Angela S. Lee

Comparison of Trunk Proprioception Between Patients With Low Back Pain and Healthy Controls

OBJECTIVE To determine whether proprioceptive impairments exist in patients with low back pain (LBP). We hypothesized that patients with LBP would exhibit larger trunk proprioception errors than healthy controls. DESIGN Case-control study. SETTING University laboratory. PARTICIPANTS 24 patients with nonspecific LBP and 24 age-matched healthy controls. INTERVENTIONS Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES We measured trunk proprioception in all 3 anatomical planes using motion perception threshold, active repositioning, and passive repositioning tests. RESULTS LBP patients had significantly greater motion perception threshold than controls (P<.001) (1.3+/-0.9 degrees vs 0.8+/-0.6 degrees ). Furthermore, all subjects had the largest motion perception threshold in the transverse plane (P<.001) (1.2+/-0.7 degrees vs 1.0+/-0.8 degrees for all other planes averaged). There was no significant difference between LBP and healthy control groups in the repositioning tasks. Errors in the active repositioning test were significantly smaller than in the passive repositioning test (P=.032) (1.9+/-1.2 degrees vs 2.3+/-1.4 degrees ). CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that impairments in proprioception may be detected in patients with LBP when assessed with a motion perception threshold measure.

The effects of stochastic resonance stimulation on spine proprioception and postural control in chronic low back pain patients.

Study Design. Spine proprioception and postural control in unstable sitting were compared in 18 chronic low back pain patients using a repeated measures design. Objective. The study objective was to determine if stochastic resonance (SR) stimulation of the paraspinal muscles improves spine proprioception and trunk postural control. Summary of Background Data. Decreased spine proprioception and larger postural sway have been found in low back pain patients, although several studies have also shown no differences in spine proprioception. Methods. Spine proprioception, measuring subjects’ sensitivity to change in position, was assessed in 3 orthopaedic planes. Postural control was assessed using an unstable seat with a hemisphere attached to the bottom. Subjects balanced with eyes closed on the most challenging size hemisphere they could manage while center-of-pressure was recorded with a force plate beneath the seat. Both tasks were performed with SR stimulation randomized at 0%, 25%, 50%, and 90% intensity levels. Results. No significant differences in spine proprioception were observed between SR stimulation levels for any of the 3 orthopaedic planes. SR stimulation significantly improved postural control, but only in the lateral plane. No differences in postural control were observed between stimulation levels 25%, 50%, and 90% in the lateral plane. There was no correlation between spine proprioception and postural control. Conclusion. Results suggest that SR stimulation to the paraspinal muscles can improve postural control; however, this improvement cannot be attributed to improved spine proprioception based on the current study. People with compromised neuromuscular control or those exposed to unstable environments may benefit from SR stimulation.

Comparison of trunk stiffness provided by different design characteristics of lumbosacral orthoses

BACKGROUND Lumbosacral orthoses (LSOs) are class I medical devices that are used in conservative and postoperative management of low back pain. The effectiveness of LSOs depends on their design aimed at enhancing trunk stiffness. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare two lumbar supports: extensible (made of neoprene and lycra) and non-extensible (made of polyester and nylon). METHODS Trunk stiffness and damping was estimated from trunk displacement data in response to a quick force release in trunk flexion, extension, and lateral bending. Fourteen male and 6 female subjects performed five trials at each experimental condition: (1) No LSO, (2) extensible LSO, (3) non-extensible LSO, (4) non-extensible LSO with a small rigid front panel, and (5) non-extensible LSO with a large rigid front panel. Testing order was randomized and the LSOs were cinched to a pressure of 70 mmHg (9.4 kPa) measured between posterior aspect of the iliac crest and the orthosis. FINDINGS The non-extensible LSO reduced trunk displacement by 14% and increased trunk stiffness by 14% (P<0.001). The extensible LSO did not result in any significant change in trunk displacement or stiffness. The addition of rigid front panels to the non-extensible LSO did not improve its effectiveness. The trunk damping did not differ between the LSO conditions. INTERPRETATION A non-extensible LSO is more effective in augmenting trunk stiffness and limiting trunk motion following a perturbation than an extensible LSO. The rigid front panels do not provide any additional trunk stiffness most likely due to incongruence created between the body and a brace.

The effects of a three-week use of lumbosacral orthoses on trunk muscle activity and on the muscular response to trunk perturbations

BackgroundThe effects of lumbosacral orthoses (LSOs) on neuromuscular control of the trunk are not known. There is a concern that wearing LSOs for a long period may adversely alter muscle control, making individuals more susceptible to injury if they discontinue wearing the LSOs. The purpose of this study was to document neuromuscular changes in healthy subjects during a 3-week period while they regularly wore a LSO.MethodsFourteen subjects wore LSOs 3 hrs a day for 3 weeks. Trunk muscle activity prior to and following a quick force release (trunk perturbation) was measured with EMG in 3 sessions on days 0, 7, and 21. A longitudinal, repeated-measures, factorial design was used. Muscle reflex response to trunk perturbations, spine compression force, as well as effective trunk stiffness and damping were dependent variables. The LSO, direction of perturbation, and testing session were the independent variables.ResultsThe LSO significantly (P < 0.001) increased the effective trunk stiffness by 160 Nm/rad (27%) across all directions and testing sessions. The number of antagonist muscles that responded with an onset activity was significantly reduced after 7 days of wearing the LSO, but this difference disappeared on day 21 and is likely not clinically relevant. The average number of agonist muscles switching off following the quick force release was significantly greater with the LSO, compared to without the LSO (P = 0.003).ConclusionsThe LSO increased trunk stiffness and resulted in a greater number of agonist muscles shutting-off in response to a quick force release. However, these effects did not result in detrimental changes to the neuromuscular function of trunk muscles after 3 weeks of wearing a LSO 3 hours a day by healthy subjects.

A comparison of a maximum exertion method and a model-based, sub-maximum exertion method for normalizing trunk EMG

The problem with normalizing EMG data from patients with painful symptoms (e.g., low back pain) is that such patients may be unwilling or unable to perform maximum exertions. Furthermore, the normalization to a reference signal, obtained from a maximal or sub-maximal task, tends to mask differences that might exist as a result of pathology. Therefore, we presented a novel method (GAIN method) for normalizing trunk EMG data that overcomes both problems. The GAIN method does not require maximal exertions (MVC) and tends to preserve distinct features in the muscle recruitment patterns for various tasks. Ten healthy subjects performed various isometric trunk exertions, while EMG data from 10 muscles were recorded and later normalized using the GAIN and MVC methods. The MVC method resulted in smaller variation between subjects when tasks were executed at the three relative force levels (10%, 20%, and 30% MVC), while the GAIN method resulted in smaller variation between subjects when the tasks were executed at the three absolute force levels (50 N, 100 N, and 145 N). This outcome implies that the MVC method provides a relative measure of muscle effort, while the GAIN-normalized data gives an estimate of the absolute muscle force. Therefore, the GAIN-normalized data tends to preserve the differences between subjects in the way they recruit their muscles to execute various tasks, while the MVC-normalized data will tend to suppress such differences. The appropriate choice of the EMG normalization method will depend on the specific question that an experimenter is attempting to answer.

Trunk muscle response to various protocols of lumbar traction

The purpose of this study was to compare trunk muscle activity, spinal decompression force, and trunk flexibility resulting from various protocols of spinal traction. Four experiments explored the effects of (1) sinusoidal, triangular, square, and continuous distraction-force waveforms, (2) 0, 10, 20, and 30 degrees of pull angle, (3) superimposed low, medium and high frequency force oscillations, and (4) sham traction. Nineteen healthy subjects volunteered for this study. Surface EMG was recorded during traction and later used in a biomechanical model to estimate spine decompression force. Trunk flexibility was measured before and after each treatment. There were no differences in muscle activity between any of the experimental conditions except the thoracic erector spinae muscle, which had lower EMG during continuous compared to sinusoidal distraction-force waveform (p=0.02). Thoracic and lumbar erector spinae muscles were significantly less active during sham than real traction (p=0.01 and p=0.04, respectively). The estimated L4-L5 spine compression force was 25N. Trunk flexibility decreased after each experimental session (p=0.01), and there were no differences between sessions. Our results suggest that the trunk muscle activity is minimal and point toward fluid exchange in the disc as one of the key biomechanical effects of spinal traction.

Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Is Related to Multiparity and Hysterectomies in Older Women

Study Design. A case-control study. Objective. To determine whether parity and abdominal surgeries are associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). Summary of Background Data. DS is considered to be a major cause of low back pain (LBP) in the older population, with greater prevalence of DS among women. Because LBP and impaired abdominal muscle function are common during pregnancy and post-partum, parity-related abdominal muscle deficiency, resulting in poor spinal mechanics, could be a factor in the development of DS in women. Indeed a relationship between the number of pregnancies and DS was reported in one study. Methods. A total of 322 women between the ages of 40 and 80 (149 with DS and 173 controls) filled out a questionnaire providing information about their demographics, the number of full-term pregnancies, the number and types of abdominal surgeries (including cesarean section and hysterectomies), and age at menopause among other items. A binary logistic regression was used as a multivariate model to identify the variables associated with DS. Results. Along with age and body mass index as covariates, the number of full-term pregnancies and the hysterectomy were significant predictors of DS. Other abdominal surgeries, cesarean section, or the number of years postmenopause were not significant predictors of DS in this regression model after adjusting for all other significant variables. Conclusion. Each full-term pregnancy seems to be associated with the 22% increase in odds of developing DS. Hysterectomy nearly doubles the odds of DS as compared to women who did not have hysterectomy. Level of Evidence: 4