Examination of the Lumbar Movement Pattern during a Clinical Test and a Functional Activity Test in People with and without Low Back Pain

Dynamic assessment of spine movement patterns using an RGB-D camera and deep learning

In clinical practice, functional limitations in patients with low back pain are subjectively assessed, potentially leading to misdiagnosis and prolonged pain. This paper proposes an objective deep learning (DL) markerless motion capture system that uses a red-green-blue-depth (RGB-D) camera to measure the kinematics of the spine during flexion-extension (FE) through: 1) the development and validation of a DL semantic segmentation algorithm that segments the back into four anatomical classes and 2) the development and validation of a framework that uses these segmentations to measure spine kinematics during FE. Twenty participants performed ten cycles of FE with drawn-on point markers while being recorded with an RGB-D camera. Five of these participants also performed an additional trial where they were recorded with an optical motion capture (OPT) system. The DL algorithm was trained to segment the back and pelvis into four anatomical classes: upper back, lower back, spine, and pelvis. A kinematic framework was then developed to refine these segmentations into upper spine, lower spine, and pelvis masks, which were used to measure spine kinematics after obtaining 3D global coordinates of the mask corners. The segmentation algorithm achieved high accuracy, and the root mean square error (RMSE) between ground truth and predicted lumbar kinematics was < 4°. When comparing markerless and OPT kinematics, RMSE values were < 6°. This work demonstrates the feasibility of using markerless motion capture to assess FE spine movement in clinical settings. Future work will expand the studied movement directions and test on different demographics.

Spinal kinematic variability is increased in people with chronic low back pain during a repetitive lifting task

Changes in spinal kinematic variability have been observed in people with chronic non-specific LBP (CNSLBP) during the performance of various repetitive functional tasks. However, the direction of these changes (i.e., less or more kinematic variability) is not consistent. This study aimed to assess differences in kinematic variability of the 3D angular displacement of thoracic and lumbar spinal segments in people with CNSLBP compared to asymptomatic individuals during a repetitive lifting task. Eleven people with CNSLBP and 11 asymptomatic volunteers performed 10 cycles of multi-planar lifting movements while spinal kinematics were recorded. For the three planes of motion, point-by-point standard deviations (SDs) were computed across all cycles of lifting and the average was calculated as a measure of kinematic variability for both segments. People with CNSLBP displayed higher thoracic (F = 8.00, p = 0.010, ηp2 = 0.286) and lumbar kinematic variability (F = 5.48, p = 0.030, ηp2 = 0.215) in the sagittal plane. Moreover, group differences were observed in the transversal plane for thoracic (F = 7.62, p = 0.012, ηp2 = 0.276) and lumbar kinematic variability (F = 5.402, p = 0.031, ηp2 = 0.213), as well as in the frontal plane for thoracic (F = 7.27, p = 0.014, ηp2 = 0.267) and lumbar kinematic variability (F = 6.11, p = 0.022, ηp2 = 0.234), all showing higher variability in those with CNSLBP. A significant main effect of group was not detected (p > 0.05) for spinal range of motion (ROM). Thus, people with CNSLBP completed the lifting task with the same ROM in all three planes of motion as observed for asymptomatic individuals, yet they performed the lifting task with higher spinal kinematic cycle-to-cycle variation.

The Observable Movement Quality scale for patients with low back pain (OMQ-LBP): validity and reliability in a primary care setting of physical therapy

BACKGROUND

The Observable Movement Quality scale for patients with low back pain (OMQ-LBP) is a newly developed measurement instrument for use in primary care settings of physical and exercise therapists to assess movement quality (MQ) of patients with low back pain (LBP).

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine validity, reliability and feasibility of the OMQ-LBP. The OMQ-LBP consists of a standardized movement circuit (performed twice) consisting of five daily activities problematic for LBP patients, which are scored with an 11-item observation list.

METHODS

Construct validity was determined by testing seven hypotheses on associations between constructs (n = 85 patients with LBP) and four hypotheses on known group differences (n = 85 patients with LBP and n = 63 healthy controls; n = 35 matched participant-patients having VAS-pain ≥ 20 mm during and/or after both circuits and healthy controls). Internal consistency was analyzed with Cronbach's alpha (n = 85 patients with LBP). For inter- and intra-rater reliability Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) values were examined (n = 14 therapists: seven primary care physical therapists and seven exercise therapists). Additionally, content validity and feasibility were determined using thematic analysis of a brief interview with participants, patients (n = 38) and therapists (n = 14).

RESULTS

After Bonferroni correction 2/7 associations between constructs and 2/4 significant group differences were confirmed. Cronbach's alpha was 0,79. The ICC-values of interrater reliability of the OMQ-LBP total score and the duration score were 0.56 and 0.99 and intra-rater reliability 0.82 and 0,93, respectively. Thematic analysis revealed five themes. Three themes elucidate that both patients and therapists perceived the content of the OMQ-LBP as valid. The fourth theme exhibits that OMQ-LBP provides a clear and unambiguous language for MQ in patients with LBP. Theme 5 depicts that the OMQ-LBP seems feasible, but video recording is time-consuming.

CONCLUSIONS

The OMQ-LBP is a promising standardized observational assessment of MQ during the five most problematic daily activities in patients with LBP. It is expected that uniform and objective description and evaluation of MQ add value to clinical reasoning and facilitate uniform communication with patients and colleagues.

Biomechanical Phenotyping of Chronic Low Back Pain: Protocol for BACPAC

OBJECTIVE

Biomechanics represents the common final output through which all biopsychosocial constructs of back pain must pass, making it a rich target for phenotyping. To exploit this feature, several sites within the NIH Back Pain Consortium (BACPAC) have developed biomechanics measurement and phenotyping tools. The overall aims of this article were to: 1) provide a narrative review of biomechanics as a phenotyping tool; 2) describe the diverse array of tools and outcome measures that exist within BACPAC; and 3) highlight how leveraging these technologies with the other data collected within BACPAC could elucidate the relationship between biomechanics and other metrics used to characterize low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

The narrative review highlights how biomechanical outcomes can discriminate between those with and without LBP, as well as among levels of severity of LBP. It also addresses how biomechanical outcomes track with functional improvements in LBP. Additionally, we present the clinical use case for biomechanical outcome measures that can be met via emerging technologies.

RESULTS

To answer the need for measuring biomechanical performance, our "Results" section describes the spectrum of technologies that have been developed and are being used within BACPAC.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The outcome measures collected by these technologies will be an integral part of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies conducted in BACPAC. Linking these measures with other biopsychosocial data collected within BACPAC increases our potential to use biomechanics as a tool for understanding the mechanisms of LBP, phenotyping unique LBP subgroups, and matching these individuals with an appropriate treatment paradigm.

The effect of low back pain on spine kinematics: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although impairments in dorso-lumbar spine mobility have been previously reported in patients with low back pain, its exact mechanism is not yet clear. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate and compare spinal kinematics between subjects with and without low back pain and identify appropriate tools to evaluate it.

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant literature. The search strategy was mainly focused on studies investigating lumbar kinematics in subjects with and without low back pain during clinical functional tests, gait, sports and daily functional activities. Papers were selected if at least one of these outputs was reported: lumbar range of motion, lumbar velocity, lumbar acceleration and deceleration, lordosis angle or lumbar excursion.

FINDINGS

Among 804 papers, 48 met the review eligibility criteria and 29 were eligible to perform a meta-analysis. Lumbar range of motion was the primary outcome measured. A statistically significant limitation of the lumbar mobility was found in low back pain group in all planes, and in the frontal and transverse planes for thoracic range of motion, but there is no significant limitation for pelvic mobility. The amount of limitation was found to be more important in the lumbar sagittal plane and during challenging functional activities in comparison with simple activities.

INTERPRETATION

The findings of this review provide insight into the impact of low back pain on spinal kinematics during specific movements, contributing to our understanding of this relationship and suggesting potential clinical implications.

Trunk control in and out of an episode of recurrent low back pain in young adults during the Balance-Dexterity Task

We investigated motor control strategies utilized by individuals with recurrent low back pain (rLBP) during active pain and remission periods as well as by back-healthy controls using the Balance-Dexterity Task. Nineteen young adults with rLBP were tested first when they were in pain and then again in symptom remission, and 19 matched controls were also tested. Trunk kinematic coupling and muscle co-activation were examined while participants performed the task by standing on one leg while compressing a spring with a maximum consistent force with the other leg. We found a decreased bilateral external oblique co-activation during the spring condition of the task compared to the stable block condition in people with rLBP compared to back healthy individuals. There was also reduced trunk coupling during the spring condition of the task compared to the stable block condition in both the rLBP active and remission groups, but no group difference between rLBP and back-healthy individuals. When individuals were in active pain, they exhibited more co-activation than when they were in remission, but the co-activation during active pain was not greater than in back-healthy individuals.

The use of statistical parametric mapping to determine altered movement patterns in people with chronic low back pain

Kinematics studies have generally focused on the quantity of movement using discrete parameters such as maximum and minimum angles to compare between people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and healthy individuals. However, discrete parameters cannot be used to fully describe movement patterns and segmental contributions. This study aimed to explore the use of Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) to characterize quality of movement by examining if differences in movement patterns exist between groups, and within-group segmental contributions, during active movement tests. Twenty-one individuals with CLBP and nine healthy individuals were recruited. Inertial Measurement Unit (IMUs) were attached at thoracic (T3) and lumbar (L1) spine, and pelvis (S1) to collect active trunk flexion, extension, rotation, and lateral bend. SPM was used to analyze between-group movement patterns and within-group segmental contributions. SPM revealed no significant differences (P > 0.05) between groups. However, a greater lumbar contribution (P < 0.001) was observed during 10-40% of flexion followed by a greater pelvic contribution (P < 0.001) during 60-90% of flexion, while a greater lumbar than thoracic contribution (P < 0.001) was observed during flexion and the return to upright position in individuals with CLBP. Individuals with CLBP used a greater thoracic contribution compared to lumbar contribution (P < 0.001) during rotation, while a greater lumbar contribution compared to pelvic contribution was observed (P < 0.001) during lateral bending. Our findings suggest that SPM approach was able to detect differences in thoracic, lumbar, and pelvic velocity contributions and timings between segments in individuals with CLBP. These findings may help improving inter-rater reliability of clinical observations.

Stereophotogrammetric approaches to multi-segmental kinematics of the thoracolumbar spine: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Spine disorders are becoming more prevalent in today's ageing society. Motion abnormalities have been linked to the prevalence and recurrence of these disorders. Various protocols exist to measure thoracolumbar spine motion, but a standard multi-segmental approach is still missing. This study aims to systematically evaluate the literature on stereophotogrammetric motion analysis approaches to quantify thoracolumbar spine kinematics in terms of measurement reliability, suitability of protocols for clinical application and clinical significance of the resulting functional assessment.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus and ScienceDirect) were searched until February 2022. Studies published in English, investigating the intersegmental kinematics of the thoracolumbar spine using stereophotogrammetric motion analysis were identified. All information relating to measurement reliability; measurement suitability and clinical significance was extracted from the studies identified.

RESULTS

Seventy-four studies met the inclusion criteria. 33% of the studies reported on the repeatability of their measurement. In terms of suitability, only 35% of protocols were deemed suitable for clinical application. The spinous processes of C7, T3, T6, T12, L1, L3 and L5 were the most widely used landmarks. The spine segment definitions were, however, found to be inconsistent among studies. Activities of daily living were the main tasks performed. Comparable results between protocols are however still missing.

CONCLUSION

The literature to date offers various stereophotogrammetric protocols to quantify the multi-segmental motion of the thoracolumbar spine, without a standard guideline being followed. From a clinical point of view, the approaches are still limited. Further research is needed to define a precise motion analysis protocol in terms of segment definition and clinical relevance.

Physical Function in Amateur Athletes with Lumbar Disc Herniation and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Case-Control Study

This study aimed to analyze if chronic low back pain (LBP) and lumbar disc herniation induce biomechanics, flexibility, body balance, physical activity, and muscular function alterations compared to a similar asymptomatic cohort. Fifty male volunteers (n = 25 with chronic LBP and lumbar disc herniation and n = 25 pain-free subjects) were enrolled. Range of motion (internal and external hip rotation, ankle dorsiflexion, and active straight leg raise, ASLR), trunk flexibility (finger−floor distance), body balance (Y-balance test) and muscle function (Biering−Sorensen test, prone and lateral bridges) outcomes were assessed. Comparative analyses between sides and group were conducted. Results: Patients showed greater weight and BMI compared with controls (p < 0.05). None of the outcomes bilaterally assessed showed side-to-side differences for pain-free participants (all, p > 0.05) or LBP patients (all, p > 0.05). Regarding the differences between groups, LBP patients showed limited internal hip rotation (p < 0.001), finger−floor distance (p < 0.001), body balance (p < 0.001), and muscle endurance (planks p < 0.001; Biering−Sorensen test p < 0.05). External hip rotation, ASLR, and ankle dorsiflexion range of movement were comparable in both groups (p > 0.05). The sample of pain-free amateur athletes showed greater range of movement for internal hip rotation, lower finger−floor distance, better body balance, and muscle function. However, the external hip rotation, ankle dorsiflexion, and ASLR tests showed no difference between cases and controls.

Individuals with recurrent low back pain exhibit further altered frontal plane trunk control in remission than when in pain

BACKGROUND

Movement alterations due to low back pain (LBP) could lead to long-term adverse consequences if they do not resolve after symptoms subside. This study aims to determine if altered trunk control associated with recurrent low back pain persists beyond symptom duration.

METHODS

Twenty young adults with recurrent LBP were tested once during an LBP episode and once in symptom remission, and twenty matched back-healthy participants served as controls. Participants walked on a treadmill with five prescribed step widths (0.33, 0.67, 1, 1.33, 1.67 × preferred step width). Motion capture and surface electromyography were used to record trunk kinematics and muscle activation. Thorax-pelvis coordination was calculated using vector coding, and longissimus activation and co-activation were analyzed.

FINDINGS

Young adults with recurrent LBP exhibited a "looser" trunk control strategy in the frontal plane during gait that was persistent regardless of pain status across multiple step widths compared to controls. The looser trunk control was demonstrated by a greater pelvis-only, less thorax-only coordination pattern, and decreased bilateral longissimus co-activation in individuals with recurrent LBP compared to controls. The looser trunk control strategy was further amplified when individuals were in symptom remission and exhibited greater trunk excursion and reduced in-phase coordination in the frontal plane.

INTERPRETATION

The amplification of aberrant movement during symptom remission may suggest that movement patterns or anatomical factors existing prior to the tested painful episode underlie altered trunk control in individuals with recurrent LBP. The symptom remission period of recurrent LBP may be a critical window into clinical evaluation and treatment.

Consistent differences in lumbar spine alignment between low back pain subgroups and genders during clinical and functional activity sitting tests

BACKGROUND

Subgroups of people with low back pain display differences in their lumbar alignment during tests from a clinical examination. However, it is unknown if subgroups display the same patterns during a functional activity test and if gender influences subgroup-related differences.

OBJECTIVES

Test if differences in lumbar alignment between two LBP subgroups are 1) present during a functional activity test of preferred sitting and 2) independent of gender.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

METHOD

154 participants with chronic low back pain were classified based on the Movement System Impairment Classification System by a physical therapist. Participants performed a functional activity test of preferred sitting and clinical tests of maximum flexed and extended sitting. 3D marker co-ordinate data were collected. Sagittal plane lumbar alignment, indexed by lumbar curvature angle, was calculated. A three-way mixed effect analysis of variance was used to examine effects of test, subgroup, gender, subgroup × test, gender × test and subgroup × gender.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

The lumbar rotation with extension subgroup [LCA = -8.0° (-9.5,-6.5)] displayed a more extended lumbar alignment than lumbar rotation [LCA = -5.9° (-7.4,-4.4)]. Women [LCA = -10.7° (-12.3,-9.2)] displayed a more extended lumbar alignment than men [LCA = -3.2° (-4.7,-1.7)]. There was a significant gender × test interaction (p = 0.01). The subgroup × test (p = 0.99) and subgroup × gender (p = 0.76) interactions were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

LBP subgroup differences in lumbar alignment are present during preferred sitting. Gender-related differences in lumbar alignment are not driving subgroup differences. These findings highlight the need to use patient-specific clinical characteristics to guide treatment of a functional activity of preferred sitting limited due to low back pain.

Can Biomechanics Research Lead to More Effective Treatment of Low Back Pain? A Point-Counterpoint Debate

SYNOPSIS

Although biomechanics plays a role in the development and perhaps the persistent or recurrent nature of low back pain (LBP), whether biomechanics alone can provide the basis for intervention is debated. Biomechanics, which refers to the mechanics of the body, including its neuromuscular control, has been studied extensively in LBP. But, can gains be made in understanding LBP by research focused on this component of biology in the multifactorial biopsychosocial problem of LBP? This commentary considers whether biomechanics research has the potential to advance treatment of LBP, and how likely it is that this research will lead to better treatment strategies. A point-counterpoint format is taken to present both sides of the argument. First, the challenges faced by an approach that considers biomechanics in isolation are presented. Next, we describe 3 models that place substantial emphasis on biomechanical factors. Finally, reactions to each point are presented as a foundation for further research and clinical practice to progress understanding of the place for biomechanics in guiding treatment of LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):425-436. Epub 15 May 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8825.