Skip to content

Pelvic Belt Effects on Osseous Anatomy, Muscule Activation and Ground Reaction Forces

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02027038
Enrollment
42
Registered
2014-01-03
Start date
2011-08-31
Completion date
2013-01-31
Last updated
2014-01-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Electromuscular Activation of the Pelis and Limbs, Ground Reaction Force Data, Helath Related Quality of Life, Sacroiliac Joint Pain

Brief summary

Hypothesis I: The anatomic alignment of the pelvic bones, the electromuscular activation of limb muscles and ground reaction forces are different in patients with sacroiliac joint pain, as compared to healthy controls. Hypothesis II: The application of pelvic belts alters the alignment of the pelvic bones, the electromuscular activation of the limb muscles or ground reaction forces. Hypothesis III: The effects proposed in hypothesis II are different in patients with sacroiliac joint pain, as compared to healthy controls.

Detailed description

The sacroiliac joint is among the most frequently involved anatomical structure in low back pain. Pelvic belt anatomy makes the sacroiliac joint more vulnerable to be involved in chronic painful conditions. However, the anatomical and functional correlate of sacroiliac joint pain is yet undetermined. According to the guidelines of International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), painful conditions should primarily be managed conservatively. However, existing studies fail providing sound evidence on the effects of conservative devices to therapy sacroiliac joint pain. In the study, a total of 17 patients suffering from sacroiliac joint pain and 17 controls were investigated by means of magnetic resonance imaging, EMG, health surveys and ground reaction force measurements. A pelvic compression belt was administered in two levels of compression and the corresponding magnetic resonance imaging, EMG and ground reaction force data were measured.

Interventions

DEVICEPelvic belt application

Sponsors

Bauerfeind AG, Zeulenroda-Triebes
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University of Leipzig
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* patients with diagnostically confirmed sacroiliac joint pain * controls without any history of musculoskeletal disorders

Exclusion criteria

* endoprostheses, metallic implants * somatoform disorders, claustrophobia, pregnancy * surgical interventions on the spine, degenerative joint diseases elsewhere

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in pelvic bone alignment by pelvic belt, electromuscular activation, ground reaction force and in health outcome3-5 hoursFirst application of pelvic belt = starting point No compression, moderate and maximum compression Health survey completion = end point

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Health related quality of life due to pelvic belt application6 weeksstarting point: end of primary outcome measure ending point: 6 weeks

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 4, 2026