Are there characteristic motion patterns in the lumbar spine during flexion?

Effect of low back pain on the kinetics and kinematics of the lumbar spine - a combined in vivo and in silico investigation

Lifting is a significant risk factor for low back pain (LBP). Different biomechanical factors including spinal loads, kinematics, and muscle electromyography (EMG) activities have previously been investigated during lifting activities in LBP patients and asymptomatic individuals to identify their association with LBP. However, the findings were contradictory and inconclusive. Accurate and subject-specific prediction of spinal loads is crucial for understanding, diagnosing, planning tailored treatments, and preventing recurrent pain in LBP patients. Therefore, the present study aimed to estimate the L5-S1 compressive and resultant shear loads in 19 healthy and 17 non-specific chronic LBP individuals during various static load-holding tasks (holding a 10 kg box at hip, chest, and head height) using full-body and personalized musculoskeletal models driven by subject-specific in vivo kinematic/kinetic, EMG, and physiological cross-sectional areas (PCSAs) data. These biomechanical characteristics were concurrently analyzed to identify potential differences between the two groups. Statistical analyses showed that LBP had almost no significant effect on the range of motion (trunk, lumbar, pelvis), PCSA, and EMG. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the predicted L5-S1 loads. However, as the task became more demanding, by elevating the hand-load from hip to head, LBP patients experienced significant increases in both compressive (33 %, p = 0.00) and shear (25 %, p = 0.02) loads, while asymptomatic individuals showed significant increases only in compressive loads (30 %, p = 0.01). This suggests that engaging in more challenging activities could potentially magnify the effect of LBP on the biomechanical factors and increase their discrimination capacity between LBP and asymptomatic individuals.

Sex-Dependent Estimation of Spinal Loads During Static Manual Material Handling Activities-Combined in vivo and in silico Analyses

Manual material handling (MMH) is considered as one of the main contributors to low back pain. While males traditionally perform MMH tasks, recently the number of females who undertake these physically-demanding activities is also increasing. To evaluate the risk of mechanical injuries, the majority of previous studies have estimated spinal forces using different modeling approaches that mostly focus on male individuals. Notable sex-dependent differences have, however, been reported in torso muscle strength and anatomy, segmental mass distribution, as well as lifting strategy during MMH. Therefore, this study aimed to use sex-specific models to estimate lumbar spinal and muscle forces during static MHH tasks in 10 healthy males and 10 females. Motion-capture, surface electromyographic from select trunk muscles, and ground reaction force data were simultaneously collected while subjects performed twelve symmetric and asymmetric static lifting (10 kg) tasks. AnyBody Modeling System was used to develop base-models (subject-specific segmental length, muscle architecture, and kinematics data) for both sexes. For females, female-specific models were also developed by taking into account for the female’s muscle physiological cross-sectional areas, segmental mass distributions, and body fat percentage. Males showed higher absolute L5-S1 compressive and shear loads as compared to both female base-models (25.3% compressive and 14% shear) and female-specific models (41% compressive and 23.6% shear). When the predicted spine loads were normalized to subjects’ body weight, however, female base-models showed larger loads (9% compressive and 16.2% shear on average), and female-specific models showed 2.4% smaller and 9.4% larger loads than males. Females showed larger forces in oblique abdominal muscles during both symmetric and asymmetric lifting tasks, while males had larger back extensor muscle forces during symmetric lifting tasks. A stronger correlation between measured and predicted muscle activities was found in females than males. Results indicate that female-specific characteristics affect the predicted spinal loads and must be considered in musculoskeletal models. Neglecting sex-specific parameters in these models could lead to the overestimation of spinal loads in females.

Spinal segment ranges of motion, movement coordination, and three-dimensional kinematics during occupational activities in normal-weight and obese individuals

Measurements of spinal segment ranges of motion (RoMs), movement coordination, and three-dimensional kinematics during occupational activities have implications in occupational/clinical biomechanics. Due to the large amount of adipose tissues, obese individuals may have different RoMs, lumbopelvic coordination, and kinematics than normal-weight ones. We aimed to measure/compare trunk, lumbar, and pelvis primary RoMs in all anatomical planes/directions, lumbopelvic ratios (lumbar to pelvis rotations at different trunk angles) in all anatomical planes/directions and three-dimensional spine kinematics during twelve symmetric/asymmetric statics load-handling activities in healthy normal-weight and obese individuals. Kinematics/motion data were collected from nine healthy young male normal-weight and nine age/height/sex matched obese individuals via a ten-camera Vicon motion capture system. Obese individuals had significantly smaller (p < 0.05) lumbar flexion (~9° in average) and larger pelvis right lateral bending (~5°) RoMs as well as smaller lumbopelvic ratios (~37%) in lateral bending and axial rotation movements as compared to normal-weight individuals. Moreover, the two groups had generally non-significant different segmental orientations (<20° and in most cases < 10°) in load-handling tasks that depended on the magnitude of load asymmetry angle (p < 0.05). Differences were larger for tasks performed near the floor, away from body, and at larger load asymmetry angles. Biomechanical models simulating pure lateral bending, axial rotation, or tasks involving large load asymmetry may therefore need subject-specific, rather than population-based, motion analysis due to the effects from body weight. In clinical applications, it should be noted that healthy obese individuals may have different RoMs and lumbopelvic rhythms than healthy normal-weight individuals in some anatomical planes/directions.

Characteristics of Lumbar Flexion Rhythm at Different Arm Positions

BACKGROUND

The lumbar spine displays its greatest mobility in ventral flexion, which is a potential risk factor for low back pain. The relative contribution of each segment to the complete flexion is denoted the spine rhythm, which is required to distinguish between normal and abnormal spinal profiles, and as well to calculate the spinal forces in musculoskeletal models. Nevertheless, different spine rhythms have been reported in literature and the effect of arm position has not been demonstrated. We therefore aimed to investigate the effects of different arm positions on spine rhythm during ventral flexion.

METHODS

A nonradiologic back measurement device was used to determine the real-time back lordosis during ventral flexion while participants (10 male and 10 female without low back pain) held their arms at 6 different positions.

RESULTS

During flexion with the arms naturally hanging down at both sides, the lumbar range of flexion was 52.6° ± 13.1°. Different arm positions displayed nonsignificant effect on lumbar range of flexion (P > 0.05). The middle and lower levels contributed more to the whole lumbar range of flexion than the upper level (P < 0.05), which is independent of arm position.

CONCLUSIONS

The lumbar spine displayed greater flexion in the middle and lower levels and its flexion rhythm remained unchanged at different arm positions. These results strike importance to explore for more reasons explaining the different lumbar flexion rhythms reported in literature.

Passive intervertebral motion characteristics in chronic mid to low back pain: A multivariate analysis

PURPOSE

Studies comparing back pain patients and controls on continuous intervertebral kinematics have shown differences using univariate parameters. Hitherto, multivariate approaches have not been applied to this high dimensional data, risking clinically relevant features being undetected. A multivariate re-analysis was carried out to estimate main modes of variation, and explore group differences.

METHODS

40 participants with mechanical back pain and 40 matched controls underwent passive recumbent quantitative videofluoroscopy. Intervertebral angles of L2/3 to L4/5 were obtained for right and left side-bending, extension, and flexion. Principal components analysis (PCA) was used to identify the main modes of variation, and to obtain a lower dimensional representation for comparing groups. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was used to identify how groups differed.

RESULTS

PCA identified three main modes of variation, all relating to range of motion (ROM) and its distribution between joints. Significant differences were found for coronal plane motions only (right: p = 0.02, left: p = 0.03) . LDA identified a shift in ROM to more cranial joints in the back pain group.

CONCLUSION

The results confirm altered motion sharing between intervertebral joints in back pain, and provides more details about this. Further work is required to establish how these findings lead to pain, and so strengthen the theoretical basis for treatment and management of this condition.

Internal Biomechanical Study of a 70-Year-Old Female Human Lumbar Bi-Segment Finite Element Model and Comparison with a Middle-Aged Male Model

The main purpose of this article is to study the biomechanics of spine tissue in elderly female. In this study, the L3-L5 lumbar bi-segmental finite element model for elderly female was obtained from the Advanced Human Modeling Laboratory of the Bioengineering Center at Wayne State University. The effects of flexion and extension on bone geometry, distribution of ligament fibers, location of nucleus, and changes in intervertebral disc height were studied by comparing the results obtained before and after the update of older female and middle-aged male models. For the purpose of comparing the calculated range of motion (ROM) with the experimental data, additional calculations for axial rotation and lateral bending were performed. The study found that the parameters of the model affected the deformation of the disc herniation, ligament and intervertebral disc, and the axial force carrying capacity of the model. The three predicted ROMs are usually similar to the experimental results. Only the older female model has a slightly larger ROM. Therefore, older women are more vulnerable to lumbar spine injuries than men.

Distinguishing between typical and atypical motion patterns amongst healthy individuals during a constrained spine flexion task

Despite 'abnormal' motion being considered a risk factor for low back injury, the current understanding of 'normal' spine motion is limited. Identifying normal motion within an individual is complicated by the considerable variation in movement patterns amongst healthy individuals. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize sources of variation in spine motion among a sample of healthy participants. The second objective of this study was to develop a multivariate model capable of predicting an expected movement pattern for an individual. The kinematic shape of the lower thoracic and lumbar spine was recorded during a constrained dynamic trunk flexion movement; as this is not a normal everyday movement task, movements are considered 'typical' and 'atypical' for this task rather than 'normal' and 'abnormal'. Variations in neutral standing posture accounted for 85% of the variation in spine motion throughout the task. Differences in total spine range of flexion and a regional re-weighting of range of motion between lower thoracic and lumbar regions explained a further 9% of the variance among individuals. The analysis also highlighted a difference in temporal sequencing of motion between lower thoracic and lumbar regions which explained 2% of the total movement variation. These identified sources of variation were used to select independent variables for a multivariate linear model capable of predicting an individuals' expected movement pattern. This was done as a proof-of-concept to demonstrate how the error between predicted and observed motion patterns could be used to differentiate between 'typical' and 'atypical' movement strategies.