Refine
Document Type
- Article (7)
- Conference Proceeding (4)
- Postprint (3)
Language
- English (14)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14)
Keywords
- EMG (4)
- Achilles and patellar tendon (2)
- instability (2)
- non-athletes (2)
- overhead athlete (2)
- rotator cuff (2)
- sonography (2)
- training adaptation (2)
- unstable resistance training (2)
- young athletes (2)
Characterization of scapular kinematics under demanding load conditions might aid to distinguish between physiological and clinically relevant alterations. Previous investigations focused only on submaximal external load situations. How scapular movement changes with maximal load remains unclear. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate 3D scapular kinematics during unloaded and maximal loaded shoulder flexion and extension. Twelve asymptomatic individuals performed shoulder flexion and extension movements under unloaded and maximal concentric and eccentric loaded isokinetic conditions. 3D scapular kinematics assessed with a motion capture system was analyzed for 20° intervals of humeral positions from 20° to 120° flexion. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to evaluate kinematic differences between load conditions for scapular position angles, scapulohumeral rhythm and scapular motion extent. Increased scapular upward rotation was seen during shoulder flexion and extension as well as decreased posterior tilt and external rotation during eccentric and concentric arm descents of maximal loaded compared to unloaded conditions. Load effects were further seen for the scapulohumeral rhythm with greater scapular involvement at lower humeral positions and increased scapular motion extent under maximal loaded shoulder movements. With maximal load applied to the arm physiological scapular movement pattern are induced that may imply both impingement sparing and causing mechanisms.
Flexion-extension ratio of trunk peak torque measures and antagonistic activity in males and females
(2014)
Repetitive overhead motions in combination with heavy loading were identified as risk factors for the development of shoulder pain. However, the underlying mechanism is not fully understood. Altered scapular kinematics as a result of muscle fatigue is suspected to be a contributor. PURPOSE: To determine scapular kinematics and scapular muscle activity at the beginning and end of constant shoulder flexion and extension loading in asymptomatic individuals. METHODS: Eleven asymptomatic adults (28±4yrs; 1.74±0.13m; 74±16kg) underwent maximum isokinetic loading of shoulder flexion (FLX) and extension (EXT) in the sagittal plane (ROM: 20- 180°; concentric mode; 180°/s) until individual peak torque was reduced by 50%. Simultaneously 3D scapular kinematics were assessed with a motion capture system and scapular muscle activity with a 3-lead sEMG of upper and lower trapezius (UT, LT) and serratus anterior (SA). Scapular position angles were calculated for every 20° increment between 20-120° humerothoracic positions. Muscle activity was quantified by amplitudes (RMS) of the total ROM. Descriptive analyses (mean±SD) of kinematics and muscle activity at begin (taskB) and end (taskE) of the loading task was followed by ANOVA and paired t-tests. RESULTS: At taskB activity ranged from 589±343mV to 605±250mV during FLX and from 105±41mV to 164±73mV during EXT across muscles. At taskE activity ranged from 594±304mV to 875±276mV during FLX and from 97±33mV to 147±57mV during EXT. Differences with increased muscle activity were seen for LT and UT during FLX (meandiff= 141±113mV for LT, p<0.01; 191±153mV for UT, p<0.01). Scapula position angles continuously increased in upward rotation, posterior tilt and external rotation during FLX and reversed during EXT both at taskB and taskE. At taskE scapula showed greater external rotation (meandiff= 3.6±3.7°, p<0.05) during FLX and decreased upward rotation (meandiff= 1.9±2.3°, p<0.05) and posterior tilt (meandiff= 1.0±2.1°, p<0.05) during EXT across humeral positions. CONCLUSIONS: Force reduction in consequence of fatiguing shoulder loading results in increased scapular muscle activity and minor alterations in scapula motion. Whether even small changes have a clinical impact by creating unfavorable subacromial conditions potentially initiating pain remains unclear.
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.
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.
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.