|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Dec 10, 2008, 5:44 PM
Post #1 of 5
(921 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
Rock climbing does not increase risk of osteoarthritis
A study in the US has found there is no greater risk of osteoarthritis in rock climbers compared to non climbers, contrary to previous theory.
The study, published in the November issue of Journal of Anatomy, examined osteological changes in the hands and fingers of rock climbers that result from intense, long-term mechanical stress placed on these bones. Specifically, whether rock climbing leads to increased cortical bone thickness and joint changes associated with osteoarthritis. Researchers also wanted to identify whether climbing intensity and frequency of different styles of climbing influence changes.
Adam Sylvester of the University of Tennessee explains: "Radiographs of both hands were taken for each participant and were scored for radiographic signs of osteoarthritis using an atlas method. We compared 27 recreational rock climbers and 35 non-climbers for four measures of bone strength and dimensions and osteoarthritis. The results suggest that climbers are not at an increased risk of developing osteoarthritis compared with non-climbers.
Climber's finger and hand bones are, however, greater in cross-sectional area and total width, indicating that additional bone is being deposited on the external surface, not usually seen in adults. The strength of the finger and hand bones are correlated with styles of climbing that emphasize athletic difficulty. Significant predictors include the highest levels achieved in bouldering and sport climbing."
The research paper can be read online at www.journalofanatomy.com.
|
|
|
|
|
mikeboomer12
Dec 10, 2008, 5:54 PM
Post #2 of 5
(898 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2007
Posts: 52
|
Hey, thanks for posting this, I have a condition that makes me susceptible to arthritis, I've always been worried. That's nice to here.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Dec 10, 2008, 6:02 PM
Post #4 of 5
(876 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118559744/PDFSTART
|
|
|
|
|
onceahardman
Dec 10, 2008, 6:20 PM
Post #5 of 5
(849 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2493
|
Clicky. Thank you! Hey, I still didn't see it in the table of contents. Where did you find it? (or did I just screw up?)
At first glance, it looks good. I would have liked them to have the measurers blinded. as to whether the X-rays belonged to climbers or not.
I did like that they took care to test intra-tester reliability. INTER-tester reliability should have also been assessed (if applicable-they didn't say how many researchers did measurements.)
Interesting (and perhaps counterintuitive) that climbers had less finger OA than non-climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
