Pain and Pain-Related Disability Associated With Proprioceptive Impairment in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: A Systematic Review

Lower Limb Proprioception in Low Back Pain and Its Relationship With Voluntary Postural Control

This study aimed to investigate whether patients with low back pain (LBP) had impaired lower limb proprioception and its association with somatosensory acuity. Thirty patients with LBP and 30 asymptomatic people volunteered, using Sway Discrimination Apparatus tests to assess somatosensory acuity during voluntary anteroposterior and mediolateral postural sway. Results showed significantly reduced somatosensory acuity in mediolateral sway in LBP patients (p = 0.005) with ankle, knee, and hip proprioception showing significantly impairment compared to asymptomatic controls (all p ≤ 0.012). Regression analysis showed that ankle and hip proprioception were significantly associated with somatosensory perception (0.001 ≤ p ≤ 0.026, 0.067 ≤ R2≤ 0.235). Overall, findings suggested a global deterioration of lower limb proprioception in LBP patients, with ankle and hip proprioception playing crucial role in somatosensory perception.

The associations between lumbar proprioception and postural control during and after calf vibration in people with and without chronic low back pain

The relationships of lumbar proprioception with postural control have not been clarified in people with chronic low back pain. This study aimed to compare the associations between lumbar proprioception and postural control in response to calf vibration in individuals with and without chronic low back pain. In this study, we recruited twenty patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP group) and twenty healthy control subjects (HC group) aged between 18 and 50 years. This study was a cross-sectional study and completed from May 2022 to October 2022. The passive joint repositioning sense (PJRS) test for two positions (15° and 35°) were used to assess lumbar proprioception and expressed as the mean of reposition error (RE). Postural control was tested by adding and removing calf vibration while standing on a stable force plate with eyes closed. The sway velocity in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction of center of pressure (COP) data with a window of 15s epoch at baseline, during and after calf vibration was used to evaluate postural control. Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to compare the difference of lumbar proprioception between two groups, and the independent t-tests were used to compare the difference of postural control at baseline and during vibration, and a mixed design ANOVA was used to compare the difference of postural control during post-perturbation. In addition, to explore the association between postural control and lumbar proprioception and pain intensity, Spearman's correlations were used for each group. The major results are: (1) significantly higher PJRS on RE of 15° (CLBP: 95% CI [2.03, 3.70]; HC: 95% CI [1.03, 1.93]) and PJRS on RE of 35° (CLBP: 95% CI [2.59, 4.88]; HC: 95% CI [1.07, 3.00]) were found in the CLBP group; (2) AP velocity was not different between the CLBP group and the HC group at baseline and during calf vibration. However, AP velocity was significantly larger in the CLBP group compared with the HC group at epoch 2-14 after calf vibration, and AP velocity for the CLBP group took a longer time (23 epochs) to return to the baseline after calf vibration compared with the HC group (9 epochs); (3) lumbar proprioception represented by PJRS on RE of 15°correlated negatively with AP velocity during and after vibration for the HC group. Within the CLBP group, no significant relationships between PJRS on RE for two positions (15° and 35°) and AP velocity in any postural phases were found. In conclusion, the CLBP group has poorer lumbar proprioception, slower proprioceptive reweighting and impaired postural control after calf vibration compared to the HC group. Lumbar proprioception offers different information on the control strategy of standing control for individuals with and without CLBP in the situations with proprioceptive disturbance. These results highlight the significance of assessing lumbar proprioception and postural control in CLBP patients.

Brain white matter pathways of resilience to chronic back pain: a multisite validation

Chronic back pain (CBP) is a global health concern with significant societal and economic burden. While various predictors of back pain chronicity have been proposed, including demographic and psychosocial factors, neuroimaging studies have shown that brain characteristics can serve as robust predictors of CBP. However, large-scale, multisite validation of these predictors is currently lacking. In two independent longitudinal studies, we examined white matter diffusion imaging data and pain characteristics in patients with subacute back pain (SBP) over six- and 12-month periods. Diffusion data from individuals with CBP and healthy controls (HC) were analyzed for comparison. Whole-brain tract-based spatial statistics analyses revealed that a cluster in the right superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF) tract had larger fractional anisotropy (FA) values in patients who recovered (SBPr) compared to those with persistent pain (SBPp), and predicted changes in pain severity. The SLF FA values accurately classified patients at baseline and follow-up in a third publicly available dataset (Area under the Receiver Operating Curve ~ 0.70). Notably, patients who recovered had FA values larger than those of HC suggesting a potential role of SLF integrity in resilience to CBP. Structural connectivity-based models also classified SBPp and SBPr patients from the three data sets (validation accuracy 67%). Our results validate the right SLF as a robust predictor of CBP development, with potential for clinical translation. Cognitive and behavioral processes dependent on the right SLF, such as proprioception and visuospatial attention, should be analyzed in subacute stages as they could prove important for back pain chronicity.

Widespread Proprioceptive Acuity Impairment in Chronic Back Pain: A Cross-sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether proprioceptive accuracy measured with the Joint Position Sense (JPS) in patients with chronic neck and low back pain is impaired exclusively in affected areas or also in distant areas, not affected by pain.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Interdisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation clinic for back and neck pain.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with chronic neck pain (n=30), patients with chronic low back pain (n=30), and age- and sex-matched asymptomatic control subjects (n=30; N=90).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients and asymptomatic control subjects completed a test procedure for the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and ankle in a randomized order. Between group differences were analyzed with the univariate analysis of variance and associations of the JPS with clinical features using the Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Both patients with chronic neck pain (P<.001) and patients with chronic low back pain (P<.01) differed significantly from asymptomatic controls in the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine and ankle joint, regardless of the painful area. No difference was shown between patient groups (P>.05). An association of the JPS with clinical characteristics, however, could not be shown.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest widespread impairment of proprioceptive accuracy in patients with chronic and low back pain and a role for central sensorimotor processes in musculoskeletal pain conditions.

The Mediation Effect of Pain on the Relationship between Kinesiophobia and Lumbar Joint Position Sense in Chronic Low Back Pain Individuals: A Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Background: Fear of movement (kinesiophobia) and impaired lumbar joint position sense (LJPS) play a vital role in developing and maintaining non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, how kinesiophobia impacts LJPS is still being determined. The aims of this study are to (1) assess the correlation between kinesiophobia and LJPS in individuals with chronic low back pain; (2) compare LJPS between individuals with CLBP and those who are asymptomatic; and (3) evaluate if pain can mediate the relationship between kinesiophobia and LJPS in CLBP individuals. (2) Methods: Eighty-three individuals (mean age = 48.9 ± 7.5 years) with a diagnosis of CLBP and 95 asymptomatic individuals (mean age = 49.4 ± 7.0 years) were recruited into this cross-sectional study. Fear of movement in CLBP individuals was assessed using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK). LJPS was determined using the active target repositioning technique using a dual-digital inclinometer. LJPS was evaluated in lumbar flexion, extension, and side-bending left and right directions, and the repositioning accuracy was determined in degrees using a dual digital inclinometer. (3) Results: Kinesiophobia showed a significant (p < 0.001) moderate positive correlation with LJPS (flexion: r = 0.51, extension: r = 0.41, side-bending left: r = 0.37 and side-bending right: r = 0.34). LJPS errors were larger in CLBP individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals (p < 0.05). Mediation analyses showed that pain significantly mediated the relationship between kinesiophobia and LJPS (p < 0.05) in CLBP individuals. (4) Conclusions: Kinesiophobia and LJPS were positively associated. LJPS is impaired in CLBP individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals. Pain may mediate adverse effects on LJPS. These factors must be taken into account when assessing and developing treatment plans for those with CLBP.

The sensorimotor theory of pathological pain revisited

Harris (1999) proposed that pain can arise in the absence of tissue damage because changes in the cortical representation of the painful body part lead to incongruences between motor intention and sensory feedback. This idea, subsequently termed the sensorimotor theory of pain, has formed the basis for novel treatments for pathological pain. Here we review the evidence that people with pathological pain have changes to processes contributing to sensorimotor function: motor function, sensory feedback, cognitive representations of the body and its surrounding space, multisensory processing, and sensorimotor integration. Changes to sensorimotor processing are most evident in the form of motor deficits, sensory changes, and body representations distortions, and for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), fibromyalgia, and low back pain. Many sensorimotor changes are related to cortical processing, pain, and other clinical characteristics. However, there is very limited evidence that changes in sensorimotor processing actually lead to pain. We therefore propose that the theory is more appropriate for understanding why pain persists rather than how it arises.

Linking Pain and Motor Control: Conceptualization of Movement Deficits in Patients With Painful Conditions

When people experience or expect pain, they move differently. Pain-altered movement strategies, collectively described here as pain-related movement dysfunction (PRMD), may persist well after pain resolves and, ultimately, may result in altered kinematics and kinetics, future reinjury, and disability. Although PRMD may manifest as abnormal movements that are often evident in clinical assessment, the underlying mechanisms are complex, engaging sensory-perceptual, cognitive, psychological, and motor processes. Motor control theories provide a conceptual framework to determine, assess, and target processes that contribute to normal and abnormal movement and thus are important for physical therapy and rehabilitation practice. Contemporary understanding of motor control has evolved from reflex-based understanding to a more complex task-dependent interaction between cognitive and motor systems, each with distinct neuroanatomic substrates. Though experts have recognized the importance of motor control in the management of painful conditions, there is no comprehensive framework that explicates the processes engaged in the control of goal-directed actions, particularly in the presence of pain. This Perspective outlines sensory-perceptual, cognitive, psychological, and motor processes in the contemporary model of motor control, describing the neural substrates underlying each process and highlighting how pain and anticipation of pain influence motor control processes and consequently contribute to PRMD. Finally, potential lines of future inquiry-grounded in the contemporary model of motor control-are outlined to advance understanding and improve the assessment and treatment of PRMD.

IMPACT

This Perspective proposes that approaching PRMD from a contemporary motor control perspective will uncover key mechanisms, identify treatment targets, inform assessments, and innovate treatments across sensory-perceptual, cognitive, and motor domains, all of which have the potential to improve movement and functional outcomes in patients with painful conditions.

Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Psychometric Validation of the English Version of the Postural Awareness Scale

PURPOSE

The Postural Awareness Scale (PAS) was developed among a sample of German speakers to measure self-reported awareness of body posture. The first aim of this study was to conduct an English translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the PAS. The second aim was to assess psychometric properties of the English version of the PAS.

METHODS

Forward and backward translations were conducted. The translated scale was then pretested in a small sample of English-speaking adults (n = 30), followed by cognitive interviews. Finally, consensus of the translated scale was achieved among an expert committee (n = 5), resulting in the Postural Awareness Scale-English Version (PAS-E). Psychometric properties of the PAS-E were investigated among a sample of individuals with chronic pain (n = 301) by evaluating factor structure, reliability, and construct validity. Analyses of variance were conducted to calculate differences in PAS-E scores between specific subgroups (pain conditions, sex, and history of mindfulness practice). Linear regression analyses investigated whether the scores on the PAS-E predicted levels of pain, stress, and mood.

RESULTS

The results obtained from an exploratory factor analysis showed a two-factor solution and were supported by a confirmatory factor analysis. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency and satisfactory construct validity. No significant differences related to sex at birth or pain duration were found.

CONCLUSION

PAS-E demonstrated good psychometric properties, and therefore, can and should be used both for research and clinical practice.

Comparison of the reliance of the postural control system on the visual, vestibular and proprioceptive inputs in chronic low back pain patients and asymptomatic participants

BACKGROUND

Although proprioception deficits have been documented in chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients, little is known about adaptive strategies to provide postural control in these patients. Substitution of unreliable proprioceptive information with other afferents might be considered plausible.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is the response of the postural control system dependent on the source of sensory afferents being manipulated in persons with and without CLBP?

METHODS

Sixty persons with and without CLBP participated in this cross-sectional study. Center of pressure (COP) displacement range, velocity, path length and area were calculated under four sensory conditions: 1) normal upright standing; 2) upright standing on a foam with eyes open and head in neutral position; 3) upright standing with eyes open and 60° cervical extension and 4) upright standing with eyes closed and 60° cervical extension. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare COP masseurs under different conditions and between the groups.

RESULTS

CLBP patients demonstrated fewer alterations to manipulation of both visual and vestibular afferents in terms of number of COP variables significantly altered. ML range and velocity in both groups and path length in the CLBP group were significantly different between conditions 2 and 4. In both groups, all COP variables except AP range increased significantly in condition 2 compared to conditions 1and 3 (p < 0.001). AP velocity was the only variable to be different between conditions 1 and 3 in both CLBP (p = 0.025) and control (p < 0.001) groups. Between group differences were significant on AP velocity (p = 0.019).

SIGNIFICANCE

No overweighting was observed in the vestibular or visual afferents in CLBP patients. Compensatory strategies seem to lie within proprioceptive system by reweighting afferents from different body segments. The postural control system behaved more robustly in CLBP patients while AP COP velocity was found as the most sensitive and discriminating parameter.

Trunk control during repetitive sagittal movements following a real-time tracking task in people with chronic low back pain

Precision of trunk movement has commonly been examined by testing relocation accuracy rather than evaluating accuracy of tracking dynamic movement. In this study we used a 3-D motion capture system to provide a novel real-time tracking task to assess trunk motor control at varying movement speeds between people with and without chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Eleven asymptomatic volunteers and 15 participants with chronic non-specific LBP performed 12 continuous cycles of trunk flexion-extension following real time visual feedback, during which, trunk motion was measured using eight optoelectronic infrared cameras. Significant time differences between the feedback and actual trunk motion were found between groups (P = 0.001). Both groups had similar variability of tracking accuracy when following the feedback (P > 0.05). However, tracking variability at a slow speed correlated (P = 0.03; r = 0.55) with the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) scores in those with LBP. This study shows that both asymptomatic people and individuals with LBP displayed anticipatory behaviour, however, the response of those with LBP was consistently delayed in tracking the visual feedback compared to the asymptomatic group. Additionally, the extent of variability of tracking accuracy over repeated tracking cycles was associated with the degree of fear of movement in people with LBP.