Walking speed differentially alters spinal loads in persons with traumatic lower limb amputation

Using inertial measurement units to estimate spine joint kinematics and kinetics during walking and running

Optical motion capture (OMC) is considered the best available method for measuring spine kinematics, yet inertial measurement units (IMU) have the potential to collect data outside the laboratory. When combined with musculoskeletal modeling, IMU technology may be used to estimate spinal loads in real-world settings. To date, IMUs have not been validated for estimates of spinal movement and loading during both walking and running. Using OpenSim Thoracolumbar Spine and Ribcage models, we compare IMU and OMC estimates of lumbosacral (L5/S1) and thoracolumbar (T12/L1) joint angles, moments, and reaction forces during gait across six speeds for five participants. For comparisons, time series are ensemble averaged over strides. Comparisons between IMU and OMC ensemble averages have low normalized root mean squared errors (< 0.3 for 81% of comparisons) and high, positive cross-correlations (> 0.5 for 91% of comparisons), suggesting signals are similar in magnitude and trend. As expected, joint moments and reaction forces are higher during running than walking for IMU and OMC. Relative to OMC, IMU overestimates joint moments and underestimates joint reaction forces by 20.9% and 15.7%, respectively. The results suggest using a combination of IMU technology and musculoskeletal modeling is a valid means for estimating spinal movement and loading.

Comparison of clinical and biomechanical characteristics between individuals with lower limb amputation with and without lower back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lower back pain is a debilitating condition common to individuals with lower limb amputation. It is unclear what risk factors contribute to the development of back pain. This study systematically reviewed and analyzed the available evidence regarding the clinical and biomechanical differences between individuals with amputation, with and without lower back pain.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL databases in November 2020 and repeated in June 2021 and June 2022. Studies were included if they reported comparisons of demographic, anthropometric, biomechanical, and other clinical variables between participants with and without LBP. Study quality and potential for reporting bias were assessed. Meta-analyses were conducted to compare the two groups.

FINDINGS

Thirteen studies were included, with aggregated data from 436 participants (239 with LBP; 197 pain free). The median reporting quality score was 37.5%. The included studies enrolled participants who were predominantly male (mean = 91.4%, range = 77.8-100%) and with trauma-related amputation. Meta-analyses showed that individuals with LBP exhibited moderate (3.4 out of 10) but significantly greater pain than those without LBP. We found no between-group differences in age, height, weight, BMI, and time since amputation (p = 0.121-0.682). No significant differences in trunk/pelvic kinematics during gait were detected (p = 0.07-0.446) between the groups.

INTERPRETATION

Demographic, anthropometric, biomechanical, and simple clinical outcome variables may be insufficient for differentiating the risk of developing back pain after amputation. Investigators should be aware of the existing gender bias in sampling and methodological limitations, as well as to consider incorporating psychosocial measures when studying LBP in this clinical population.

Lower back kinetic demands during induced lower limb gait asymmetries

BACKGROUND

Gait asymmetries are common in many clinical populations (e.g., amputation, injury, or deformities) and are associated with a high incidence of lower back pain. Despite this high incidence, the impact of gait asymmetries on lower back kinetic demands are not well characterized due to experimental limitations in these clinical populations. Therefore, we artificially and safely induced gait asymmetry during walking in healthy able-bodied participants to examine lower back kinetic demands compared to their normal gait.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Are lower back kinetic demands different during artificially induced asymmetries than those during normal gait?

METHODS

L5/S1 vertebral joint kinetics and trunk muscle forces were estimated during gait in twelve healthy men and women with a musculoskeletal lower back model that uniquely incorporated participant-specific responses using an EMG optimization approach. Five walking conditions were conducted on a force-measuring treadmill, including normal unperturbed "symmetrical" gait, and asymmetrical gait induced by unilaterally altering leg mass, leg length, and ankle joint motion in various combinations. Gait symmetry index and lower back kinetics were compared with repeated-measures ANOVAs and post hoc tests (α = .05).

RESULTS

The perturbations were successful in producing different degrees of step length and stance time gait asymmetries (p < .01). However, lower back kinetic demands associated with asymmetrical gait were similar to, or only moderately different from normal walking for most conditions despite the observed asymmetries.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our findings indicate that the high incidence of lower back pain often associated with gait asymmetries may not be a direct effect of increased lower back demands. If biomechanical demands are responsible for the high incidence of lower back pain in such populations, daily tasks besides walking may be responsible and warrant further investigation.

Are lower back demands reduced by improving gait symmetry in unilateral transtibial amputees?

BACKGROUND

Gait asymmetry and a high incidence of lower back pain are typical for people with unilateral lower limb amputation. A common therapeutic objective is to improve gait symmetry; however, it is unknown whether better gait symmetry reduces lower back pain risk. To begin investigating this important clinical question, we examined a preexisting dataset to explore whether L5/S1 vertebral joint forces in people with unilateral lower limb amputation can be improved with better symmetry.

METHODS

L5/S1 compression and resultant shear forces were estimated in each participant with unilateral lower limb amputation (n = 5) with an OpenSim musculoskeletal model during different levels of guided gait asymmetry. The amount of gait asymmetry was defined by bilateral stance times and guided via real-time feedback. A theoretical lowest L5/S1 force was determined from the minimum of a best-fit quadratic curves of L5/S1 forces at levels of guided asymmetry ranging from -10 to +15%. The forces found at the theoretical lowest force and during the 0% asymmetry level were compared to forces at preferred levels of asymmetry and to those from an able-bodied group (n = 5).

FINDINGS

Results indicated that the forces for the people with unilateral lower limb amputation group at the preferred level of asymmetry were not different then at their 0% asymmetry condition, theoretical lowest L5/S1 forces, or the able-bodied group (all p-values > .23).

INTERPRETATION

These preliminary results challenge the premise that restoring symmetric gait in people with unilateral lower limb amputation will reduce risk of lower back pain.

Overall Greater Demands on the Musculoskeletal System at Multiple Walking Speeds in Service Members With Lower Limb Loss

Individuals with lower limb loss often walk with altered/asymmetric movement mechanics, postulated as a catalyst for development of low back and knee pain. Here, the authors simultaneously investigated trunk-pelvic movement patterns and lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics among 38 males with traumatic, unilateral lower limb loss (23 transtibial and 15 transfemoral), and 15 males without limb loss, at a self-selected and 2 standardized (1.0 and 1.6 m/s) speeds. Individuals with versus without lower limb loss walked with greater trunk range of motion in the frontal and transverse planes at all speeds (despite ∼10% slower self-selected speeds). At all speeds, individuals with versus without limb loss exhibited +29% larger medial ground reaction forces, and at 1.6 m/s also exhibited +50% to 110% larger vertical hip power generation, +27% to 80% larger vertical hip power absorption, and +21% to 90% larger medial-lateral hip power absorption. Moreover, pervasive biomechanical differences between transtibial versus transfemoral limb loss identify amputation-level movement strategies. Overall, greater demands on the musculoskeletal system across walking speeds, particularly at the hip, knee, and low back, highlight potential risk factors for the development/recurrence of prevalent secondary musculoskeletal conditions (eg, joint degeneration and pain) following limb loss.

Which is the best-suited landmark to assess the thoracic orientation?

Several skin surface-based techniques exist to non-invasively determine the spinal kinematics. However, the accuracy of these techniques is limited by soft-tissue artefacts. Furthermore, structures like the thorax are frequently assumed to be rigid but display considerable mobility within itself. This study aimed to quantify the accuracy at different thoracic landmarks for measuring mobility in healthy individuals during different activities to provide a recommendation for the best suited measurement location. The locations of 29 landmarks were continuously captured on 19 individuals (age: 25-59 years) during sitting, standing, walking, jumping, intra-thoracic motions, and different breathing depths using reflective markers. Marker triplets were used at every landmark to calculate their orientations by first backtracking the rigid-body motion (RBM) of the thorax in general, and subsequently calculating the RBM of each rigid marker triplet. Of the latter, the maximum axis angle for each exercise was statistically evaluated. Landmarks at the middle of the clavicles displayed the largest overall errors (approximately 90° during worst case scenario). However, the variability of errors among the investigated exercises was large. Landmarks at the cranial sternal region (particularly at the "Louis angle") and at the T3 spinous process showed the smallest errors for all subjects and tasks (e.g., <5° and <11°, respectively, during normal breathing). When only one sensor is to be used, it is recommended to use the cranial sternal region to assess the thoracic orientation. Study results highly sensitive to thoracic orientation should be considered with care or performed using more appropriate methods.

Evolution of Fatigue Damage in the L5-S1 Intervertebral Disc Resulting from Walking Exposures Among Persons with Lower Limb Loss

The risk of fatigue damage within the L5-S1 spinal disc was calculated for a sample of 52 individuals with unilateral limb loss (26 transtibial; 26 transfemoral) and 26 uninjured controls using a non-linear multi-axial fatigue model of the spine motion segments. Time to complete damage was calculated for each participant and walking pace; the influences of walking activity were determined by varying daily step counts. Assuming similar activity across groups (10,000 steps per day), times to failure were not different between persons with and without limb loss (50 [23] vs. 46 [24] years, respectively); walking faster was associated with shorter times to failure. Greater daily step counts similarly decreased time to failure in all groups. While such a similarity in fatigue damage evolution does not necessarily downplay the role of biomechanical factors, it may highlight the important influences of psychosocial factors in the development of low back pain in persons with limb loss. Nevertheless, with additional work to include activities beyond walking, computational damage models can provide a predictive platform for evaluating specific clinical interventions (e.g., behavior modification, movement retraining, prosthetic devices) that are ultimately intended to mitigate physical risk factors for low back pain following limb loss.

Trunk-Pelvis motions and spinal loads during upslope and downslope walking among persons with transfemoral amputation

Larger trunk and pelvic motions in persons with (vs. without) lower limb amputation during activities of daily living (ADLs) adversely affect the mechanical demands on the lower back. Building on evidence that such altered motions result in larger spinal loads during level-ground walking, here we characterize trunk-pelvic motions, trunk muscle forces, and resultant spinal loads among sixteen males with unilateral, transfemoral amputation (TFA) walking at a self-selected speed both up ("upslope"; 1.06 ± 0.14 m/s) and down ("downslope"; 0.98 ± 0.20 m/s) a 10-degree ramp. Tri-planar trunk and pelvic motions were obtained (and ranges-of-motion [ROM] computed) as inputs for a non-linear finite element model of the spine to estimate global and local muscle (i.e., trunk movers and stabilizers, respectively) forces, and resultant spinal loads. Sagittal- (p = 0.001), frontal- (p = 0.004), and transverse-plane (p < 0.001) trunk ROM, and peak mediolateral shear (p = 0.011) and local muscle forces (p = 0.010) were larger (respectively 45, 35, 98, 70, and 11%) in upslope vs. downslope walking. Peak anteroposterior shear (p = 0.33), compression (p = 0.28), and global muscle (p = 0.35) forces were similar between inclinations. Compared to previous reports of persons with TFA walking on level ground, 5-60% larger anteroposterior and mediolateral shear observed here (despite ∼0.25 m/s slower walking speeds) suggest greater mechanical demands on the low back in sloped walking, particularly upslope. Continued characterization of trunk motions and spinal loads during ADLs support the notion that repeated exposures to these larger-than-normal (i.e., vs. level-ground walking in TFA and uninjured cohorts) spinal loads contribute to an increased risk for low back injury following lower limb amputation.

Changes in Trunk and Pelvis Motion Among Persons With Unilateral Lower Limb Loss During the First Year of Ambulation

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively investigate trunk-pelvis kinematic outcomes among persons with unilateral transtibial and transfemoral limb loss with time from initial independent ambulation with a prosthesis, while secondarily describing self-reported presence and intensity of low back pain. Over time, increasing trunk-pelvis range of motion and decreasing trunk-pelvis coordination with increasing presence and/or intensity of low back pain were hypothesized. Additionally, less trunk-pelvis range of motion and more trunk-pelvis coordination for persons with more distal limb loss was hypothesized.

DESIGN

Inception cohort with up to 5 repeated evaluations, including both biomechanical and subjective outcomes, during a 1-year period (0, 2, 4, 6, 12 months) after initial ambulation with a prosthesis.

SETTING

Biomechanics laboratory within military treatment facility.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two men with unilateral transtibial limb loss and 10 men with unilateral transfemoral limb loss (N=32).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Triplanar trunk-pelvis range of motion and intersegmental coordination (continuous relative phase) obtained at self-selected (∼1.30m/s) and controlled (∼1.20m/s) walking velocities. Self-reported presence and intensity of low back pain.

RESULTS

An interaction effect between time and group existed for sagittal (P=.039) and transverse (P=.009) continuous relative phase at self-selected walking velocity and transverse trunk range of motion (P=.013) and sagittal continuous relative phase (P=.005) at controlled walking velocity. Trunk range of motion generally decreased, and trunk-pelvis coordination generally increased with increasing time after initial ambulation. Sagittal trunk and pelvis range of motion were always less and frontal trunk-pelvis coordination was always greater for persons with more distal limb loss. Low back pain increased for persons with transtibial limb loss and decreased for persons with transfemoral limb loss following the 4-month time point.

CONCLUSIONS

Temporal changes (or lack thereof) in features of trunk-pelvis motions within the first year of ambulation help elucidate relationships between (biomechanical) risk factors for low back pain after limb loss.

Understanding Low Back Pain in Traumatic Lower Limb Amputees: A Systematic Review

Objective

This systematic review aims to evaluate current literature for the prevalence, causes, and effect of low back pain (LBP) in traumatic lower limb amputees, specifically its association with the kinematics and kinetics of the lumbar spine and lower extremities.

Data Sources

Databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched systematically for eligible studies from inception to January 2018.

Study Selection

The inclusion terms were synonyms of low back pain, lower limb amputation, and trauma, whereas studies involving nontraumatic amputee populations, single cases, or reviews were excluded. 1822 studies were initially identified, of which 44 progressed to full-text reading, and 11 studies were included in the review.

Data Extraction

Two independent reviewers reviewed the included studies, which were evaluated using a quality assessment tool and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system for risk of bias, prior to analyzing results and conclusions.

Data Synthesis

There was an LBP prevalence of 52%-64% in traumatic amputees, compared to 48%-77% in the general amputee population (predominantly vascular, tumor, trauma), attributed to a mixture of biomechanical, psychosocial, and personal factors. These factors determined the presence, frequency, and severity of the pain in the amputees, significantly affecting their quality of life. However, little evidence was available on causality.

Conclusion

The high prevalence of LBP in traumatic amputees highlights the necessity to advance research into the underlying mechanics behind LBP, specifically the spinal kinematics and kinetics. This may facilitate improvements in rehabilitation, with the potential to improve quality of life in traumatic amputees.

Trunk muscle forces and spinal loads in persons with unilateral transfemoral amputation during sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit activities

BACKGROUND

Alterations and asymmetries in trunk motions during activities of daily living, involving lower extremities, are suggested to cause higher spinal loads in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Given the repetitive nature of most activities of daily living, knowledge of the amount of increase in spinal loads is important for designing interventions aimed at prevention of secondary low back pain due to potential fatigue failure of spinal tissues. The objective of this study was to determine differences in trunk muscle forces and spinal loads between persons with and without lower limb amputation when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit tasks.

METHODS

Kinematics of the pelvis and thorax, obtained from ten males with unilateral transfemoral lower limb amputation and 10 male uninjured controls when performing sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit activities, were used within a non-linear finite element model of the spine to estimate trunk muscle forces and resultant spinal loads.

FINDINGS

The peak compression force, medio-lateral (only during stand-to-sit), and antero-posterior shear forces were respectively 348 N, 269 N, and 217 N larger in person with vs. without amputation. Persons with amputation also experienced on average 171 N and 53 N larger mean compression force and medio-lateral shear force, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

While spinal loads were larger in persons with amputation, these loads were generally smaller than the reported threshold for spinal tissue injury. However, a rather small increase in spinal loads during common activities of daily living like walking, sit-to-stand, and stand-to-sit may nevertheless impose a significant risk of fatigue failure for spinal tissues due to the repetitive nature of these activities.