The Effect of the Lower Extremity Posture on Trunk While Sitting

  • Sangeun JinEmail author
  • Seulgi Kim
  • Seong Rok Chang
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 820)


The goal of this study was to investigate the interactions between upper extremity and lower extremity in sitting postures. Ten healthy participants were recruited from the university population, and were asked to sit on a chair with six different lower extremity postures (2 trunk-thigh angles, 3 knee angles). The head, trunk and lower extremity postures were captured by using fourteen motion trackers, and used to calculate the head flexion angle, thoracic flexion angle, lumbar flexion angle, pelvic flexion angle, and shoulder angle. Results showed the effects of changes in the trunk-thigh angle and the knee angle on all dependent measures. First, the bigger trunk-thigh angle (135°) showed better lumbar lordosis, smaller head flexion angle, and less rounded shoulder as compared to the 90° trunk-thigh angle. In addition, the current study revealed that the bigger the trunk-thigh angle, the better the whole trunk postures including the better lumbar and thoracic lordosis, less flexed head, and less rounded shoulder. Second, the bigger knee flexion angle negatively influenced on all trunk posture measures, suggesting that the extended knee joint tightens hamstring muscles and pulls the pelvis backward, and finally results in the bad trunk posture such as less lordotic lumbar and thoracic postures, more head flexion angle and more rounded shoulder angle. On this basis, the office chair should be designed under the consideration of the lower extremity postures such as the position of foots, the knee supporter, and the seat inclination angle.


Sitting Lower extremity Trunk kinematics 



This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035470).


  1. 1.
    Callaghan JP, McGill SM (2001) Low back joint loading and kinematics during standing and unsupported sitting. Ergonomics 44:280–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Karlqvist L, Tornqvist EW, Hagberg M, Hagman M, Tommingas A (2002) Self-reported working conditions of VDU operators and associations with musculoskeletal symptoms: a cross-sectional study focussing on gender differences. Int J Ind Ergon 30(4–5):277–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marcus M, Gerr F, Monteilh C, Ortiz DJ, Gentry E, Cohen S, Edwards A, Ensor C, Kleinbaum D (2002) A prospective study of computer users: II. Postural risk factors for musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders. Am J Ind Med 41: 236–249Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Demunter C (2005) The digital divide in Europe.
  5. 5.
    Berolo S, Wells RP, Amick BC (2011) Musculoskeletal symptoms among mobile hand-held device users and their relationship to device use: a preliminary study in a Canadian university population. Appl Ergon 42(2):371–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bendix T, Biering-Sorenson F (1983) Posture of the trunk when sitting on forward inclining seats. Scand J Rehabil Med 15(4):197–203Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bridger RS, Orkin D, Henneberg M (1992) A quantitative investigation of lumbar and pelvic postures in standing and sitting: interrelationships with body position and hip muscle length. Int J Ind Ergon 9:235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Curran M, O’Sullivan L, Dankaerts W, O’Sullivan K (2015) Does using a chair backrest or reducing seated hip flexion influence trunk muscle activity and discomfort? A systematic review. Hum Factors 57(7):1115–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Keegan JJ (1953) Alterations of the lumbar curve related to posture and seating. J Bone Joint Surg 35(3):589–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harrison DD, Harrison SO, Croft AC, Harrison DE, Troyanovich SJ (1999) Sitting biomechanics part I: review of the literature. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 22(9):594–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cailliet R, Helberg LA (1981) Organic musculoskeletal back disorders. In: Stolov WC, Clowers MR, (eds) Handbook of severe disability. U.S. Department of Education, RASGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leinonen V, Kankaanpaa M, Airaksinen O, Hanninen O (2000) Back and hip extensor activities during trunk flexion/extension: effects of low back pain and regabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 81(1): 32–37Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sihvonen T (1997) Flexion relaxation of the hamstring muscles during lumbar-pelvic rhythm. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 78(5):486–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Snijders CJ, Vleeming A, Stoeckart R (1993) Transfer of lumbosacral load to iliac bones and legs: part 2: loading of the sacroiliac joints when lifting in a stooped posture. Clin Biomech 8(6):295–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vleeming A, Pool-Goudzwaard AL, Stoeckart R, van Wingerden JP, Snijders CJ (1995) The posterior layer of the thoracolumbar fascia. its function in load transfer from spine to legs. Spine 20(7):753–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Psihogios JP, Sommerich CM, Mirka G, Moon SD (2001) A field evaluation of monitor placement effects in VDT users. Appl Ergon 32(4):131–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eklund J, Liew M (1991) Evaluation of seating : the influence of hip and knee angles on spinal posture. Int J Ind Ergon 8(1):67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pusan National UniversityBusanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Pukyong National UniversityBusanRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations