PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2025

Comparison of skin-to-bone distance in the interscapular region when measured in the prone position and in the seated position in a therapy massage chair.

Tsunehiko Wada, Miyono Okinaka, Kodai Kawasaki and 3 others

PMID 39902306

WHAT IT FOUND

Skin-to-bone thickness in the upper back did not change significantly when healthy men moved from lying face down to sitting in a massage chair.

This suggests depth guidelines from prone studies may apply to seated treatments, though patient factors like BMI still matter.

Key findings

01There was no statistically significant difference in skin-to-bone distance between the prone and seated positions at either measurement point.

02Skin-to-bone thickness showed a strong positive correlation with BMI, but no significant correlation with age or height.

03Thickness differed significantly between the two anatomical sites (Point A and Point B) in both positions.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study included only healthy young-to-middle-aged males, so results may not apply to females, older adults, or patients with specific musculoskeletal conditions. The seated position was achieved using a massage chair that supports the body, which may differ from a patient maintaining their own posture in a standard chair. The sample size was small (18 participants). The study measured healthy tissue; it did not account for conditions like muscle spasm or edema that might alter tissue thickness.

Declared interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The study was approved by the University of Tsukuba ethics committee.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that seated treatments are universally safe for all patients based on this study. The participants were healthy males with normal BMI, and the study did not test patients with osteoporosis, kyphosis, or other spinal deformities who may have different anatomical risks.

Read it on PubMed →