Chronic low back pain patients walk with locally altered spinal kinematics

Changes in spinal motor behaviour are associated with reduction in disability in chronic low back pain: A longitudinal cohort study with 1-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The need to improve spinal motor behaviour in chronic low back pain (CLBP) rehabilitation remains unclear. The objective of this study was to test if changes in spinal motor behaviour were associated with changes in disability after an interdisciplinary rehabilitation program (IRP) in patients with CLBP.

METHODS

Seventy-one patients with CLBP participating in an IRP were included. Spinal motor behaviour was assessed with biomechanical (lumbar angular amplitude and velocity, erector spinae muscle activity and duration of the task), cognitive-emotional (task-specific fear [PRF]) and pain-related (movement-evoked pain [MEP]) measures during a lifting task before and after the IRP. Disability was measured before and after the IRP, and at 3-month and 1-year follow-ups.

RESULTS

After adjusting for confounders, changes in disability were significantly associated with MEP changes (β adj. = 0.49, p < 0.001) and PRF changes (β adj. = 0.36, p = 0.008), but not with changes in any of the biomechanical measures. MEP at the end of IRP was also associated with disability at 3 months (β adj. = 0.37, p = 0.001) and 1 year (β adj. = 0.42, p = 0.01). Biomechanical measures at the end of the IRP were not associated with disability, except for the duration of the task that was significantly associated with reduction of disability at 3 months (β non-adj = 0.5, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pain-related and cognitive-emotional measures of spinal motor behaviour were associated with reduction in disability following an IRP. Future research is needed to further investigate causal relationships between spinal motor behaviour and disability.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This study supports a multidimensional understanding and analysis of spinal motor behaviour, integrating the cognitive-emotional, pain-related and biomechanical domains. It also supports the consideration of spinal motor behaviour as a potentially important treatment target in chronic low back pain management. Moreover, it suggests that reducing movement-evoked pain and task-specific fear may have more influence on disability than changing lumbar amplitude, lumbar angular velocity or erector muscle activity, which may have important implications for rehabilitation.

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.

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.

Measurement properties of 72 movement biomarkers aiming to discriminate non‑specific chronic low back pain patients from an asymptomatic population

The identification of relevant and valid biomarkers to distinguish patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) from an asymptomatic population in terms of musculoskeletal factors could contribute to patient follow-up and to evaluate therapeutic strategies. Several parameters related to movement impairments have been proposed in the literature in that respect. However, most of them were assessed in only one study, and only 8% were evaluated in terms of reliability, validity and interpretability. The aim of this study was to consolidate the current knowledge about movement biomarkers to discriminate NSCLBP patients from an asymptomatic population. For that, an experimental protocol was established to assess the reliability, validity and interpretability of a set of 72 movement biomarkers on 30 asymptomatic participants and 30 NSCLBP patients. Correlations between the biomarkers and common patient reported outcome measures were also analysed. Four biomarkers reached at least a good level in reliability (ICC ≥ 0.75) and validity (significant difference between asymptomatic participants and NSCLBP patients, p ≤ 0.01) domains and could thus be possibly considered as valuable biomarkers: maximal lumbar sagittal angle, lumbar sagittal angle range of motion, mean lumbar sagittal angular velocity, and maximal upper lumbar sagittal angle during trunk sagittal bending. These four biomarkers demonstrated typically larger values in asymptomatic participants than in NSCLBP patients. They are in general weakly correlated with patient reported outcome measures, arguing for a potential interest in including related musculoskeletal factors in the establishment of a valuable diagnosis and in guiding treatment response.

Reduction in pain-related fear is not associated with improvement in spinal biomechanics but with decrease in movement-evoked pain in patients with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

While a causal relationship between pain-related fear and spinal movement avoidance in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) has frequently been postulated, evidence supporting this relationship is limited. This study aimed to test if decreases in pain-related fear or catastrophizing were associated with improvements in spinal biomechanics, accounting for possible changes in movement-evoked pain.

METHODS

Sixty-two patients with CLBP were assessed before and after an interdisciplinary rehabilitation program (IRP). Pain-related fear was assessed with general and task-specific measures. Lower and upper lumbar angular amplitude and velocity as well as paraspinal muscle activity were recorded during five daily-life tasks to evaluate spinal biomechanics. Relationships were tested with multivariable linear regression analyses.

RESULTS

The large decreases in pain-related fear and catastrophizing following the IRP were scarcely and inconsistently associated with changes in spinal biomechanics (< 3% of the models reported a statistically significant association). Results remained comparable for activities inducing more or less fear, for specific or general measures of pain-related fear, and for analyses performed on the entire population or limited to subgroups of patients with higher levels of task-specific fear. In contrast, reductions in task-specific pain-related fear were significantly associated with decreases in movement-evoked pain in all tasks (r = 0.26-0.62, p ≤ 0.02).

CONCLUSION

This study does not support an association between pain-related fear and spinal movement avoidance. However, it provides evidence supporting a direct relationship between decreased pain-related fear and decreased movement-evoked pain, possibly explaining some mechanisms of the rehabilitation programs.

Consistency of vertebral motion and individual characteristics in gait sequences

Vertebral motion reveals complex patterns, which are not yet understood in detail. This applies to vertebral kinematics in general but also to specific motion tasks like gait. For gait analysis, most of existing publications focus on averaging characteristics of recorded motion signals. Instead, this paper aims at analyzing intra- and inter-individual variation specifically and elaborating motion parameters, which are consistent during gait cycles of particular persons. For this purpose, a study design was utilized, which collected motion data from 11 asymptomatic test persons walking at different speed levels (2, 3, and 4 km/h). Acquisition of data was performed using surface topography. The motion signals were preprocessed in order to separate average vertebral orientations (neutral profiles) from basic gait cycles. Subsequently, a k-means clustering technique was applied to figure out, whether a discrimination of test persons was possible based on the preprocessed motion signals. The paper shows that each test sequence could be assigned to the particular test person without additional prior information. In particular, the neutral profiles appeared to be highly consistent intra-individually (across the gait cycles as well as speed levels), but substantially different between test persons. A full discrimination of test persons was achieved using the neutral profiles with respect to flexion/extension data. Based on this, these signals can be considered as individual characteristics for the particular test persons.

Limited evidence of altered gait parameters in people with chronic nonspecific low back pain

BACKGROUND

Differences in gait parameters have been shown between people with and without low back pain (LBP). However, previous studies did not well control factors such as sex, age, height and walking speed known to influence gait parameters.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is gait altered in people with LBP when sex, age, height and walking speed are controlled?

METHODS

A series of gait parameters were measured in 16 participants with LBP and 16 age, sex and height matched healthy controls while walking on an instrumented treadmill. LBP group walked at a comfortable speed whilst control group walked at their own comfortable speed and at the comfortable speed of their matched participants with LBP. Pain and disability were measured for the LBP group. The between-group differences in mean, standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) of gait parameters were tested using paired samples t-test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test or two-factor repeated measures analyses of variance.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) of pain intensity was 2 (1, 3.5). From 102 tests of between-group difference in mean, SD and CV of 17 gait parameters at both comfortable speed and matched speed walking, only the mean of stride length (p = 0.037) during matched speed walking and SD of single support phase (p = 0.040) during comfortable speed walking showed significant between-group differences. There was no significant between-group difference in the rest means (comfortable walking: p ≥ 0.116; matched speed walking: p ≥ 0.069), SDs (comfortable walking: p ≥ 0.066; matched speed walking: p ≥ 0.098) and CVs of gait parameters (comfortable walking: p ≥ 0.110; matched speed walking: p ≥ 0.121).

SIGNIFICANCE

The lack of significant between-group difference in gait parameters may suggest that the gait of people with low level of LBP were not altered when sex, age and height were controlled.

Biomechanical factors associated with non-specific low back pain in adults: A systematic review

Low back pain (LBP) can result in increased direct medical and non-medical costs to patients, employers, and health care providers. This systematic review aimed to provide a better understanding of the biomechanical factors associated with chronic non-specific LBP in adults. SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched. In total, 26 studies were included and significant differences were noted between healthy controls and LBP patients in various motion. Biomechanical factors among adults with non-specific LBP were altered and differed as compared to healthy controls in various motion might be to compensate the pain during those motions. This review highlighted the biomechanical differences across those with non-specific LBP and healthy adults. Both groups showed a similar level of pain during functional tasks but LBP patients suffered from a moderate level of disability. Future studies should not rely on questionnaire-based pain scale only. The biomechanical factors summarized in this review can be used to diagnose non-specific LBP accurately, and as modifiable targets for exercise-based intervention.

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.

Do people with low back pain walk differently? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The biomechanics of the trunk and lower limbs during walking and running gait are frequently assessed in individuals with low back pain (LBP). Despite substantial research, it is still unclear whether consistent and generalizable changes in walking or running gait occur in association with LBP. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify whether there are differences in biomechanics during walking and running gait in individuals with acute and persistent LBP compared with back-healthy controls.

METHODS

A search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO in June 2019 and was repeated in December 2020. Studies were included if they reported biomechanical characteristics of individuals with and without LBP during steady-state or perturbed walking and running. Biomechanical data included spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and electromyography variables. The reporting quality and potential for bias of each study was assessed. Data were pooled where possible to compare the standardized mean differences (SMD) between back pain and back-healthy control groups.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies were included and reviewed. Two studies investigated acute pain and the rest investigated persistent pain. Nine studies investigated running gait. Of the studies, 20% had high reporting quality/low risk of bias. In comparison with back-healthy controls, individuals with persistent LBP walked slower (SMD = -0.59, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): -0.77 to -0.42)) and with shorter stride length (SMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -0.60 to -0.16). There were no differences in the amplitude of motion in the thoracic or lumbar spine, pelvis, or hips in individuals with LBP. During walking, coordination of motion between the thorax and the lumbar spine/pelvis was significantly more in-phase in the persistent LBP groups (SMD = -0.60, 95%CI: -0.90 to -0.30), and individuals with persistent LBP exhibited greater amplitude of activation in the paraspinal muscles (SMD = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.23-0.80). There were no consistent differences in running biomechanics between groups.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate-to-strong evidence that individuals with persistent LBP demonstrate differences in walking gait compared to back-healthy controls.

Between/within-session reliability of spinal kinematic and lumbar muscle activity measures in patients with chronic low back pain and asymptomatic individuals

BACKGROUND

Longitudinal research is required to better understand the role of spinal movement alterations in chronic low back pain (CLBP). To this end, it is critical to assess the between-session reliability of spinal movement measures.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the within/between-session reliability of spinal movement measures in patients with CLBP and asymptomatic controls?

METHODS

Spinal movement was recorded prospectively during two sessions, a week apart, for 20 patients with CLBP (60% male; 40.0 ± 12.3 years old) and 20 asymptomatic individuals (55% male; 38.2 ± 10.9 years old). Sagittal-plane angular amplitude and angular velocity at the lower lumbar, upper lumbar, lower thoracic and upper thoracic joints, as well as maximal erector spinae activity were measured during five daily-activity tasks. In addition, task-independent measures were obtained by averaging the measures across tasks. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC 2,1) and the minimal detectable change (MDC) were calculated. Pearson correlation was used to compare task-independent and task-specific measures.

RESULTS

Between-session ICCs in patients with CLBP were mostly moderate to good for maximal angular amplitude and erector spinae activity measures. Lower ICCs were observed for range of angular motion and angular velocity measures (42% of ICCs < 0.5). Median MDCs were 9.6°, 18.3°/s and 1.0% for angular amplitude, angular velocity and erector spinae activity measures, respectively. The reliability of task-independent and task-specific measures was strongly correlated (r = 0.91, p < 0.001).

SIGNIFICANCE

Sagittal-plane maximal angular amplitude and erector spinae activity measures during various daily-activity tasks demonstrated mostly moderate to good between-session ICCs. However, relatively large MDCs suggested that important changes are needed to be detectable. Task-independent measures reported similarly acceptable ICCs than task-specific measures, supporting their use to describe spinal movement.

Comprehensive visualization of spinal motion in gait sequences based on surface topography

Analysis of spinal motion is considered to be important to assess function of the human spine. Surface topography (ST) is a method to record the vertebral orientation in 3D. Such measurements can be performed in static but also in dynamic situations like gait or other motion tasks. However, dynamic ST measurements are hard to interpret due to their complexity. The main goal of this paper is to provide comprehensive visualization tools which allow a more intuitive and comprehensive interpretation n of such measurements. In particular, juxtaposition and superimposition techniques are utilized to emphasize differences in motion characteristics. The method was applied to a test series of 12 healthy volunteers walking on a treadmill at various speed levels. It could be shown that the visualization tools are helpful to compare different motion sequences including an analysis of intra- and interindividual variation. Based on these techniques, it could be shown that the profiles of vertebral orientation remain considerable constant when one person was walking at different speed levels whereas they differed substantially between the different individuals. In contrast, the motion amplitudes contained high intra- and interindividual variation, i.e. between speed levels and different test persons. In summary, the paper demonstrates that appropriate visualization tools are helpful to interpret ST measurements and cope with the complexity of these data sets. In particular, they can be used to compare different motion sequences in a more comprehensive way.

Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Have an Individual Movement Signature: A Comparison of Angular Amplitude, Angular Velocity and Muscle Activity Across Multiple Functional Tasks

Despite a large body of evidence demonstrating spinal movement alterations in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP), there is still a lack of understanding of the role of spinal movement behavior on LBP symptoms development or recovery. One reason for this may be that spinal movement has been studied during various functional tasks without knowing if the tasks are interchangeable, limiting data consolidation steps. The first objective of this cross-sectional study was to analyze the influence of the functional tasks on the information carried by spinal movement measures. To this end, we first analyzed the relationships in spinal movement between various functional tasks in patients with CLBP using Pearson correlations. Second, we compared the performance of spinal movement measures to differentiate patients with CLBP from asymptomatic controls among tasks. The second objective of the study was to develop task-independent measures of spinal movement and determine the construct validity of the approach. Five functional tasks primarily involving sagittal-plane movement were recorded for 52 patients with CLBP and 20 asymptomatic controls. Twelve measures were used to describe the sagittal-plane angular amplitude and velocity at the lower and upper lumbar spine as well as the activity of the erector spinae. Correlations between tasks were statistically significant in 91 out of 99 cases (0.31 ≤ r ≤ 0.96, all p < 0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) to differentiate groups did not differ substantially between tasks in most of the comparisons (82% had a difference in AUC of ≤0.1). The task-independent measures of spinal movement demonstrated equivalent or higher performance to differentiate groups than functional tasks alone. In conclusion, these findings support the existence of an individual spinal movement signature in patients with CLBP, and a limited influence of the tasks on the information carried by the movement measures, at least for the twelve common sagittal-plane measures analysed in this study. Therefore, this work brought critical insight for the interpretation of data in literature reporting differing tasks and for the design of future studies. The results also supported the construct validity of task-independent measures of spinal movement and encouraged its consideration in the future.

The Influence of Kinematic Constraints on Model Performance During Inverse Kinematics Analysis of the Thoracolumbar Spine

Motion analysis is increasingly applied to spine musculoskeletal models using kinematic constraints to estimate individual intervertebral joint movements, which cannot be directly measured from the skin surface markers. Traditionally, kinematic constraints have allowed a single spinal degree of freedom (DOF) in each direction, and there has been little examination of how different kinematic constraints affect evaluations of spine motion. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of different kinematic constraints for inverse kinematics analysis. We collected motion analysis marker data in seven healthy participants (4F, 3M, aged 27–67) during flexion–extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation tasks. Inverse kinematics analyses were performed on subject-specific models with 17 thoracolumbar joints allowing 51 rotational DOF (51DOF) and corresponding models including seven sets of kinematic constraints that limited spine motion from 3 to 9DOF. Outcomes included: (1) root mean square (RMS) error of spine markers (measured vs. model); (2) lag-one autocorrelation coefficients to assess smoothness of angular motions; (3) maximum range of motion (ROM) of intervertebral joints in three directions of motion (FE, LB, AR) to assess whether they are physiologically reasonable; and (4) segmental spine angles in static ROM trials. We found that RMS error of spine markers was higher with constraints than without (p < 0.0001) but did not notably improve kinematic constraints above 6DOF. Compared to segmental angles calculated directly from spine markers, models with kinematic constraints had moderate to good intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for flexion–extension and lateral bending, though weak to moderate ICCs for axial rotation. Adding more DOF to kinematic constraints did not improve performance in matching segmental angles. Kinematic constraints with 4–6DOF produced similar levels of smoothness across all tasks and generally improved smoothness compared to 9DOF or unconstrained (51DOF) models. Our results also revealed that the maximum joint ROMs predicted using 4–6DOF constraints were largely within physiologically acceptable ranges throughout the spine and in all directions of motions. We conclude that a kinematic constraint with 5DOF can produce smooth spine motions with physiologically reasonable joint ROMs and relatively low marker error.

Motion of the multi-segmented spine in elite dancers during passé and arabesque

BACKGROUND

The spinal biomechanics of dance tasks have received little study and no studies have used a multi-segmented spinal model. Knowledge of how the segments of the spine move may be useful to the dance clinician and dance educator.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the direction and amount of motion of the primary segments of the spine in elite dancers during an arabesque and a passé?

METHODS

This observational study examined 59 elite dancers performing an arabesque and a passé using a three-dimensional motion analysis system with the trunk divided into a series of five segments: pelvis, lower lumbar, upper lumbar, lower thoracic and upper thoracic spine.

RESULTS

For the arabesque, all spinal segments moved in the same direction within each plane and the majority of total spinal motion occurred in the thoracic spine. Thoracic segments were at or near end range position at completion of the arabesque. For the passé, the spinal segments moved in different directions within each plane and the majority of total spinal motion occurred in the lumbar spine.

SIGNIFICANCE

Dance clinicians and dance educators may benefit from the knowledge that thoracic hypomobility in any plane may limit arabesque performance and that attempts to instruct dancers to achieve a position of passé without flexion of the lumbar spine may be a valid aesthetic ideal but also an unrealistic functional expectation.

Spine and pelvis coordination variability in rowers with and without chronic low back pain during rowing

The aim of this study was to compare the spine-pelvis coordination and coordination variability (CV) during rowing in elite rowers with and without chronic low back pain (CLBP). Fourteen professional rowers (6 healthy and 8 with CLBP) participated in this study. 3D kinematic of upper trunk (UT), lower trunk (LT), lower back (LB), and pelvis segments during ergometer rowing at 70% and 100% of peak power were captured. The adjacent segments' coordination and CV were calculated using modified vector coding method. The results showed that segments' range of motion increased in both groups with increasing intensity, especially in CLBP rowers. CLBP rowers showed significantly lower: LT dominancy in LT/LB coordination at both intensities; anti-phase pattern in LB/Pelvis coordination at 100% intensity; UT/LT CV in early recovery, and significantly higher LB/Pelvis CV in final recovery and catch position (p < 0.05). Moreover, both groups showed significantly lower UT dominancy for UT/LT coordination in sagittal plane; higher anti-phase pattern in frontal plane; lower UT/LT CV in sagittal plane, lower LT/LB CV in sagittal and transverse plane, lower LB/Pelvis CV in frontal plane in trunk preparation phase, and a lower UT/LT CV in frontal plane for acceleration phase at 100% versus 70% intensity. In conclusion rowers with CLBP cannot adapt their coordination pattern and its variability with increase in intensity, and the movement in the kinematic chain from pelvis to UT stops in spine-pelvic junction. These findings have practical implications in designing coaching and rehabilitation strategies to facilitate performance and prevent injuries.

Relationship between psychological factors and spinal motor behaviour in low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

This meta-analysis investigated whether more negative psychological factors are associated with less spinal amplitude of movement and higher trunk muscle activity in individuals with low back pain. Furthermore, it examined whether pain intensity was a confounding factor in this relationship. We included studies that provided at least 1 correlation coefficient between psychological (pain-related fear, catastrophizing, depression, anxiety, and self-efficacy) and spinal motor behaviour (spinal amplitude and trunk muscle activity) measures. In total, 52 studies (3949 participants) were included. The pooled correlation coefficients (95% confidence interval; number of participants) were -0.13 (-0.18 to -0.09; 2832) for pain-related fear, -0.16 (-0.23 to -0.09; 756) for catastrophizing, -0.08 (-0.13 to -0.03; 1570) for depression, -0.08 (-0.30 to 0.14; 336) for anxiety, and -0.06 (-0.46 to 0.36; 66) for self-efficacy. The results indicated that higher levels of pain-related fear, catastrophizing, and depression are significantly associated with reduced amplitudes of movement and larger muscle activity and were consistent across subgroup and moderation analyses. Pain intensity did not significantly affect the association between these psychological factors and spinal motor behaviour and had a very small independent association with spinal motor behaviour. In conclusion, the very small effect sizes found in the meta-analyses question the role of psychological factors as major causes of spinal movement avoidance in low back pain. Experimental studies with more specific and individualized measures of psychological factors, pain intensity, and spinal motor behaviour are recommended.

Walking and running with non-specific chronic low back pain: What about the lumbar lordosis angle?

Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a major health problem, affecting about one fifth of the population worldwide. To avoid further pain or injury, patients with NSCLBP seem to adopt a stiffer movement pattern during everyday living activities. However, it remains unknown how NSCLBP affects the lumbar lordosis angle (LLA) during repetitive activities such as walking or running. This pilot study therefore aimed at exploring possible NSCLBP-related alterations in LLAs during walking and running by focusing on discrete parameters as well as continuous data. Thirteen patients with NSCLBP and 20 healthy pain-free controls were enrolled and underwent a full-body movement analysis involving various everyday living activities such as standing, walking and running. LLAs were derived from markers placed on the spinous processes of the vertebrae L1-L5 and S1. Possible group differences in discrete (average and range of motion (ROM)) and continuous LLAs were analyzed descriptively using mean differences with confidence intervals ranging from 95% to 75%. Patients with NSCLBP indicated reduced average LLAs during standing, walking and running and a tendency for lower LLA-ROM during walking. Analyses of continuous data indicated the largest group differences occurring around 25% and 70% of the walking and 25% and 75% of the running cycle. Furthermore, patients indicated a reversed movement pattern during running, with increasing instead of a decreasing LLAs after foot strike. This study provides preliminary evidence that NSCLBP might affect LLAs during walking and running. These results can be used as a basis for future large-scale investigations involving hypothesis testing.

Lumbar and thoracic kinematics during step-up: Comparison of three-dimensional angles between patients with chronic low back pain and asymptomatic individuals

While alterations in spinal kinematics have been repeatedly observed in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), their exact nature is still unknown. Specifically, there is a need for comprehensive assessments of multisegment spinal angles during daily-life activities. The purpose of this exploratory study was to characterize three-dimensional angles at the lower lumbar, upper lumbar, lower thoracic, and upper thoracic joints in CLBP patients and asymptomatic controls during stepping up with three different step heights. Spinal angles of 10 patients with nonspecific CLBP (six males; 38.7 ± 7.2 years old, 22.3 ± 1.6 kg/m² ) and 11 asymptomatic individuals (six males; 36.7 ± 5.4 years old, 22.9 ± 3.8 kg/m² ) were measured in a laboratory using a camera-based motion capture system. Seven out of the 12 angle curves had characteristic patterns, leading to the identification of 20 characteristic peaks. Comparing peak amplitudes between groups revealed statistically significantly smaller sagittal- and frontal-plane angles in the patient group at the upper lumbar joint with the two higher steps and at the lower lumbar joint with the higher step. Significantly reduced angles were also observed in sagittal plane at the upper thoracic joint with the two smaller steps. Moreover, a higher number of significant differences between groups was detected with the two higher steps than with the smallest step. In conclusion, this study showed the value of a comprehensive description of spinal angles during step-up tasks and provided insights into the alterations with CLBP. These preliminary results support prior research suggesting that CLBP rehabilitation should facilitate larger amplitudes of motion during functional activities.

Assessment of movement coordination strategies to inform health of movement and guide retraining interventions

INTRODUCTION

Exploring characteristics of human movement has long been the focus of clinicians and researchers. Changes in movement coordination strategies have been identified in the presence of pain highlighting the need for assessment in clinical practice. A major development in the understanding of movement related disorders is recognition of individual differences in presentation and consequently the need to tailor interventions based on assessment.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this masterclass is to build a rationale for the clinical assessment of movement coordination strategies, exploring loss of movement choices, coordination variability, and to present a clinical framework for individualised management, including the use of cognitive movement control tests and retraining interventions. An approach for the qualitative rating of movement coordination strategies is presented. A compromised movement system may be one characterised by a lack of ability to access motor abundance and display choice in the use of movement coordination strategies. The identification of lost movement choices revealed during the assessment of movement coordination strategies is proposed as a marker of movement health.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The health of the movement system may be informed by the ability to display choice in movement coordination strategies. There is evidence that restoring these choices has clinical utility and an influence on pain and improved function. This approach seeks to provide individuals with more flexible problem solving, enabled through a movement system that is robust to each unique challenge of function. This assessment framework sits within a bigger clinical reasoning picture for sustained quality of life.

Alteration of movement patterns in low back pain assessed by Statistical Parametric Mapping

Changes in movement pattern in low back pain (LBP) groups have been analysed by reporting predefined discrete variables. However, this approach does not consider the full kinematic data waveform and its dynamic information, potentially exposing the analysis to bias. Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) has been introduced and applied to 1 dimensional (D) kinematic variables allowing the assessment of data over time. The aims of this study were to assess differences in 3D kinematics patterns in people with and without LBP during functional tasks by using SPM and to investigate if SPM analysis was consistent with standard 3D range of motion (RoM) assessments. 3D joints kinematics of the spine and lower limbs were compared between 20 healthy controls and 20 participants with non-specific LBP during walking, sit-to-stand and lifting. SPM analysis showed significant differences in the 3Dkinematics of the lower thoracic segment, upper and lower lumbar segment and knee joint during walking and lifting mostly observed at the beginning and/or towards the end of the tasks. ROMs differed between groups in the lower thoracic segment (walking/sit-to-stand), upper and lower lumbar segments (walking/sit-to-stand/lifting), hip and knee (sit-to-stand/lifting). Based on these results, the two approaches can yield different data interpretations. SPM analysis allows the identification of differences in movement that occur over time. This adds value to LBP movement analysis as it allows an understanding of the LBP strategies adopted during motion that may not be conveyed by simple discrete parameters such as ROMs.

Measuring lumbar back motion during functional activities using a portable strain gauge sensor-based system: A comparative evaluation and reliability study

Quantifying lumbar back motion during functional activities in real-life environments may contribute to a better understanding of common pathologies such as spinal disorders. The current study therefore aimed at the comparative evaluation of the Epionics SPINE system, a portable device for measuring sagittal lumbar back motion during functional activities. Twenty healthy participants were therefore evaluated with the Epionics SPINE and a Vicon motion capture system in two identical separate research visits. They performed the following activities: standing, sitting, chair rising, box lifting, walking, running and a counter movement jump (CMJ). Lumbar lordosis angles were extracted as continuous values as well as average and range of motion (ROM) parameters. Agreement between the systems was evaluated using Bland-Altman analyses, whereas within- and between-session reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and minimal detectable changes (MDC). The analysis showed excellent agreement between the systems for chair rising, box lifting and CMJ with a systematic underestimation of lumbar lordosis angles during walking and running. Reliability was moderate to high for all continuous and discrete parameters (ICC ≥ 0.62), except for ROM during running (ICC = 0.29). MDC values were generally below 15°, except for CMJ (peak values up to 20° within and 25° between the sessions). The Epionics SPINE system performed similarly to a Vicon motion capture system for measuring lumbar lordosis angles during functional activities and showed high consistency within and between measurement sessions. These findings can serve researchers and clinicians as a bench mark for future investigations using the system in populations with spinal pathologies.

Low Back Pain: The Potential Contribution of Supraspinal Motor Control and Proprioception

Motor control, which relies on constant communication between motor and sensory systems, is crucial for spine posture, stability and movement. Adaptions of motor control occur in low back pain (LBP) while different motor adaption strategies exist across individuals, probably to reduce LBP and risk of injury. However, in some individuals with LBP, adapted motor control strategies might have long-term consequences, such as increased spinal loading that has been linked with degeneration of intervertebral discs and other tissues, potentially maintaining recurrent or chronic LBP. Factors contributing to motor control adaptations in LBP have been extensively studied on the motor output side, but less attention has been paid to changes in sensory input, specifically proprioception. Furthermore, motor cortex reorganization has been linked with chronic and recurrent LBP, but underlying factors are poorly understood. Here, we review current research on behavioral and neural effects of motor control adaptions in LBP. We conclude that back pain-induced disrupted or reduced proprioceptive signaling likely plays a pivotal role in driving long-term changes in the top-down control of the motor system via motor and sensory cortical reorganization. In the outlook of this review, we explore whether motor control adaptations are also important for other (musculoskeletal) pain conditions.

Multi-segment spine range of motion in dancers with and without recent low back pain

BACKGROUND

Altered spine kinematics are a common in people with LBP. This may be especially true for populations such as dancers, who are required to perform repetitive movements of the spine, although this remains unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do dancers with recent LBP display altered spine kinematics compared to their asymptomatic counterparts?

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of multi-segment spine kinematics was performed. Forty-seven pre-professional and professional female dancers either with LBP in the past two months (n = 26) or no LBP in the past 12 months (n = 21) participated. Range of motion (ROM) during standing side bending, seated rotation, and walking gait were compared.

RESULTS

Female dancers with LBP displayed reduced upper lumbar transverse plane ROM in seated rotation (Effect Size (ES)= -0.61, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -1.20, 0.02, p = 0.04), as well as reduced lower lumbar transverse plane ROM (ES=-0.65, 95% CI: -1.24, -0.06, p = 0.03) in gait. However, there was increased lower thoracic transverse plane ROM (ES = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.04, 1.21, p = 0.04) during gait. No differences in the frontal plane were observed.

SIGNIFICANCE

Altered transverse plane spine kinematics were evident in dancers with recent LBP for select segments and tasks. This may reflect a protective movement strategy. However, as the effect sizes of observed differences were moderate, and the total number of differences between groups was small, collectively, it seems only subtle differences in spine kinematics differentiate dancers with LBP to dancers without.

Spinal segments do not move together predictably during daily activities

BACKGROUND

Considering the thoracic, lumbar spine or whole spine as rigid segments has been the norm until recent studies highlighted the importance of more detailed modelling. A better understanding of the requirement for spine multi-segmental analysis could guide planning of future studies and avoid missing clinically-relevant information.

RESEARCH QUESTION

This study aims to assess the correlation between adjacent spine segments movement thereby evaluating segmental redundancy in both healthy and participants with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

A 3D motion capture system tracked the movement of upper and lower thoracic and lumbar spine segments in twenty healthy and twenty participants with LBP. Tasks performed included walking, sit-to-stand and lifting, repeated 3 times. 3D angular kinematics were calculated for each spine segment. Segmental redundancy was evaluated through cross-correlation (R_xy) analysis of kinematics time series and correlation of range of motion (R_ROM) of adjacent spine segments.

RESULTS

The upper/lower lumbar pairing showed weak correlations in the LBP group for all tasks and anatomical planes (R_xyrange:0.02-0.36) but moderate and strong correlations during walking (R_xy _frontalplane:0.4) and lifting (R_xy _sagittalplane:0.64) in the healthy group. The lower thoracic/upper lumbar pairing had weak correlations for both groups during lifting and sit-to-stand in the frontal plane and for walking (R_xy:0.01) in the sagittal plane only. The upper/lower thoracic pairing had moderate correlations during sit-to-stand in sagittal and transverse plane in patients with LBP (R_xy _sagittalplane:0.41; R_xy _transverse plane:-0.42) but weak in healthy (R_xy _sagittalplane:0.23; R_xy _transverseplane:-0.34); the contrary was observed during lifting. The majority of R_ROM values (55/72) demonstrated weak correlations.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results suggest that multi-segmental analysis of the spine is necessary if spine movement characteristics are to be fully understood. We cannot establish a priori where redundancy occurs based on healthy data, therefore extra consideration should be made when planning studies with pathological cohorts.

Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain and Motor Control During Gait

Background: Chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) poses a major socioeconomic problem, although the mechanisms are not yet clear. Impaired motor control is one of the mechanisms being discussed. Objectives: The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of motor control parameter differences between individuals with and without non-specific LBP during gait. Methods: A literature search on Medline, SportDiscus, PsychInfo, PsychArticels, EMBASE, and Scopus was performed. Twenty-nine articles comparing healthy adults and adults with chronic non-specific LBP in neuromuscular and/or biomechanical parameters during walking or running were examined. Data extraction and quality assessment were independently performed by two persons. Among others, we extracted population, conditions, outcome measures, and results. Results: The results showed that persons with and without non-specific LBP differed in several parameters of motor control, which was indicated by a lower movement amplitude of the pelvis, more in-phase coordination, lower ground reaction forces, higher stride-to-stride variability and a higher activity in ES in the LBP group. Conclusion: Despite no strong evidence for any of the parameters, a combination of biomechanical and neuromuscular parameters provides a conclusive explanation. Impaired motor control during walking is reflected in higher activity of the erector spinae, which leads to a stiffened lumbar-pelvic region. Different acquisition and processing of data renders making comparisons difficult, whereby standards for future research are necessary.

Between-session reliability of opto-electronic motion capture in measuring sagittal posture and 3-D ranges of motion of the thoracolumbar spine

This study evaluated between-session reliability of opto-electronic motion capture to measure trunk posture and three-dimensional ranges of motion (ROM). Nineteen healthy participants aged 24-74 years underwent spine curvature, pelvic tilt and trunk ROM measurements on two separate occasions. Rigid four-marker clusters were attached to the skin overlying seven spinous processes, plus single markers on pelvis landmarks. Rigid body rotations of spine marker clusters were calculated to determine neutral posture and ROM in flexion, extension, total lateral bending (left-right) and total axial rotation (left-right). Segmental spine ROM values were in line with previous reports using opto-electronic motion capture. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated as measures of between-session reliability and measurement error, respectively. Retroreflective markers showed fair to excellent between-session reliability to measure thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic tilt (ICC = 0.82, 0.63, and 0.54, respectively). Thoracic and lumbar segments showed highest reliabilities in total axial rotation (ICC = 0.78) and flexion-extension (ICC = 0.77-0.79) ROM, respectively. Pelvic segment showed highest ICC values in flexion (ICC = 0.78) and total axial rotation (ICC = 0.81) trials. Furthermore, it was estimated that four or fewer repeated trials would provide good reliability for key ROM outcomes, including lumbar flexion, thoracic and lumbar lateral bending, and thoracic axial rotation. This demonstration of reliability is a necessary precursor to quantifying spine kinematics in clinical studies, including assessing changes due to clinical treatment or disease progression.

Relative mobility of the pelvis and spine during trunk axial rotation in chronic low back pain patients: A case-control study

Background

Trunk axial rotation is a risk factor for chronic low back pain (CLBP). The characteristics of rotational mobility in the pelvis and spine among CLBP patients are not fully understood.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine three-dimensional kinematic changes, and to compare the differences of rotational mobility and coupled motion, in patients with and without CLBP.

Methods

Fifteen patients with CLBP and 15 age and sex matched healthy subjects participated in this study. Each subject performed trunk rotation to maximum range of motion (ROM) in a standing position. The kinematics data was collected using a three-dimensional motion analysis system. The outcomes measured were the rotational ROM and the spine/pelvis ratio (SPR) in transvers plane at both maximum and 50% rotation position. The coupled angles in sagittal and frontal planes were also measured.

Results

No significant differences in rotational ROM of the thorax, pelvis, and spine were observed between two groups at maximum rotation position. However, there was a significant interaction between groups and rotational ROM of pelvis and spine (F = 4.57, p = 0.04), and the SPR in CLBP patients was significantly greater than that of the healthy subjects (CLBP; 0.50 ± 0.10 Control; 0.41 ± 0.12, p = 0.04). The results at 50% rotation position were similar to that at maximum rotation. This indicates a relative increase in spinal rotation in the CLBP patients during trunk rotation. Moreover, the CLBP patients exhibited a significantly higher anterior tilt of the pelvis and extension of the spine in the sagittal plane coupled with rotation.

Conclusions

CLBP patients had relative hyper rotational mobility of the spine as well as excessive spinal extension coupled with trunk rotation. These results suggest that uncoordinated trunk rotation might be a functional failure associated with CLBP.