Sensitivity to Differences in the Extent of Neck-Retraction and -Rotation Movements Made with and without Vision

Repeated end range spinal movement while seated abolishes the proprioceptive deficit induced by prolonged flexed sitting posture. A study assessing the statistical and clinical significance of spinal position sense

BACKGROUND

Sustained spinal flexion has been proposed to affect the properties of spinal tissues, increase postural muscle's activation latency and act detrimentally on proprioception.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the effect of flexed posture (FP) on spinal proprioception and assessed the immediate effect of spinal movement on the presumable flexion-induced proprioceptive deficit.

DESIGN

Clinical measurement study.

METHODS

Marker-based kinematic analyses of the head, spine, and pelvis were conducted on 50 individuals. Subjects were educated in a lordotic sitting posture (IOSP) that they reproduced immediately; after 10 and 30 min in FP; and after sagittal spinal movement. Nine sagittal angles were calculated. Absolute error (AE) and constant error (CE) were used to evaluate repositioning accuracy. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to test for significant differences in angles obtained among postures, as well as for the AE and CE calculated from the trials.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in reposition error (RE) after immediate reproduction of IOSP (all p > 0.0083). Following FP AEs presented significant differences for head (4.1°), head protraction (1.9°), head tilt (2.1°), lumbar (3.2°) and pelvis angle (2.1°). CEs revealed significant differences for head protraction (-1.8°) and lumbar angle (-3.5°). No significant differences were found for AE and CE after spinal sagittal movement (all p > 0.0083).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged FP can affect spinal position sense, but sagittal spinal movement can abolish the proprioceptive deficit. The significant differences documented, may be of limited clinical utility given their magnitude, and the reliability data presented may be of use in reinterpreting previously documented proprioceptive analyses.

Evaluation of the relative contribution of peripheral and focal vision to proprioceptive differentiation of underfoot inversion angles in young elite athletes

Different visual conditions during proprioceptive testing have the potential to mask clinically meaningful differences in proprioceptive acuity, and must be understood in order to improve testing accuracy. This study compared the proprioceptive acuity achieved in estimating underfoot surface angles when looking ahead vs looking down during an active stepping task. 40 athletes from national development squads (23 male, 17 female, M age = 16 yr.) judged the inversion angle of a footplate when stepping onto and across it. 19 participants were permitted to briefly look down and see the footplate before stepping onto it, while 21 looked ahead and saw the footplate only in peripheral vision as they walked across. Looking down before stepping contributed to higher proprioceptive acuity scores. These results indicate that during a stepping task, a short opportunity to assess ground angle with focal vision supports the peripheral sensory receptors in proprioceptive acuity to a greater extent than peripheral vision alone.

Discrimination of Amount of Spinal Flexion for Movements Made with and without Vision after Lumbar Disc Replacement

Discrimination of differences between small lumbar flexion movements made when standing may differ depending on whether vision is available. Dependence on general vision during trunk movements may be increased following surgery, in which an intervertebral disc is replaced with a prosthetic disc. This study investigated whether the availability of vision changed discrimination of small differences in lumbar forward flexion movement when standing for patients with lumbar disc replacement and healthy peers. 20 volunteers without a history of back pain and 20 with disc replacement undertook a 100-trial sequence of forward flexion movements to a set of physical stops, making an absolute judgement as to the position after each movement. General (nontarget) vision during the movement was available or removed randomly trial by trial. Availability of vision did not affect discrimination of flexion movements of the lumbar spine either in normal healthy individuals or those with disc replacement.

Comparison of lumbar proprioception as measured in unrestrained standing in individuals with disc replacement, with low back pain, and without low back pain

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional laboratory study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether individuals with spinal pain and those who have undergone spinal surgery have difficulty discriminating small movement differences using a spinal proprioception test for active flexion movements.

BACKGROUND

Structures contributing to proprioception may be affected during disc replacement surgery. Postsurgical assessment of proprioceptive ability to make discriminations in the range used for maintaining upright postural stability is needed to inform postoperative rehabilitation.

METHODS

Proprioceptive sensitivity to differences between lumbar spine movements of 11 degrees, 13 degrees, 15 degrees, 17 degrees, and 19 degrees of forward flexion was measured in unrestrained standing, with vision of the target obscured. Individuals after disc replacement (n=16), with disc degeneration and discogenic back pain (n=19), and without back pain (n=18) performed 50 movement trials and stated the amount of movement performed for each trial (11 degrees, 13 degrees, 15 degrees, 17 degrees, or 19 degrees).

RESULTS

The pattern of discrimination scores between adjacent lumbar flexion movement pairs shown by the individuals in the discogenic back pain group differed significantly from the disc replacement and healthy control groups (P=.024), which were not significantly different from each other. Although mean discrimination scores averaged over all movement pairs did not differ significantly between the groups, participants with discogenic back pain discriminated between the 2 smallest lumbar flexion movements significantly better than those in the other 2 groups (P=.013).

CONCLUSION

The greater sensitivity of the individuals with disc pain to discriminate between the 2 smallest flexion movements was interpreted as a contrast effect arising from differences between the groups in usual upright posture, with disc replacement restoring the same pattern of posture as seen for healthy controls.