Effects of noxious stimulation and pain expectations on neuromuscular control of the spine in patients with chronic low back pain

Pain-sensorimotor interactions: New perspectives and a new model

How pain and sensorimotor behavior interact has been the subject of research and debate for many decades. This article reviews theories bearing on pain-sensorimotor interactions and considers their strengths and limitations in the light of findings from experimental and clinical studies of pain-sensorimotor interactions in the spinal and craniofacial sensorimotor systems. A strength of recent theories is that they have incorporated concepts and features missing from earlier theories to account for the role of the sensory-discriminative, motivational-affective, and cognitive-evaluative dimensions of pain in pain-sensorimotor interactions. Findings acquired since the formulation of these recent theories indicate that additional features need to be considered to provide a more comprehensive conceptualization of pain-sensorimotor interactions. These features include biopsychosocial influences that range from biological factors such as genetics and epigenetics to psychological factors and social factors encompassing environmental and cultural influences. Also needing consideration is a mechanistic framework that includes other biological factors reflecting nociceptive processes and glioplastic and neuroplastic changes in sensorimotor and related brain and spinal cord circuits in acute or chronic pain conditions. The literature reviewed and the limitations of previous theories bearing on pain-sensorimotor interactions have led us to provide new perspectives on these interactions, and this has prompted our development of a new concept, the Theory of Pain-Sensorimotor Interactions (TOPSMI) that we suggest gives a more comprehensive framework to consider the interactions and their complexity. This theory states that pain is associated with plastic changes in the central nervous system (CNS) that lead to an activation pattern of motor units that contributes to the individual's adaptive sensorimotor behavior. This activation pattern takes account of the biological, psychological, and social influences on the musculoskeletal tissues involved in sensorimotor behavior and on the plastic changes and the experience of pain in that individual. The pattern is normally optimized in terms of biomechanical advantage and metabolic cost related to the features of the individual's musculoskeletal tissues and aims to minimize pain and any associated sensorimotor changes, and thereby maintain homeostasis. However, adverse biopsychosocial factors and their interactions may result in plastic CNS changes leading to less optimal, even maladaptive, sensorimotor changes producing motor unit activation patterns associated with the development of further pain. This more comprehensive theory points towards customized treatment strategies, in line with the management approaches to pain proposed in the biopsychosocial model of pain.

Neuromuscular adaptations to experimentally induced pain in the lumbar region: systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Experimental pain models are frequently used to understand the influence of pain on the control of human movement. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of experimentally induced pain in the lumbar region of healthy individuals on trunk muscle activity and spine kinematics. Databases were searched from inception up to January 31, 2022. In total, 26 studies using either hypertonic saline injection (n = 19), heat thermal stimulation (n = 3), nociceptive electrical stimulation (n = 3), or capsaicin (n = 1) were included. The identified adaptations were task dependent, and their heterogeneity was partially explained by the experimental pain model adopted. Meta-analyses revealed an increase of erector spinae activity (standardized mean difference = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.22-1.19) during full trunk flexion and delayed onset of transversus abdominis to postural perturbation tasks (mean difference = 25.2 ms, 95% CI = 4.09-46.30) in the presence of pain. Low quality of evidence supported an increase in the activity of the superficial lumbar muscles during locomotion and during voluntary trunk movements during painful conditions. By contrast, activity of erector spinae, deep multifidus, and transversus abdominis was reduced during postural perturbation tasks. Reduced range of motion of the lumbar spine in the presence of pain was supported by low quality of evidence. Given the agreement between our findings and the adaptations observed in clinical populations, the use of experimental pain models may help to better understand the mechanisms underlying motor adaptations to low back pain.

Relative contributions of the nervous system, spinal tissue and psychosocial health to non-specific low back pain: Multivariate meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Nervous system, psychosocial and spinal tissue biomarkers are associated with non-specific low back pain (nsLBP), though relative contributions are unclear.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and SPORTDiscus were searched up to 25 March 2020. Related reviews and reference lists were also screened. Observational studies examining structural and functional nervous system biomarkers (e.g. quantitative sensory tests, structural and functional brain measures), psychosocial factors (e.g. mental health, catastrophizing) and structural spinal imaging biomarkers (e.g. intervertebral disc degeneration, paraspinal muscle size) between nsLBP and pain-free controls were included. For multivariate meta-analysis, two of three domains were required in each study. Random-effects pairwise and multivariate meta-analyses were performed. GRADE approach assessed evidence certainty. Newcastle-Ottawa scale assessed risk of bias. Main outcomes were the effect size difference of domains between nsLBP and pain-free controls.

RESULTS

Of 4519 unique records identified, 33 studies (LBP = 1552, referents = 1322) were meta-analysed. Psychosocial state (Hedges' g [95%CI]: 0.90 [0.69-1.10], p < 0.001) in nsLBP showed larger effect sizes than nervous system (0.31 [0.13-0.49], p < 0.001; difference: 0.61 [0.36-0.86], p < 0.001) and spine imaging biomarkers (0.55 [0.37-0.73], p < 0.001; difference: 0.36 [0.04-0.67], p = 0.027). The relationship between domains changes depending on if pain duration is acute or chronic.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial effect sizes in nsLBP are greater than that for spinal imaging and nervous system biomarkers. Limitations include cross-sectional design of studies included and inference of causality. Future research should investigate the clinical relevance of these effect size differences in relation to pain intensity and disability.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO-CRD42020159188.

SIGNIFICANCE

Spinal imaging (e.g. intervertebral disc degeneration), psychosocial (e.g. depression) and nervous system (e.g. quantitative sensory tests, structural and functional brain measures) biomarkers contribute to non-specific low back pain. However, psychosocial factors may be more compromised than nervous system and spinal imaging biomarkers. This relationship depends on if the pain is acute or chronic. These findings underscore that the 'non-specific' label in back pain should be reconsidered, and more specific multidimensional categories evaluated to guide patient management.

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.

Impact of load expectations on neuromuscular and postural strategies during a freestyle lifting task in individuals with and without chronic low back pain

Objective

This study aimed to investigate how load expectations modulate neuromuscular and postural strategies in the anticipation of a freestyle lifting task with varying expected loads in individuals with and without chronic low back pain (cLBP).

Methods

Forty-seven participants, 28 with cLBP pain and 19 without, were recruited and completed a series of freestyle lifting trials (3 sets of box lifted for a total of 36 lifts). Verbal cues were used to modulate their expectations about the boxes’ weight: no expectation, lighter or heavier load expectations. Following each set, participants rated their perceived exertion on a visual analog scale. During the lifting protocol, kinematics (time to maximal flexion, angular velocity and joint angles), electromyography muscle activity (erector spinae and quadriceps) and center of pressure displacement were simultaneously recorded.

Results

Results showed that time to maximal knee flexion was modulated by load expectations in both groups (mean lighter load expectations = 1.15 ± 0.32 sec.; mean heavier load expectations = 1.06 ± 0.31 sec.). Results also showed a load expectations X group interaction for that time to maximal hip and lumbar flexion. Time to maximal hip flexion decreased with heavier load expectations (mean lighter load expectations = 1.20 ± 0.36; mean heavier load expectations = 1.16 ± 0.33) for cLBP only. Time to maximal lumbar flexion increased with heavier load expectation (mean lighter load expectations = 1.41 ± 0.27 sec.; mean lighter load expectations = 1.46 ± 0.29 sec.) for participants without LBP. However, no difference in lumbar, hip nor knee angles were observed between groups or conditions. Results highlighted significant load expectation effects for erector spinae electromyography activity, as lower muscle activations was observed for both groups with heavier load expectations (mean = 0.32 ± 0.15), compared to lighter load expectations (mean = 0.52 ± 0.27). Force plates analyses did not reveal any significant load expectation effects.

Conclusion

Present findings showed that load expectations modulate movement strategies and muscle activation similarly but not identically in individuals with chronic low back pain and healthy adults during freestyle lifting. Results of the present study partially differ from previous studies and suggest only minor differences in lifting strategies between healthy individuals and individuals with cLBP experiencing low level of pain and disability. More studies are needed to investigate the potential role of load expectations in the development and persistence of chronic low back pain.

Clinical and Psychosocial Factors Over Time Following an Acute Low Back Pain Episode

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent condition with overwhelming healthcare costs and high disability rates. Characterization of clinical and psychosocial variables over time in patients experiencing an episode of acute LBP and the identification of factors that differ between those who develop chronic LBP and those who do not could aid in the development of improved targeted treatment.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the trajectory of depression, pain catastrophizing, life purpose, pain sensitivity, and disability in persons presenting with an acute/subacute episode of LBP, evaluating whether there are changes over time and differences in these variables between those who developed chronic LBP and those who did not.

METHODS

Prospective analysis (baseline, 2.5 months, 6 months, and weekly diaries) of 42 patients experiencing an acute LBP episode was performed. Descriptive statistics, repeated-measures mixed modeling, and Fisher's least significant differences method were used during data analysis.

RESULTS

Depressive symptoms vary over time. There was no difference over time in pain catastrophizing, life purpose, pain sensitivity, or disability. Those who met the criteria for chronic LBP at 6 months had increased pain catastrophizing scores and higher disability scores compared with those who do not meet the criteria for chronic LBP. Depressive symptoms, life purpose, and pain sensitivity were not different between those who met the criteria for chronic LBP and those who did not.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study characterize factors potentially contributory to the development of chronic LBP over time. Those participants who developed chronic LBP had higher pain catastrophizing scores averaged across all time points in this study, suggesting it could be an interesting factor to target to improve LBP chronicity.

The relationship between indicators of lumbo-pelvic coordination and pain, disability, pain catastrophizing and depression in patients presenting with non-chronic low back pain

This study examined associations and changes overtime in low back kinematics and disability, pain, pain catastrophizing, and depression and assessed whether associations and changes overtime varied between individuals who meet the classification criteria for chronic low back pain at 6 months and those who do not. Findings suggested that those persons with a higher ratio of lumbar contribution to thorax motion and smaller pelvic tilt during forward bending had higher scores on measures of disability, pain and pain catastrophizing. This same association was found in those who met classification criteria for chronic low back pain at 6 months. Opposing associations were found in the group not meeting classification criteria for chronic low back pain, specifically, increased pelvic tilt was positively associated with higher pain catastrophizing scores. Practitioner summary This study examined associations and changes overtime in low back kinematics and psychosocial and clinical factors and whether associations and changes overtime varied between individuals who meet the classification criteria for chronic low back pain at 6 months and those who do not, Results suggest that associations exist between psychological factors and kinematic changes during the time between an acute low back pain episode to meeting classification for chronic low back pain at 6 months.

Is there evidence to use kinematic/kinetic measures clinically in low back pain patients? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is a widespread reliance on self-reported questionnaires to assess low back pain patients. However, it has been suggested that objective measures of low back pain patients' functional status should be used to aid clinical assessment. The aim of this study is to systematically review which kinematic /kinetic parameters have been used to assess low back pain patients against healthy controls and to propose clinical kinematic/kinetic measures.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases were searched for relevant studies. Reference lists of selected studies and hand searches were performed. Studies had to compare people with and without non-specific low back pain while performing functional tasks and report body segment/joint kinematic and/or kinetic data. Two reviewers independently identified relevant papers.

FINDINGS

Sixty-two studies were included. Common biases identified were lack of assessor blinding and sample size calculation, use of samples of convenience, and poor experimental protocol standardization. Studies had small sample sizes. Range of motion maneuvers were the main task performed (33/62). Kinematic/kinetic data of different individual or combination of body segments/joints were reported among the studies, commonest was to assess the hip joint and lumbar segment motion (13/62). Only one study described full body movement. The most commonly reported outcome was range of motion. Statistically significant differences between controls and low back pain groups were reported for different outcomes among the studies. Moreover, when the same outcome was reported disagreements were noted.

INTERPRETATION

The literature to date offers limited and inconsistent evidence of kinematic/kinetic measures in low back pain patients that could be used clinically.

Identifying Subgroups of Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain Based on a Multifactorial Approach: Protocol For a Prospective Study

Background

Low back pain, especially nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), the leading cause of disability worldwide, represents both social and economic problems. Different therapeutic management techniques can be used, but their effects vary. Clinicians and researchers attribute the variation in the efficacy of therapeutic and management techniques to the heterogeneity of the nonspecific chronic low back pain population, and they agree that nonspecific chronic LBP must be subgrouped.

Objective

This study aims to identify nonspecific chronic LBP subgroups based on a multifactorial approach, including biomechanical, physical, and psychosocial data.

Methods

A total of 100 nonspecific chronic LBP patients and 30 healthy participants aged between 18 and 60 years will be recruited for this prospective study. A psychosocial profile will be established using questionnaires on anxiety, depression, functional disability, pain, fear of pain, avoidance belief, and physical activity. A physical capacity evaluation will be conducted. It will evaluate flexibility of the hips, lumbar spine, and lateral thoracolumbar segment, as well as trunk (extensor and flexor) muscle endurance. The subjects will perform functional daily life activities, such as walking, object lifting, forward bending, sit-to-stand, stand-to-sit, balance, and usual postures. Full body kinematics, kinetics, and surface electromyography of the trunk and hip muscles will be assessed during these tasks. The clustering classification methods for the statistical analysis will be determined according to the data and will be used to identify the subgroups of nonspecific chronic LBP patients.

Results

Data collection started in September 2017 and will be completed with the inclusion of all the participants (100 nonspecific chronic LBP and 30 control). The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant international conferences.

Conclusions

Numerous studies have showed that the therapeutic management of nonspecific chronic LBP is difficult and has inconstant effects caused by the complexity and heterogeneity of nonspecific chronic LBP. Identifying subgroups with a multifactorial approach is more comprehensive and closer to the pathophysiology of nonspecific chronic LBP. It also represents benefit interests and a challenge both clinically and socially. The perspective of this study is expected to support clinicians for a more adapted therapeutic management for each subgroup.

Diagnosis of Compressed Nerve Root in Lumbar Disc Herniation Patients by Surface Electromyography

OBJECTIVE

To establish a logistic regression model using surface electromyography (SEMG) parameters for diagnosing the compressed nerve root at L₅ or S₁ level in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

This study recruited 24 patients with L₅ nerve root compression and 23 patients with S₁ nerve root compression caused by LDH from May 2014 to May 2016. SEMG signals from the bilateral tibialis anterior and lateral gastrocnemius were measured. The root mean square (RMS), the RMS peak time, the mean power frequency (MPF), and the median frequency (MF) were analyzed. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity values were calculated separately. The areas under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the kappa value were used to evaluate the accuracy of the SEMG diagnostic model.

RESULTS

The accuracy of the SEMG model ranged from 85.71% to 100%, with an average of 93.57%. The sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and kappa value of the logistic regression model were 0.98 ± 0.05, 0.92 ± 0.09, 0.95 ± 0.04 (P = 0.006), and 0.87 ± 0.11, respectively (P = 0.001). The final diagnostic model was: P=1-11+ey; y = 10.76 - (5.95 × TA_RMS Ratio) - (0.38 × TA_RMS Peak Time Ratio) - (5.44 × 44 × LG_RMS Peak Time Ratio). L₅ nerve root compression is diagnosed when P < 0.5 and S₁ nerve root compression when P ≥ 0.5.

CONCLUSIONS

The logistic regression model developed in this study showed high diagnostic accuracy in detecting the compressed nerve root (L₅ and S₁ ) in these patients with LDH.