Comparison of the thoracic flexion relaxation ratio and pressure pain threshold after overhead assembly work and below knee assembly work

A systematic review and meta analysis of measurement properties for the flexion relaxation ratio in people with and without non specific spine pain

This review sought to identify, critically appraise, compare, and summarize the literature on the reliability, discriminative validity and responsiveness of the flexion relaxation ratio (FRR) in adults (≥ 18 years old) with or without spine pain (any duration), in either a clinical or research context. The review protocol was registered on Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/27EDF ) and follows COSMIN, PRISMA, and PRESS guidelines. Six databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2022. The search string was developed by content experts and a health services librarian. Two pairs of reviewers independently completed titles/abstracts and full text screening for inclusion, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (COSMIN RoB Toolkit). At all stages, discrepancies were resolved through consensus meetings. Data were pooled where possible with a three-level random effects meta-analyses and a modified GRADE assessment was used for the summary of findings. Following duplicate removal, 728 titles/abstracts and 219 full texts were screened with 23 included in this review. We found, with moderate certainty of evidence, that the cervical FRR has high test-retest reliability and lumbar FRR has moderate to high test-retest reliability, and with high certainty of evidence that the cervical and lumbar FRR can discriminate between healthy and clinical groups (standardized mean difference - 1.16 [95% CI - 2.00, - 0.32] and - 1.21 [- 1.84, - 0.58] respectively). There was not enough evidence to summarize findings for thoracic FRR discriminative validity or the standard error of measurement for the FRR. Several studies used FRR assuming responsiveness, but no studies were designed in a way that could confirm responsiveness. The evidence supports adequate reliability of FRR for the cervical and lumbar spine, and discriminative validity for the cervical and lumbar spine only. Improvements in study design and reporting are needed to strengthen the evidence base to determine the remaining measurement properties of this outcome.

Effect of chronic knee osteoarthritis on flexion-relaxation phenomenon of the erector spinae in elderly females

[Purpose] This study investigated the flexion-relaxation phenomenon of the erector spinae in elderly women with chronic knee osteoarthritis and determined whether the flexion-relaxation phenomenon can be used as a pain evaluation tool in such cases. [Subjects and Methods] Seventeen elderly females with chronic knee osteoarthritis and 13 healthy young females voluntarily participated in this study. They performed three postural positions in 15 s: trunk flexion, complete trunk flexion, and trunk extension, each for 5 s. While these positions were held, muscle activation of the thoracic and lumbar erector spinae were measured using surface electromyography. The flexion-relaxation rate was determined by dividing the values for trunk extension by those of complete trunk flexion and by dividing the values for trunk flexion by those of complete trunk flexion. [Results] According to our results, the flexion-relaxation phenomenon was different between healthy young and elderly females with chronic knee osteoarthritis. Specifically, there was a difference in the left thoracic erector spinae muscle, but not in the left and right lumbar erector spinae or right thoracic spinae muscle. [Conclusion] Our study demonstrated that the erector spinae muscle flexion-relaxation phenomenon can be used as a pain evaluation tool in elderly females with chronic knee osteoarthritis.

Effects of lumbar stabilization exercises on the flexion-relaxation phenomenon of the erector spinae

[Purpose] This study evaluated the differences in the flexion-relaxation phenomenon (FRP) of the right and left erector spinae muscles in asymptomatic subjects and the effect of lumbar stabilization exercises on these differences. [Subjects and Methods] Twenty-six participants (12 in the exercise group and 14 in the control group) with a difference in the FRP in the right and left erector spinae muscles were recruited from among healthy students attending Silla University. The exercise group performed two lumbar stabilization exercises (back bridge exercise and hand-knee exercise) for 4 weeks. The control group did not exercise. [Results] No significant group-by-exercise interaction was found. The right and left erector spinae muscles did show a difference in FRP between the control and exercise groups (119.2 ± 69.2 and 131.1 ± 85.2 ms, respectively). In addition, the exercise group showed a significant decrease in post-exercise (50.0 ± 27.0 ms) compared to pre-exercise (112.3 ± 41.5 ms) differences in the right and left FRP. [Conclusion] These results suggest that lumbar stabilization exercises may counter asymmetry of the FRP in the erector spinae muscles, possibly preventing low back pain in the general population.