The purpose of this study was to investigate the kinematic and kinetic changes that may occur in the pelvic and spine regions during cross-legged sitting postures. Experiments were performed on sixteen healthy subjects. Data were collected while the subject sat in 4 different sitting postures for 5 seconds: uncrossed sitting with both feet on the floor (Posture A), sitting while placing his right knee on the left knee (Posture B), sitting by placing right ankle on left knee (Posture C), and sitting by placing right ankle over the left ankle (Posture D). The order of the sitting posture was random. The sagittal plane angles (pelvic tilt, lumbar A-P curve, thoracic A-P curve) and the frontal plane angles (pelvic obliquity, lumber lateral curves, thoracic lateral curves) were obtained using VICON system with 6 cameras and analyzed with Nexus software. The pressure on each buttock was measured using Tekscan. Repeated one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the angle and pressure across the four postures. The Bonferroni's post hoc test was used to determine the differences between upright trunk sitting and cross-legged postures. In sagittal plane, cross-legged sitting postures showed significantly greater kyphotic curves in lumbar and thoracic spine when compared uncrossed sitting posture. Also, pelvic posterior tilting was greater in cross-legged postures. In frontal plane, only height of the right pelvic was significantly higher in Posture B than in Posture A. Finally, in Posture B, the pressure on the right buttock area was greater than Posture A and, in Posture C, the pressure on the left buttock area was greater than Posture A. However, all dependent variables in both planes did not demonstrate any significant difference among the three cross-legged postures (p>.05). The findings suggest that asymmetric changes in the pelvic and spine region secondary to the prolonged cross-legged sitting postures may cause lower back pain and deformities in the spine structures.

This study is performed to investigate the difference of the spinal stability system with and without low back pain. There were 9 participants with low back pain and 9 asymptomatic subjects to be recruited, they were measured thoracic and lumbar curvature, trunk muscle activation in upright sitting postures and slump sitting, back muscle endurance, and lumbar proprioception. Spinal curvature and surface electromyography of 4 trunk muscles were measured in an upright sitting postures and slump sitting in 18 subjects. The result of the study was that there were significant differences between the groups in spinal curvature (p<.05), significantly higher external oblique activity and less internal oblique in the low back pain group than the healthy subjects (p<.05), and significantly less proprioception in the low back pain group (p<.05). But there was not a significant difference between the trunk muscle endurance groups. According to the result, the low back pain group had greater thoracic extension and higher global muscle activity in the upright sitting posture and less proprioception. This study was useful to suggest postural training for normal muscle activation, selective muscle strengthening to prevent chronic deterioration, and helpful in making a treatment plan to indicate a synthetic care method that includes increasing proprioception.