Background: Development of more effective interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), requires a robust theoretical framework regarding mechanisms underlying the persistence of LBP. Altered movement patterns, possibly driven by pain-related cognitions, are assumed to drive pain persistence, but cogent evidence is missing. Aim: To assess variability and stability of lumbar movement patterns, during repetitive seated reaching, in people with and without LBP, and to investigate whether these movement characteristics are associated with painrelated cognitions. Methods: 60 participants were recruited, matched by age and sex (30 back-healthy and 30 with LBP). Mean age was 32.1 years (SD13.4). Mean Oswestry Disability Index-score in LBP-group was 15.7 (SD12.7). Pain-related cognitions were assessed by the ‘Pain Catastrophizing Scale’ (PCS), ‘Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale’ (PASS) and the task-specific ‘Expected Back Strain’ scale(EBS). Participants performed a seated repetitive reaching movement (45 times), at self-selected speed. Lumbar movement patterns were assessed by an optical motion capture system recording positions of cluster markers, located on the spinous processes of S1 and T8. Movement patterns were characterized by the spatial variability (meanSD) of the lumbar Euler angles: flexion-extension, lateralbending, axial-rotation, temporal variability (CyclSD) and local dynamic stability (LDE). Differences in movement patterns, between people with and without LBP and with high and low levels of pain-related cognitions, were assessed with factorial MANOVA. Results: We found no main effect of LBP on variability and stability, but there was a significant interaction effect of group and EBS. In the LBP-group, participants with high levels of EBS, showed increased MeanSDlateral-bending (p = 0.004, η2 = 0.14), indicating a large effect. MeanSDaxial-rotation approached significance (p = 0.06). Significance: In people with LBP, spatial variability was predicted by the task-specific EBS, but not by the general measures of pain-related cognitions. These results suggest that a high level of EBS is a driver of increased spatial variability, in participants with LBP.
Introduction: Falling causes long term disability and can even lead to death. Most falls occur during gait. Therefore improving gait stability might be beneficial for people at risk of falling. Recently arm swing has been shown to influence gait stability. However at present it remains unknown which mode of arm swing creates the most stable gait. Aim: To examine how different modes of arm swing affect gait stability. Method: Ten healthy young male subjects volunteered for this study. All subjects walked with four different arm swing instructions at seven different gait speeds. The Xsens motion capture suit was used to capture gait kinematics. Basic gait parameters, variability and stability measures were calculated. Results: We found an increased stability in the medio-lateral direction with excessive arm swing in comparison to normal arm swing at all gait speeds. Moreover, excessive arm swing increased stability in the anterior–posterior and vertical direction at low gait speeds. Ipsilateral and inphase arm swing did not differ compared to a normal arm swing. Discussion: Excessive arm swing is a promising gait manipulation to improve local dynamic stability. For excessive arm swing in the ML direction there appears to be converging evidence. The effect of excessive arm swing on more clinically relevant groups like the more fall prone elderly or stroke survivors is worth further investigating. Conclusion: Excessive arm swing significantly increases local dynamic stability of human gait.
BACKGROUND: Instability of the knee joint during gait is frequently reported by patients with knee osteoarthritis or an anterior cruciate ligament rupture. The assessment of instability in clinical practice and clinical research studies mainly relies on self-reporting. Alternatively, parameters measured with gait analysis have been explored as suitable objective indicators of dynamic knee (in)stability.RESEARCH QUESTION: This literature review aimed to establish an inventory of objective parameters of knee stability during gait.METHODS: Five electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, Cinahl and SPORTDiscuss) were systematically searched, with keywords concerning knee, stability and gait. Eligible studies used an objective parameter(s) to assess knee (in)stability during gait, being stated in the introduction or methods section. Out of 10717 studies, 89 studies were considered eligible.RESULTS: Fourteen different patient populations were investigated with kinematic, kinetic and/or electromyography measurements during (challenged) gait. Thirty-three possible objective parameters were identified for knee stability, of which the majority was based on kinematic (14 parameters) or electromyography (12 parameters) measurements. Thirty-nine studies used challenged gait (i.e. external perturbations, downhill walking) to provoke knee joint instability. Limited or conflicting results were reported on the validity of the 33 parameters.SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, a large number of different candidates for an objective knee stability gait parameter were found in literature, all without compelling evidence. A clear conceptual definition for dynamic knee joint stability is lacking, for which we suggest : "The capacity to respond to a challenge during gait within the natural boundaries of the knee". Furthermore biomechanical gait laboratory protocols should be harmonized, to enable future developments on clinically relevant measure(s) of knee stability during gait.
LINK
