Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Conference Proceeding (6)
- Postprint (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (25)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (25)
Keywords
- Children (3)
- Young athletes (3)
- adolescents (3)
- prevalence (3)
- EMG (2)
- Gait (2)
- Injury (2)
- Pain occurrence (2)
- Training volume (2)
- body-mass index (2)
Institute
- Department Sport- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (25) (remove)
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a 6-week sensorimotor or resistance training on maximum trunk strength and response to sudden, high-intensity loading in athletes. Interventions showed no significant difference for maximum strength in concentric and eccentric testing (p>0.05). For perturbation compensation, higher peak torque response following SMT (Extension: +24Nm 95%CI +/- 19Nm; Rotation: + 19Nm 95%CI +/- 13Nm) and RT (Extension: +35Nm 95%CI +/- 16Nm; Rotation: +5Nm 95%CI +/- 4Nm) compared to CG (Extension: -4Nm 95%CI +/- 16Nm; Rotation: -2Nm 95%CI +/- 4Nm) was present (p<0.05).
Trunk loading and back pain
(2017)
An essential function of the trunk is the compensation of external forces and loads in order to guarantee stability. Stabilising the trunk during sudden, repetitive loading in everyday tasks, as well as during performance is important in order to protect against injury. Hence, reduced trunk stability is accepted as a risk factor for the development of back pain (BP). An altered activity pattern including extended response and activation times as well as increased co-contraction of the trunk muscles as well as a reduced range of motion and increased movement variability of the trunk are evident in back pain patients (BPP). These differences to healthy controls (H) have been evaluated primarily in quasi-static test situations involving isolated loading directly to the trunk. Nevertheless, transferability to everyday, dynamic situations is under debate. Therefore, the aim of this project is to analyse 3-dimensional motion and neuromuscular reflex activity of the trunk as response to dynamic trunk loading in healthy (H) and back pain patients (BPP).
A measurement tool was developed to assess trunk stability, consisting of dynamic test situations. During these tests, loading of the trunk is generated by the upper and lower limbs with and without additional perturbation. Therefore, lifting of objects and stumbling while walking are adequate represents. With the help of a 12-lead EMG, neuromuscular activity of the muscles encompassing the trunk was assessed. In addition, three-dimensional trunk motion was analysed using a newly developed multi-segmental trunk model. The set-up was checked for reproducibility as well as validity. Afterwards, the defined measurement set-up was applied to assess trunk stability in comparisons of healthy and back pain patients.
Clinically acceptable to excellent reliability could be shown for the methods (EMG/kinematics) used in the test situations. No changes in trunk motion pattern could be observed in healthy adults during continuous loading (lifting of objects) of different weights. In contrast, sudden loading of the trunk through perturbations to the lower limbs during walking led to an increased neuromuscular activity and ROM of the trunk. Moreover, BPP showed a delayed muscle response time and extended duration until maximum neuromuscular activity in response to sudden walking perturbations compared to healthy controls. In addition, a reduced lateral flexion of the trunk during perturbation could be shown in BPP.
It is concluded that perturbed gait seems suitable to provoke higher demands on trunk stability in adults. The altered neuromuscular and kinematic compensation pattern in back pain patients (BPP) can be interpreted as increased spine loading and reduced trunk stability in patients. Therefore, this novel assessment of trunk stability is suitable to identify deficits in BPP. Assignment of affected BPP to therapy interventions with focus on stabilisation of the trunk aiming to improve neuromuscular control in dynamic situations is implied. Hence, sensorimotor training (SMT) to enhance trunk stability and compensation of unexpected sudden loading should be preferred.
AIM To analyze neuromuscular activity patterns of the trunk in healthy controls (H) and back pain patients (BPP) during one-handed lifting of light to heavy loads. METHODS RESULTS Seven subjects (3m/4f; 32 +/- 7 years; 171 +/- 7 cm; 65 +/- 11 kg) were assigned to BPP (pain grade >= 2) and 36 (13m/23f; 28 +/- 8 years; 174 +/- 10 cm; 71 +/- 12 kg) to H (pain grade <= 1). H and BPP did not differ significantly in anthropometrics (P > 0.05). All subjects were able to lift the light and middle loads, but 57% of BPP and 22% of H were not able to lift the heavy load (all women) chi(2) analysis revealed statistically significant differences in task failure between H vs BPP (P = 0.03). EMG-RMS ranged from 33% +/- 10%/30% +/- 9% (DL, 1 kg) to 356% +/- 148%/283% +/- 80% (VR, 20 kg) in H/BPP with no statistical difference between groups regardless of load (P > 0.05). However, the EMG-RMS of the VR was greatest in all lifting tasks for both groups and increased with heavier loads. CONCLUSION Heavier loading leads to an increase (2-to 3-fold) in trunk muscle activity with comparable patterns. Heavy loading (20 kg) leads to task failure, especially in women with back pain.
Background
Back pain patients (BPP) show delayed muscle onset, increased co-contractions, and variability as response to quasi-static sudden trunk loading in comparison to healthy controls (H). However, it is unclear whether these results can validly be transferred to suddenly applied walking perturbations, an automated but more functional and complex movement pattern. There is an evident need to develop research-based strategies for the rehabilitation of back pain. Therefore, the investigation of differences in trunk stability between H and BPP in functional movements is of primary interest in order to define suitable intervention regimes. The purpose of this study was to analyse neuromuscular reflex activity as well as three-dimensional trunk kinematics between H and BPP during walking perturbations.
Methods
Eighty H (31m/49f;29±9yrs;174±10cm;71±13kg) and 14 BPP (6m/8f;30±8yrs;171±10cm;67±14kg) walked (1m/s) on a split-belt treadmill while 15 right-sided perturbations (belt decelerating, 40m/s2, 50ms duration; 200ms after heel contact) were randomly applied. Trunk muscle activity was assessed using a 12-lead EMG set-up. Trunk kinematics were measured using a 3-segment-model consisting of 12 markers (upper thoracic (UTA), lower thoracic (LTA), lumbar area (LA)). EMG-RMS ([%],0-200ms after perturbation) was calculated and normalized to the RMS of unperturbed gait. Latency (TON;ms) and time to maximum activity (TMAX;ms) were analysed. Total motion amplitude (ROM;[°]) and mean angle (Amean;[°]) for extension-flexion, lateral flexion and rotation were calculated (whole stride cycle; 0-200ms after perturbation) for each of the three segments during unperturbed and perturbed gait. For ROM only, perturbed was normalized to unperturbed step [%] for the whole stride as well as the 200ms after perturbation. Data were analysed descriptively followed by a student´s t-test to account for group differences. Co-contraction was analyzed between ventral and dorsal muscles (V:R) as well as side right:side left ratio (Sright:Sleft). The coefficient of variation (CV;%) was calculated (EMG-RMS;ROM) to evaluate variability between the 15 perturbations for all groups. With respect to unequal distribution of participants to groups, an additional matched-group analysis was conducted. Fourteen healthy controls out of group H were sex-, age- and anthropometrically matched (group Hmatched) to the BPP.
Results
No group differences were observed for EMG-RMS or CV analysis (EMG/ROM) (p>0.025). Co-contraction analysis revealed no differences for V:R and Srigth:Sleft between the groups (p>0.025). BPP showed an increased TON and TMAX, being significant for Mm. rectus abdominus (p = 0.019) and erector spinae T9/L3 (p = 0.005/p = 0.015). ROM analysis over the unperturbed stride cycle revealed no differences between groups (p>0.025). Normalization of perturbed to unperturbed step lead to significant differences for the lumbar segment (LA) in lateral flexion with BPP showing higher normalized ROM compared to Hmatched (p = 0.02). BPP showed a significant higher flexed posture (UTA (p = 0.02); LTA (p = 0.004)) during normal walking (Amean). Trunk posture (Amean) during perturbation showed higher trunk extension values in LTA segments for H/Hmatched compared to BPP (p = 0.003). Matched group (BPP vs. Hmatched) analysis did not show any systematic changes of all results between groups.
Conclusion
BPP present impaired muscle response times and trunk posture, especially in the sagittal and transversal planes, compared to H. This could indicate reduced trunk stability and higher loading during gait perturbations.
Background
Back pain patients (BPP) show delayed muscle onset, increased co-contractions, and variability as response to quasi-static sudden trunk loading in comparison to healthy controls (H). However, it is unclear whether these results can validly be transferred to suddenly applied walking perturbations, an automated but more functional and complex movement pattern. There is an evident need to develop research-based strategies for the rehabilitation of back pain. Therefore, the investigation of differences in trunk stability between H and BPP in functional movements is of primary interest in order to define suitable intervention regimes. The purpose of this study was to analyse neuromuscular reflex activity as well as three-dimensional trunk kinematics between H and BPP during walking perturbations.
Methods
Eighty H (31m/49f;29±9yrs;174±10cm;71±13kg) and 14 BPP (6m/8f;30±8yrs;171±10cm;67±14kg) walked (1m/s) on a split-belt treadmill while 15 right-sided perturbations (belt decelerating, 40m/s2, 50ms duration; 200ms after heel contact) were randomly applied. Trunk muscle activity was assessed using a 12-lead EMG set-up. Trunk kinematics were measured using a 3-segment-model consisting of 12 markers (upper thoracic (UTA), lower thoracic (LTA), lumbar area (LA)). EMG-RMS ([%],0-200ms after perturbation) was calculated and normalized to the RMS of unperturbed gait. Latency (TON;ms) and time to maximum activity (TMAX;ms) were analysed. Total motion amplitude (ROM;[°]) and mean angle (Amean;[°]) for extension-flexion, lateral flexion and rotation were calculated (whole stride cycle; 0-200ms after perturbation) for each of the three segments during unperturbed and perturbed gait. For ROM only, perturbed was normalized to unperturbed step [%] for the whole stride as well as the 200ms after perturbation. Data were analysed descriptively followed by a student´s t-test to account for group differences. Co-contraction was analyzed between ventral and dorsal muscles (V:R) as well as side right:side left ratio (Sright:Sleft). The coefficient of variation (CV;%) was calculated (EMG-RMS;ROM) to evaluate variability between the 15 perturbations for all groups. With respect to unequal distribution of participants to groups, an additional matched-group analysis was conducted. Fourteen healthy controls out of group H were sex-, age- and anthropometrically matched (group Hmatched) to the BPP.
Results
No group differences were observed for EMG-RMS or CV analysis (EMG/ROM) (p>0.025). Co-contraction analysis revealed no differences for V:R and Srigth:Sleft between the groups (p>0.025). BPP showed an increased TON and TMAX, being significant for Mm. rectus abdominus (p = 0.019) and erector spinae T9/L3 (p = 0.005/p = 0.015). ROM analysis over the unperturbed stride cycle revealed no differences between groups (p>0.025). Normalization of perturbed to unperturbed step lead to significant differences for the lumbar segment (LA) in lateral flexion with BPP showing higher normalized ROM compared to Hmatched (p = 0.02). BPP showed a significant higher flexed posture (UTA (p = 0.02); LTA (p = 0.004)) during normal walking (Amean). Trunk posture (Amean) during perturbation showed higher trunk extension values in LTA segments for H/Hmatched compared to BPP (p = 0.003). Matched group (BPP vs. Hmatched) analysis did not show any systematic changes of all results between groups.
Conclusion
BPP present impaired muscle response times and trunk posture, especially in the sagittal and transversal planes, compared to H. This could indicate reduced trunk stability and higher loading during gait perturbations.
Introduction: Gait speed is one of the most commonly and frequently used parameters to evaluate gait development. It is characterized by high variability when comparing different steps in children. The objective of this study was to determine intra-individual gait speed variability in children.
Methods: Gait speed measurements (6-10 trials across a 3 m walkway) were performed and analyzed in 8263 children, aged 1-15 years. The coefficient of variation (CV) served as a measure for intra-individual gait speed variability measured in 6.6 +/- 1.0 trials per child. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the influence of age and body height on changes in variability. Additionally, a subgroup analysis for height within the group of 6-year-old children was applied.
Results: A successive reduction in gait speed variability (CV) was observed for age groups (age: 1-15 years) and body height groups (height: 0.70-1.90 m). The CV in the oldest subjects was only one third of the CV (CV 6.25 +/- 3.52%) in the youngest subjects (CV 16.58 +/- 10.01%). Up to the age of 8 years (or 1.40 m height) there was a significant reduction in CV over time, compared to a leveling off for the older (taller) children.
Discussion: The straightforward approach measuring gait speed variability in repeated trials might serve as a fundamental indicator for gait development in children. Walking velocity seems to increase to age 8. Enhanced gait speed consistency of repeated trials develops up to age 15.
Stumbling led to an increase in ROM, compared to unperturbed gait, in all segments and planes. These increases ranged between 107 +/- 26% (UTA/rotation) and 262 +/- 132% (UTS/lateral flexion), significant only in lateral flexion. EMG activity of the trunk was increased during stumbling (abdominal: 665 +/- 283%; back: 501 +/- 215%), without significant differences between muscles. Provoked stumbling leads to a measurable effect on the trunk, quantifiable by an increase in ROM and EMG activity, compared to normal walking. Greater abdominal muscle activity and ROM of lateral flexion may indicate a specific compensation pattern occurring during stumbling. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.