which is influenced through
exterior factors (skinmovement, reproducebility).
The results we received were well-suited for our
medical purpose.
The following parameters of examination were used
to judge the different postures:
A) The axis between the dorsal edge of the
right and the left acromion and the tactile
spinae posterior superior. These points
were marked with retrotargets and show the
rotation of the pelvis-acromion-axis along
the vertical body axis.
B) We defined transverse sections in the spa-
cial shape profile 10 cm, 25 cm and 35 cm
above the connection of the spinae iliaca
posterior.
These sections are useful to size the body
rotation along the vertical body axis in
different heights of the trunk.
C) The tactile line of the spine was also mar-
ked with reflecting targets to represent
the spacial geometry (kypho-lordosis) in-
cluding the vertical.
The examinations were carried out in normal stan-
ding and sitting postures, the patients sat down
on a backless stool.
With our analyses we emphasized the variation of
the rotation of the trunk in the horizontal plane
in transition from sitting to standing.
The connection line of the pelvis points was de-
fined generally horizontal to enable a comparison
of the trunk rotation and inclination.
to A) In both sitting and standing postures we
found a light leftrotation of the upper
part of the body at 8 probands in relation
to the pelvis axis (right acromion is rota-
ted forward):
0 - 36 mm standing ; 0 - 48 mm sitting
5 patients showed a light right rotation of
the acromion connected axis:
0 - 21 mm standing ; 0 - 12 mm sitting
Those deviations may be influenced by an
insuffizient positioning of the retrotar-
gets. Differences between the standing and
sitting results were calculated to show the
effective movements in space. We found out
clearly that most of our patients had an
increase of leftrotation in transition from
standing to sitting posture ( 0 - 29 mm).
This effect corresponds with the occupatio-
nal posture.
rotation pelvis—acromion—axis
difference sitting and standing
rotation (mm) to the left
patient
acromion
picture 2: differences between sitting and standing positions
rotation of the pelvis-acromion-axis
