Intelligent Seating System with Haptic Feedback for Active Health Support

We conducted intradiscal pressure measurements with one volunteer performing various activities normally found in daily life, sports, and spinal therapy. The goal of this study was to measure intradiscal pressure to complement earlier data from Nachemson with dynamic and long-term measurements over a broad range of activities. Loading of the spine still is not well understood. The most important in vivo data are from pioneering intradiscal pressure measurements recorded by Nachemson during the 1960s. Since that time, there have been few data to corroborate or dispute those findings. Under sterile surgical conditions, a pressure transducer with a diameter of 1.5 mm was implanted in the nucleus pulposus of a nondegenerated L4-L5 disc of a male volunteer 45-years-old and weighing 70 kg. Pressure was recorded with a telemetry system during a period of approximately 24 hours for various lying positions; sitting positions in a chair, in an armchair, and on a pezziball (ergonomic sitting ball); during sneezing, laughing, walking, jogging, stair climbing, load lifting during hydration over 7 hours of sleeping, and others. The following values and more were measured: lying prone, 0.1 MPa; lying laterally, 0.12 MPa; relaxed standing, 0.5 MPa; standing flexed forward, 1.1 MPa; sitting unsupported, 0.46 MPa; sitting with maximum flexion, 0.83 MPa; nonchalant sitting, 0.3 MPa; and lifting a 20-kg weight with round flexed back, 2.3 MPa; with flexed knees, 1.7 MPa; and close to the body, 1.1 MPa. During the night, pressure increased from 0.1 to 0.24 MPa. Good correlation was found with Nachemson's data during many exercises, with the exception of the comparison of standing and sitting or of the various lying positions. Notwithstanding the limitations related to the single-subject design of this study, these differences may be explained by the different transducers used. It can be cautiously concluded that the intradiscal pressure during sitting may in fact be less than that in erect standing, that muscle activity increases pressure, that constantly changing position is important to promote flow of fluid (nutrition) to the disc, and that many of the physiotherapy methods studied are valid, but a number of them should be re-evaluated.

By measurement of intradiscal pressure in vitro, the hydrostatic properties of the nucleus pulposus of normal lumbar intervertebral disc was established. The stress distribution within normal discs subjected to vertical load was also explained, demonstrating the high tangential strains occurring in the posterior part of the annulus fibrosus. Intravitally performed measurements of disc pressure have demonstrated how the load on the lumbar disc varies according to the position of the subject's body. Compared to the pressure or load in the upright standing position, reclining reduces the pressure by 70%, while unsupported sitting increases the load by 40% and forward leaning and weight lifting by more than 100%. Similar relatively large augmentations of the load were observed in subjects performing various commonly used muscle-strengthening exercises. Measurement of intradiscal pressure is instrumental in explaining, from a mechanical point, the occurrence of posterior ruptures in the lumbar discs, and provides a basis for the rational treatment of patients with low-back pain in so far as these exhibit increase of pain on increased mechanical loads. For the majority of patients with low-back pain, the cause is unknown, although most evidence so far presented links the lumbar intervertebral disc to the pain syndromes. Results of recent studies have shown that both chemical and mechanical factors are probably of importance. So far we cannot successfully treat the chemical part of the disc syndrome. Since all our patients exhibit more pain when the spine is mechanically loaded, knowledge gained from intravital disc-pressure measurements provides a basis for successfully treating the mechanical part of the condition. Since none of the frequently prescribed and more spectacular remedies has ever been proved statistically superior to any of the others, it is most fair to our patients and to ourselves to use simpler, less expensive, and less dangerous programmes, such as bed-rest, administration of salicylates, and proper ergonomic advice. Based on a scientific approach, the low-back-pain school is intended to help the patient to be able to cope with these back troubles, to avoid excess therapy, and to decrease the cost both for the individual and for Society.