Trunk-pelvic coordination during unstable sitting with varying task demand: A methodological study

Poor lumbar spine coordination in acute low back pain predicts persistent long-term pain and disability

PURPOSE

Sitting balance on an unstable surface requires coordinated out-of-phase lumbar spine and provides sufficient challenge to expose quality of spine control. We investigated whether the quality of spine coordination to maintain balance in acute low back pain (LBP) predicts recovery at 6 months.

METHODS

Participants in an acute LBP episode (n = 94) underwent assessment of sitting balance on an unstable surface. Seat, hip and spine (lower lumbar, lumbar, upper lumbar, thoracic) angular motion and force plate data were recorded. Coordination between the seat and hip/spine segments to maintain balance was quantified in the frequency domain to evaluate coordination (coherence) and relative timing (phase angle: in-phase [segments move together]; out-of-phase [segments move opposite]). Center of pressure (CoP) and upper thorax motion assessed overall balance performance. Hip and spine coordination with the seat were compared between those who did not recover (increased/unchanged pain/disability), partially recovered (reduced pain/disability) or recovered (no pain and disability) at 6 months.

RESULTS

In both planes, coherence between the seat and lower lumbar spine was lower (and in-phase-unhelpful for balance) at baseline in those who did not recover than those who recovered. Coherence between the seat and hip was higher in partially recovered in both planes, suggesting compensation by the hip. LBP groups had equal overall balance performance (CoP, upper thorax motion), but non-recovery groups used a less optimal strategy that might have consequences for long-term spine health.

CONCLUSION

These longitudinal data revealed that individuals with compromised contribution of the lumbar spine to the balance during unstable sitting during acute LBP are less likely to recover.

Coordination of hip and spine in individuals with acute low back pain during unstable sitting

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Trunk postural control differs between individuals with and without chronic low back pain (LBP). Whether this corresponds to differences in hip/spine coordination during the early acute phase of LBP (ALBP) is unclear.

PURPOSE

To compare hip/spine coordination in relation to seat movements between individuals with and without ALBP when balancing on an unstable seat and to identify coordination strategies to maintain balance using cluster analysis.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Cross-sectional observational study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

ALBP (n=130) and pain-free (n=72) individuals.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Frequency domain measures to evaluate hip/spine coordination (amplitude spectrum, phase angle, and coherence) and time-series measures to assess overall balance performance (center of pressure [CoP] reflecting the amount of seat movements, upper thorax motion as a surrogate for head motion).

METHODS

Participants maintained balance while sitting on a seat fixed to a hemisphere. Seat, hip, and spine (lower lumbar, lumbar, upper lumbar, and thoracic) angular motion and force plate data were recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, seat/CoP movements (amplitude spectrum and RMSdisplacement) were greater (in both planes) and sagittal coordination (coherence) between the hip or lower spine and seat movements was lower in ALBP than controls. Cluster analysis using coherence data revealed different coordination strategies to maintain balance. Separate clusters used a "lower lumbar strategy" and "hip strategy" in the sagittal plane, and a "lower and upper lumbar strategy" and "lower lumbar strategy" in the frontal plane. A cluster using a "low coherence strategy" in both planes was also identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Hip and lower spine coordination was less in individuals with ALBP in conjunction with a lower quality of overall balance performance. However, interpretation of the relationship between coherence and overall balance performance was not straightforward. Clusters in both the ALBP group and the control group adopted a low coherence strategy, and this was not consistently related to poor overall balance performance. This suggests overall balance performance cannot be inferred from coherence alone and requires consideration of interaction of other different features.

Trunk postural control during unstable sitting among individuals with and without low back pain: A systematic review with an individual participant data meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Sitting on an unstable surface is a common paradigm to investigate trunk postural control among individuals with low back pain (LBP), by minimizing the influence lower extremities on balance control. Outcomes of many small studies are inconsistent (e.g., some find differences between groups while others do not), potentially due to confounding factors such as age, sex, body mass index [BMI], or clinical presentations. We conducted a systematic review with an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to investigate whether trunk postural control differs between those with and without LBP, and whether the difference between groups is impacted by vision and potential confounding factors.

METHODS

We completed this review according to PRISMA-IPD guidelines. The literature was screened (up to 7th September 2023) from five electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Outcome measures were extracted that describe unstable seat movements, specifically centre of pressure or seat angle. Our main analyses included: 1) a two-stage IPD meta-analysis to assess the difference between groups and their interaction with age, sex, BMI, and vision on trunk postural control; 2) and a two-stage IPD meta-regression to determine the effects of LBP clinical features (pain intensity, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear-avoidance beliefs) on trunk postural control.

RESULTS

Forty studies (1,821 participants) were included for the descriptive analysis and 24 studies (1,050 participants) were included for the IPD analysis. IPD meta-analyses revealed three main findings: (a) trunk postural control was worse (higher root mean square displacement [RMSdispl], range, and long-term diffusion; lower mean power frequency) among individuals with than without LBP; (b) trunk postural control deteriorated more (higher RMSdispl, short- and long-term diffusion) among individuals with than without LBP when vision was removed; and (c) older age and higher BMI had greater adverse impacts on trunk postural control (higher short-term diffusion; longer time and distance coordinates of the critical point) among individuals with than without LBP. IPD meta-regressions indicated no associations between the limited LBP clinical features that could be considered and trunk postural control.

CONCLUSION

Trunk postural control appears to be inferior among individuals with LBP, which was indicated by increased seat movements and some evidence of trunk stiffening. These findings are likely explained by delayed or less accurate corrective responses.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021124658).

Cortical activity, kinematics and trunk muscles activity response to pelvis movements during unstable sitting

BACKGROUND

Balance control is a leading component of human motor activities and its impairment is associated with an increased risk of falling, lower back pain due to impaired motor control mechanism. Prolonged sitting position at workplace is one of the risk factors of reduced postural control and lower back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate theta and alpha waves cortical activity, trunk muscles activity and kinematics in static sitting, dynamic sitting on different platforms: simple wobble board (WB) and wobble board on bearing surface (WBB).

METHODS

The kinematics of body segments, electromyography of five trunk muscles, electroencephalography of 32 scalp electrodes were measured during balance tasks in sitting position for 17 subjects with continuous seated position at workplace.

RESULTS

Cortical power on WBB1 increase in fronto - central (p< 0.05) region while on WBB2 increase in centro - parietal region (p< 0.05). WBB2 increase more muscles compared with WB2. The amplitude of movement of ASIS, Th10 can be seen lower on WBB compared with WB (p< 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows that WBB can increase personalized sitting and improve trunk motor control during hours of prolonged sitting.

Clarifying the Biomechanical Concept of Coordination Through Comparison With Coordination in Motor Control

Coordination is a multidisciplinary concept in human movement science, particularly in the field of biomechanics and motor control. However, the term is not used synonymously by researchers and has substantially different meanings depending on the studies. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of coordination to avoid confusion. The meaning of coordination in motor control from computational and ecological perspectives has been clarified, and the meanings differed between them. However, in biomechanics, each study has defined the meaning of the term and the meanings are diverse, and no study has attempted to bring together the diversity of the meanings of the term. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to provide a summary of the different meanings of coordination across the theoretical landscape and clarify the meaning of coordination in biomechanics. We showed that in biomechanics, coordination generally means the relation between elements that act toward the achievement of a motor task, which we call biomechanical coordination. We also showed that the term coordination used in computational and ecological perspectives has two different meanings, respectively. Each one had some similarities with biomechanical coordination. The findings of this study lead to an accurate understanding of the concept of coordination, which would help researchers formulate their empirical arguments for coordination in a more transparent manner. It would allow for accurate interpretation of data and theory development. By comprehensively providing multiple perspectives on coordination, this study intends to promote coordination studies in biomechanics.