Cervical kinematic training with and without interactive VR training for chronic neck pain - a randomized clinical trial

Impairments in cervical kinematics are common in patients with neck pain. A virtual reality (VR) device has potential to be effective in the management of these impairments. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of kinematic training (KT) with and without the use of an interactive VR device. In this assessor-blinded, allocation-concealed pilot clinical trial, 32 participants with chronic neck pain were randomised into the KT or kinematic plus VR training (KTVR) group. Both groups completed four to six training sessions comprising of similar KT activities such as active and quick head movements and fine head movement control and stability over five weeks. Only the KTVR group used the VR device. The primary outcome measures were neck disability index (NDI), cervical range of motion (ROM), head movement velocity and accuracy. Kinematic measures were collected using the VR system that was also used for training. Secondary measures included pain intensity, TAMPA scale of kinesiophobia, static and dynamic balance, global perceived effect and participant satisfaction. The results demonstrated significant (p < 0.05) improvements in NDI, ROM (rotation), velocity, and the step test in both groups post-intervention. At 3-month post-intervention, these improvements were mostly sustained; however there was no control group, which limits the interpretation of this. Between-group analysis showed a few specific differences including global perceived change that was greater in the KTVR group

Interactive cervical motion kinematics: sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant values for identifying kinematic impairments in patients with chronic neck pain

Chronic neck pain has been consistently shown to be associated with impaired kinematic control including reduced range, velocity and smoothness of cervical motion, that seem relevant to daily function as in quick neck motion in response to surrounding stimuli. The objectives of this study were: to compare interactive cervical kinematics in patients with neck pain and controls; to explore the new measures of cervical motion accuracy; and to find the sensitivity, specificity, and optimal cutoff values for defining impaired kinematics in those with neck pain. In this cross-section study, 33 patients with chronic neck pain and 22 asymptomatic controls were assessed for their cervical kinematic control using interactive virtual reality hardware and customized software utilizing a head mounted display with built-in head tracking. Outcome measures included peak and mean velocity, smoothness (represented by number of velocity peaks (NVP)), symmetry (represented by time to peak velocity percentage (TTPP)), and accuracy of cervical motion. Results demonstrated significant and strong effect-size differences in peak and mean velocities, NVP and TTPP in all directions excluding TTPP in left rotation, and good effect-size group differences in 5/8 accuracy measures. Regression results emphasized the high clinical value of neck motion velocity, with very high sensitivity and specificity (85%–100%), followed by motion smoothness, symmetry and accuracy. These finding suggest cervical kinematics should be evaluated clinically, and screened by the provided cut off values for identification of relevant impairments in those with neck pain. Such identification of presence or absence of kinematic impairments may direct treatment strategies and additional evaluation when needed

Factors associated with cervical kinematic impairments in patients with neck pain

Background and aim: Cervical kinematics have functional relevance and are important for assessment and management in patients with neck disorders. A better understanding of factors that might influence cervical kinematics is required. The aim of this study was to determine any relationships between altered kinematics to the symptoms and signs of sensorimotor impairments, neck pain and disability and fear of neck motion in people with neck pain. Method: Kinematics were measured in 39 subjects with chronic neck pain using a customized virtual reality system. Range of cervical motion, mean and peak velocity, time to peak velocity percentage, number of velocity peaks and accuracy were derived. Correlations between these measures to self-reported (neck pain intensity, disability, fear of motion, dizziness, visual disturbances) and sensorimotor measures and regression analyses were conducted. Results: Range and velocity of motion of cervical rotation appeared to be most related to visual disturbances and pain or dynamic balance. Nevertheless these relationships only explained about 30% of the variance of each measure. Conclusion: Signs and symptoms of sensorimotor dysfunction should be considered and monitored in the management of altered cervical rotation kinematics in patients with chronic neck disorders. Future research should consider the effects of addressing these factors on neck kinematics and vice versa to aid functional recovery in those with neck pain

Predictors for positive response to home kinematic training in chronic neck pain

Objectives: There is strong evidence for exercise therapy in neck pain, but a wide variety of protocols. Predictors for outcome are unknown and current practice is based on trial and error. The objective of this study was to identify predictors for response to home kinematic training (KT) considering improvement in both self-reported and kinematic measures. Methods: A continuing analysis of data from the second phase of a randomized controlled trial, which included 4 weeks of KT using laser or virtual reality, with baseline, postintervention, and 3-month follow-up measures. Positive self-reported response was defined as a ≥50% pain reduction, ≥7% reduction in neck disability index (NDI), or a global perceived effect of 3 to 5 of 5. A second model defined improvement by ≥40% increase in cervical velocity. Results: Data were retrieved from 79 participants with chronic neck pain who completed the postintervention evaluation and 52 who completed the 3-month follow-up. Self-reported response was 71% to 73% and kinematic response was 41% to 46%. Prediction models indicated an immediate increase in self-reported measures in men with NDI ≥ 20% slower (≤65°/s), and less accurate (≥16° error) cervical motion at baseline. In the longer term, older patients with higher NDI seemed to benefit more. In the second model, no factors significantly predicted improvement in kinematic measures at either time point. Conclusion: A high positive response rate to home KT was found by self-reported criteria. Males with poorer clinical and kinematic presentation at baseline, that is greater disability and slower neck motion, were more likely to respond

Neck motion kinematics: an inter-tester reliability study using an interactive neck VR assessment in asymptomatic individuals

The use of virtual reality (VR) for assessment and intervention of neck pain has previously been used and shown reliable for cervical range of motion measures. Neck VR enables analysis of task-oriented neck movement by stimulating responsive movements to external stimuli. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to establish inter-tester reliability of neck kinematic measures so that it can be used as a reliable assessment and treatment tool between clinicians

Simulator sickness in patients with neck pain and vestibular pathology during virtual reality tasks

Immersion in virtual environments can cause simulator sickness (SS). Further, head and neck movement in interactive virtual reality (VR) assessment and training stimulates the vestibular and cervical afferent systems that can cause dizziness in subjects with neck pain and vestibular pathology. This cross-sectional, observational, study investigated SS and factors that may influence this between 20 neck pain, 14 vestibular pathology and 20 asymptomatic control subjects. Pre-VR questionnaires included a visual symptom scale and dizziness intensity. SS measures included the simulator sickness visual analogue scale and the simulator sickness questionnaire. Significantly greater incidence of any SS and higher values were found in the vestibular and neck pain groups compared to the control group in selected SS measures. No significant differences were found when comparing SS measures between the vestibular and neck pain groups. Significant mild-to-moderate correlations for the entire population were found between both SS measures to pre-VR visual symptoms and dizziness intensity. SS levels in neck pain and vestibular populations are comparable and higher than asymptomatic individuals. Dizziness and visual disturbances may be associated with an increase in severity of SS in these clinical populations

Cervical kinematics in patients with vestibular pathology vs. patients with neck pain: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE: Research has consistently shown cervical kinematic impairments in subjects with persistent neck pain (NP). It could be reasoned that those with vestibular pathology (VP) may also have altered kinematics since vestibular stimulation via head movement can cause dizziness and visual disturbances. However, this has not been examined to date. This pilot study investigated changes in cervical kinematics between asymptomatic control, NP and VP subjects using a Virtual Reality (VR) system. It was hypothesised that there would be altered kinematics in VP subjects, which might be associated with dizziness and visual symptoms

High-vs. low-tech cervical movement sense measurement in individuals with neck pain

Objectives: To compare diagnostic ability of the clinical cervical movement sense (CCMS) test to the neck virtual reality (VR) system accuracy module. Background: Altered cervical proprioception is common in patients with persistent neck pain (NP). Recently a simple CCMS has been found to be feasible and reliable. However, it is not known how this compares to a valid method. Methods: Twenty participants with persistent NP and 20 healthy controls were videoed while performing the CCMS using a laser pointer and traced a zigzag pattern and then assessed using the VR accuracy module which consisted of following 8 segments in four directions. Diagnostic ability using a model from potential variables from the video analysis of number of errors and task performance time was compared to a model provided from VR data. Results: Subjects with NP had significantly greater horizontal errors in the CCMS and VR accuracy. Both CCMS and VR measurement models utilising measurements of horizontal movement error demonstrated good diagnostic ability (AUC = 0.88, 0.91 respectively) and there was no statistical difference between the models’ AUC (p = 0.7). Conclusion: The simple clinical testing tool appears to provide a measure of cervical movement sense, similar to the established Neck VR accuracy measure. Both tools differentiated individuals with NP from controls with similar sensitivity and specificity, with some advantage to the VR. The rotational motion measures seem most suitable in the assessment of motion accuracy. CCMS has potential to be used as a simple clinical measure and warrants further research