Dataset Information

Comparison of proprioceptive acuity of the cervical spine in healthy adults and adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:It has been suggested that patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP) perform poorly in postural tasks when compared to healthy individuals. Despite its importance in posture and alignment of the trunk in relation to the head, neck proprioception has not been examined in patients with low back pain. The purpose of this study was to compare neck proprioception in patients with CNSLBP with healthy individuals. METHODS:Cervical joint reposition error was measured five times consecutively in the neutral head position, 30° and 60° left and right head rotation. The main outcome measure was the mean cervical joint repositioning error of the head. RESULTS:Forty-six participants with (n = 24, 54 ± 16yrs SD, 14 females) and without (n = 22, 36 ± 13yrs SD, 13 females) CNSLBP were included in the study. Comparison of mean cervical joint repositioning error between patients and healthy controls showed no statistically significant group difference in any of the applied positions. The range of deviation in CNSLBP patients was between 1.57° and 3.27° compared to 1.46° to 2.26° in healthy controls. An overshooting tendency for both groups was found in the neutral head position. CONCLUSION:The ability to accurately position the head does not seem to be impaired in patients with CNSLBP. This may suggest that sensorimotor control is affected on other levels of the movement system and future research should focus on methods to identify the source of these aberrations.

SUBMITTER: Emmert M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6328243 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of proprioceptive acuity of the cervical spine in healthy adults and adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

Emmert Maria M Schuster-Amft Corina C de Bruin Eling D ED McCaskey Michael A MA

PloS one 20190110 1

<h4>Background</h4>It has been suggested that patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP) perform poorly in postural tasks when compared to healthy individuals. Despite its importance in posture and alignment of the trunk in relation to the head, neck proprioception has not been examined in patients with low back pain. The purpose of this study was to compare neck proprioception in patients with CNSLBP with healthy individuals.<h4>Methods</h4>Cervical joint reposition error was mea ...[more]

PMID: 30629608

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProprioceptive training (PrT) is popularly applied as preventive or rehabilitative exercise method in various sports and rehabilitation settings. Its effect on pain and function is only poorly evaluated. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise and analyse the existing data on the effects of PrT on pain alleviation and functional restoration in patients with chronic (? 3 months) neck- or back pain.MethodsRelevant electronic databases were searched from their respective inception to February 2014. Randomised controlled trials comparing PrT with conventional therapies or inactive controls in patients with neck- or low back pain were included. Two review authors independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias (RoB). Data extraction was performed by the first author and crosschecked by a second author. Quality of findings was assessed and rated according to GRADE guidelines. Pain and functional status outcomes were extracted and synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively.ResultsIn total, 18 studies involving 1380 subjects described interventions related to PrT (years 1994-2013). 6 studies focussed on neck-, 12 on low back pain. Three main directions of PrT were identified: Discriminatory perceptive exercises with somatosensory stimuli to the back (pPrT, n=2), multimodal exercises on labile surfaces (mPrT, n=13), or joint repositioning exercise with head-eye coordination (rPrT, n=3). Comparators entailed usual care, home based training, educational therapy, strengthening, stretching and endurance training, or inactive controls. Quality of studies was low and RoB was deemed moderate to high with a high prevalence of unclear sequence generation and group allocation (>60%). Low quality evidence suggests PrT may be more effective than not intervening at all. Low quality evidence suggests that PrT is no more effective than conventional physiotherapy. Low quality evidence suggests PrT is inferior to educational and behavioural approaches.ConclusionsThere are few relevant good quality studies on proprioceptive exercises. A descriptive summary of the evidence suggests that there is no consistent benefit in adding PrT to neck- and low back pain rehabilitation and functional restoration.

Project description:Background contextAnimals are commonly used to model the human spine for in vitro and in vivo experiments. Many studies have investigated similarities and differences between animals and humans in the lumbar and thoracic vertebrae. However, a quantitative anatomic comparison of calf, pig, and human cervical spines has not been reported.PurposeTo compare fundamental structural similarities and differences in vertebral bodies from the cervical spines of commonly used experimental animal models and humans.Study designAnatomical morphometric analysis was performed on cervical vertebra specimens harvested from humans and two common large animals (i.e., calves and pigs).MethodsMultiple morphometric parameters were directly measured from cervical spine specimens of twelve pigs, twelve calves and twelve human adult cadavers. The following anatomical parameters were measured: vertebral body width (VBW), vertebral body depth (VBD), vertebral body height (VBH), spinal canal width (SCW), spinal canal depth (SCD), pedicle width (PW), pedicle depth (PD), pedicle inclination (PI), dens width (DW), dens depth (DD), total vertebral width (TVW), and total vertebral depth (TVD).ResultsThe atlantoaxial (C1-2) joint in pigs is similar to that in humans and could serve as a human substitute. The pig cervical spine is highly similar to the human cervical spine, except for two large transverse processes in the anterior regions ofC4-C6. The width and depth of the calf odontoid process were larger than those in humans. VBW and VBD of calf cervical vertebrae were larger than those in humans, but the spinal canal was smaller. Calf C7 was relatively similar to human C7, thus, it may be a good substitute.ConclusionPig cervical vertebrae were more suitable human substitutions than calf cervical vertebrae, especially with respect to C1, C2, and C7. The biomechanical properties of nerve vascular anatomy and various segment functions in pig and calf cervical vertebrae must be considered when selecting an animal model for research on the spine.

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain can disrupt the cortical representation of a painful body part. This disruption may play a role in maintaining the individual's pain. Tactile acuity training has been used to normalise cortical representation and reduce pain in certain pain conditions. However, there is little evidence for the effectiveness of this intervention for chronic low back pain (CLBP). The primary aim of this study was to inform the development of a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) by providing preliminary data on the effect of tactile acuity training on pain and function in individuals with CLBP. The secondary aim was to obtain qualitative feedback about the intervention.MethodsIn this mixed-methods pilot RCT 15 individuals were randomised to either an intervention (tactile acuity training) or a placebo group (sham tactile acuity training). All participants received 3 sessions of acuity training (intervention or sham) from a physiotherapist and were requested to undertake daily acuity home training facilitated by an informal carer (friend/relative). All participants also received usual care physiotherapy. The primary outcome measures were pain (0-100visual analogue scale (VAS)) and function (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)). Participants and their informal carers were invited to a focus group to provide feedback on the intervention.ResultsThe placebo group improved by the greatest magnitude for both outcome measures, but there was no statistically significant difference (Mean difference (95%CI), p-value) between groups for change in pain (25.6 (-0.7 to 51.9), p = 0.056) or function (2.2 (-1.6 to 6.0), p = 0.237). Comparing the number of individuals achieving a minimally clinically significant improvement, the placebo group had better outcomes for pain with all participants achieving ?30% improvement compared to only a third of the intervention group (6/6 vs. 3/9, p = 0.036). Qualitatively, participants reported that needing an informal carer was a considerable barrier to the home training component of the study.ConclusionsThis pilot RCT found tactile acuity training to be no more effective than sham tactile acuity training for function and less effective for pain in individuals with CLBP. That the intervention could not be self-applied was a considerable barrier to its use.Trial registration isrctnISRCTN98118082.

Dataset Information

Comparison of proprioceptive acuity of the cervical spine in healthy adults and adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

Publications

Comparison of proprioceptive acuity of the cervical spine in healthy adults and adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets