How is precision regulated in maintaining trunk posture?

Precision of limb control is associated with increased joint stiffness caused by antagonistic co-activation. The aim of this study was to examine whether this strategy also applies to precision of trunk postural control. To this end, thirteen subjects performed static postural tasks, aiming at a target object with a cursor that responded to 2D trunk angles. By manipulating target dimensions, different levels of precision were imposed in the frontal and sagittal planes. Trunk angle and electromyography (EMG) of abdominal and back muscles were recorded. Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed significant effects of target dimensions on kinematic variability in both movement planes. Specifically, standard deviation (SD) of trunk angle decreased significantly when target size in the same direction decreased, regardless of the precision demands in the other direction. Thus, precision control of trunk posture was directionally specific. However, no consistent effect of precision demands was found on trunk muscle activity, when averaged over time series. Therefore, it was concluded that stiffness regulation by antagonistic co-activation was not used to meet increased precision demands in trunk postural control. Instead, results from additional analyses suggest that precision of trunk angle was controlled in a feedback mode

Initial intramuscular perfusion pressure predicts early skeletal muscle function following isolated tibial fractures

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The severity of associated soft tissue trauma in complex injuries of the extremities guides fracture treatment and decisively determines patient's prognosis. Trauma-induced microvascular dysfunction and increased tissue pressure is known to trigger secondary soft tissue damage and seems to adversely affect skeletal muscle function.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>20 patients with isolated tibial fractures were included. Blood pressure and compartment pressure (anterior and deep posterior compartment) were measured continuously up to 24 hours. Corresponding perfusion pressure was calculated. After 4 and 12 weeks isokinetic muscle peak torque and mean power of the ankle joint in dorsal and plantar flexion were measured using a Biodex dynamometer.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A significant inverse correlation between the anterior perfusion pressure at 24 hours and deficit in dorsiflexion at 4 weeks was found for both, the peak torque (R = -0.83; p < 0.01) and the mean power (R = -0.84; p < 0.01). The posterior perfusion pressure at 24 h and the plantar flexion after 4 weeks in both, peak torque (R = -0.73, p =< 0.05) and mean power (R = -0.7, p =< 0.05) displayed a significant correlation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The functional relationship between the decrease in intramuscular perfusion pressures and muscle performance in the early rehabilitation period indicate a causative and prognostic role of early posttraumatic microcirculatory derangements and skeletal muscle function. Therapeutic concepts aimed at effective muscle recovery, early rehabilitation, and decreased secondary tissue damage, should consider the maintenance of an adequate intramuscular perfusion pressure.</p

Brief psychosocial education, not core stabilization, reduced incidence of low back pain: results from the Prevention of Low Back Pain in the Military (POLM) cluster randomized trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Effective strategies for the primary prevention of low back pain (LBP) remain elusive with few large-scale clinical trials investigating exercise and education approaches. The purpose of this trial was to determine whether core stabilization alone or in combination with psychosocial education prevented incidence of low back pain in comparison to traditional lumbar exercise.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Prevention of Low Back Pain in the Military study was a cluster randomized clinical study with four intervention arms and a two-year follow-up. Participants were recruited from a military training setting from 2007 to 2008. Soldiers in 20 consecutive companies were considered for eligibility (n = 7,616). Of those, 1,741 were ineligible and 1,550 were eligible but refused participation. For the 4,325 Soldiers enrolled with no previous history of LBP average age was 22.0 years (SD = 4.2) and there were 3,082 males (71.3%). Companies were randomly assigned to receive traditional lumbar exercise, traditional lumbar exercise with psychosocial education, core stabilization exercise, or core stabilization with psychosocial education, The psychosocial education session occurred during one session and the exercise programs were done daily for 5 minutes over 12 weeks. The primary outcome for this trial was incidence of low back pain resulting in the seeking of health care.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no adverse events reported. Evaluable patient analysis (4,147/4,325 provided data) indicated no differences in low back incidence resulting in the seeking of health care between those receiving the traditional exercise and core stabilization exercise programs. However, brief psychosocial education prevented low back pain episodes regardless of the assigned exercise approach, resulting in a 3.3% (95% CI: 1.1 to 5.5%) decrease over two years (numbers needed to treat (NNT) = 30.3, 95% CI = 18.2 to 90.9).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Core stabilization has been advocated as preventative, but offered no such benefit when compared to traditional lumbar exercise in this trial. Instead, a brief psychosocial education program that reduced fear and threat of low back pain decreased incidence of low back pain resulting in the seeking of health care. Since this trial was conducted in a military setting, future studies are necessary to determine if these findings can be translated into civilian populations.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00373009">NCT00373009</a> at ClinicalTrials.gov - <url>http://clinicaltrials.gov/</url></p

Effect of spinal manipulation on sensorimotor functions in back pain patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low back pain (LBP) is a recognized public health problem, impacting up to 80% of US adults at some point in their lives. Patients with LBP are utilizing integrative health care such as spinal manipulation (SM). SM is the therapeutic application of a load to specific body tissues or structures and can be divided into two broad categories: SM with a high-velocity low-amplitude load, or an impulse "thrust", (HVLA-SM) and SM with a low-velocity variable-amplitude load (LVVA-SM). There is evidence that sensorimotor function in people with LBP is altered. This study evaluates the sensorimotor function in the lumbopelvic region, as measured by postural sway, response to sudden load and repositioning accuracy, following SM to the lumbar and pelvic region when compared to a sham treatment.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A total of 219 participants with acute, subacute or chronic low back pain are being recruited from the Quad Cities area located in Iowa and Illinois. They are allocated through a minimization algorithm in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either 13 HVLA-SM treatments over 6 weeks, 13 LVVA-SM treatments over 6 weeks or 2 weeks of a sham treatment followed by 4 weeks of full spine "doctor's choice" SM. Sensorimotor function tests are performed before and immediately after treatment at baseline, week 2 and week 6. Self-report outcome assessments are also collected. The primary aims of this study are to 1) determine immediate pre to post changes in sensorimotor function as measured by postural sway following delivery of a single HVLA-SM or LVVA-SM treatment when compared to a sham treatment and 2) to determine changes from baseline to 2 weeks (4 treatments) of HVLA-SM or LVVA-SM compared to a sham treatment. Secondary aims include changes in response to sudden loads and lumbar repositioning accuracy at these endpoints, estimating sensorimotor function in the SM groups after 6 weeks of treatment, and exploring if changes in sensorimotor function are associated with changes in self-report outcome assessments.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study may provide clues to the sensorimotor mechanisms that explain observed functional deficits associated with LBP, as well as the mechanism of action of SM.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, with the ID number of <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00830596">NCT00830596</a>, registered on January 27, 2009. The first participant was allocated on 30 January 2009 and the final participant was allocated on 17 March 2011.</p