Poor lumbar spine coordination in acute low back pain predicts persistent long-term pain and disability.

PURPOSE: Sitting balance on an unstable surface requires coordinated out-of-phase lumbar spine and provides sufficient challenge to expose quality of spine control. We investigated whether the quality of spine coordination to maintain balance in acute low back pain (LBP) predicts recovery at 6 months. METHODS: Participants in an acute LBP episode (n = 94) underwent assessment of sitting balance on an unstable surface. Seat, hip and spine (lower lumbar, lumbar, upper lumbar, thoracic) angular motion and force plate data were recorded. Coordination between the seat and hip/spine segments to maintain balance was quantified in the frequency domain to evaluate coordination (coherence) and relative timing (phase angle: in-phase [segments move together]; out-of-phase [segments move opposite]). Center of pressure (CoP) and upper thorax motion assessed overall balance performance. Hip and spine coordination with the seat were compared between those who did not recover (increased/unchanged pain/disability), partially recovered (reduced pain/disability) or recovered (no pain and disability) at 6 months. RESULTS: In both planes, coherence between the seat and lower lumbar spine was lower (and in-phase-unhelpful for balance) at baseline in those who did not recover than those who recovered. Coherence between the seat and hip was higher in partially recovered in both planes, suggesting compensation by the hip. LBP groups had equal overall balance performance (CoP, upper thorax motion), but non-recovery groups used a less optimal strategy that might have consequences for long-term spine health. CONCLUSION: These longitudinal data revealed that individuals with compromised contribution of the lumbar spine to the balance during unstable sitting during acute LBP are less likely to recover.

Selecting Sensitive Parameter Subsets in Dynamical Models With Application to Biomechanical System Identification.

Estimating many parameters of biomechanical systems with limited data may achieve good fit but may also increase 95% confidence intervals in parameter estimates. This results in poor identifiability in the estimation problem. Therefore, we propose a novel method to select sensitive biomechanical model parameters that should be estimated, while fixing the remaining parameters to values obtained from preliminary estimation. Our method relies on identifying the parameters to which the measurement output is most sensitive. The proposed method is based on the Fisher information matrix (FIM). It was compared against the nonlinear least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method to guide modelers on the pros and cons of our FIM method. We present an application identifying a biomechanical parametric model of a head position-tracking task for ten human subjects. Using measured data, our method (1) reduced model complexity by only requiring five out of twelve parameters to be estimated, (2) significantly reduced parameter 95% confidence intervals by up to 89% of the original confidence interval, (3) maintained goodness of fit measured by variance accounted for (VAF) at 82%, (4) reduced computation time, where our FIM method was 164 times faster than the LASSO method, and (5) selected similar sensitive parameters to the LASSO method, where three out of five selected sensitive parameters were shared by FIM and LASSO methods.

Time-Domain Optimal Experimental Design in Human Seated Postural Control Testing.

We are developing a series of systems science-based clinical tools that will assist in modeling, diagnosing, and quantifying postural control deficits in human subjects. In line with this goal, we have designed and constructed a seated balance device and associated experimental task for identification of the human seated postural control system. In this work, we present a quadratic programming (QP) technique for optimizing a time-domain experimental input signal for this device. The goal of this optimization is to maximize the information present in the experiment, and therefore its ability to produce accurate estimates of several desired seated postural control parameters. To achieve this, we formulate the problem as a nonconvex QP and attempt to locally maximize a measure (T-optimality condition) of the experiment's Fisher information matrix (FIM) under several constraints. These constraints include limits on the input amplitude, physiological output magnitude, subject control amplitude, and input signal autocorrelation. Because the autocorrelation constraint takes the form of a quadratic constraint (QC), we replace it with a conservative linear relaxation about a nominal point, which is iteratively updated during the course of optimization. We show that this iterative descent algorithm generates a convergent suboptimal solution that guarantees monotonic nonincreasing of the cost function value while satisfying all constraints during iterations. Finally, we present successful experimental results using an optimized input sequence.

The effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: The evidence for the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in the management of low back pain (LBP) is considered weak by systematic reviews, because it is generally based on low-quality studies. Consequently, there is a need for more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a low risk of bias. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of an OMT intervention for reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic LBP. METHODS: A single-blinded, crossover, RCT was conducted at a university-based health system. Participants were adults, 21-65 years old, with nonspecific LBP. Eligible participants (n=80) were randomized to two trial arms: an immediate OMT intervention group and a delayed OMT (waiting period) group. The intervention consisted of three to four OMT sessions over 4-6 weeks, after which the participants switched (crossed-over) groups. The primary clinical outcomes were average pain, current pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29 v1.0 pain interference and physical function, and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included the remaining PROMIS health domains and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). These measures were taken at baseline (T0), after one OMT session (T1), at the crossover point (T2), and at the end of the trial (T3). Due to the carryover effects of OMT intervention, only the outcomes obtained prior to T2 were evaluated utilizing mixed-effects models and after adjusting for baseline values. RESULTS: Totals of 35 and 36 participants with chronic LBP were available for the analysis at T1 in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively, whereas 31 and 33 participants were available for the analysis at T2 in the immediate OMT and waiting period groups, respectively. After one session of OMT (T1), the analysis showed a significant reduction in the secondary outcomes of sleep disturbance and anxiety compared to the waiting period group. Following the entire intervention period (T2), the immediate OMT group demonstrated a significantly better average pain outcome. The effect size was a 0.8 standard deviation (SD), rendering the reduction in pain clinically significant. Further, the improvement in anxiety remained statistically significant. No study-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported. CONCLUSIONS: OMT intervention is safe and effective in reducing pain along with improving sleep and anxiety profiles in patients with chronic LBP.

Trunk postural control during unstable sitting among individuals with and without low back pain: A systematic review with an individual participant data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Sitting on an unstable surface is a common paradigm to investigate trunk postural control among individuals with low back pain (LBP), by minimizing the influence lower extremities on balance control. Outcomes of many small studies are inconsistent (e.g., some find differences between groups while others do not), potentially due to confounding factors such as age, sex, body mass index [BMI], or clinical presentations. We conducted a systematic review with an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to investigate whether trunk postural control differs between those with and without LBP, and whether the difference between groups is impacted by vision and potential confounding factors. METHODS: We completed this review according to PRISMA-IPD guidelines. The literature was screened (up to 7th September 2023) from five electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Outcome measures were extracted that describe unstable seat movements, specifically centre of pressure or seat angle. Our main analyses included: 1) a two-stage IPD meta-analysis to assess the difference between groups and their interaction with age, sex, BMI, and vision on trunk postural control; 2) and a two-stage IPD meta-regression to determine the effects of LBP clinical features (pain intensity, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear-avoidance beliefs) on trunk postural control. RESULTS: Forty studies (1,821 participants) were included for the descriptive analysis and 24 studies (1,050 participants) were included for the IPD analysis. IPD meta-analyses revealed three main findings: (a) trunk postural control was worse (higher root mean square displacement [RMSdispl], range, and long-term diffusion; lower mean power frequency) among individuals with than without LBP; (b) trunk postural control deteriorated more (higher RMSdispl, short- and long-term diffusion) among individuals with than without LBP when vision was removed; and (c) older age and higher BMI had greater adverse impacts on trunk postural control (higher short-term diffusion; longer time and distance coordinates of the critical point) among individuals with than without LBP. IPD meta-regressions indicated no associations between the limited LBP clinical features that could be considered and trunk postural control. CONCLUSION: Trunk postural control appears to be inferior among individuals with LBP, which was indicated by increased seat movements and some evidence of trunk stiffening. These findings are likely explained by delayed or less accurate corrective responses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021124658).

How Individuals With Low Back Pain Conceptualize Their Condition: A Collaborative Modeling Approach.

Low back pain (LBP) is complex. This study aimed to use collaborative modeling to evaluate conceptual models that individuals with LBP have of their condition, and to compare these models with those of researchers/clinicians. Twenty-eight individuals with LBP were facilitated to generate mental models, using "fuzzy cognitive maps," that represented conceptualization of their own LBP and LBP "in general." "Components" (ie, causes, outcomes and treatments) related to pain, disability and quality of life were proposed, along with the weighted "Connections" between Components. Components were classified into thematic categories. Weighting of Connections were summed for each Component to judge relative importance. Individual models were aggregated into a metamodel. When considering their own condition, participants' models included 19(SD = 6) Components and 43(18) Connections with greatest weight on "Biomechanical" components. When considering LBP in general, models changed slightly. Patient models contrasted the more complex models of researchers/clinicians (25(7) Components; 77(42) Connections), with most weight on "Psychological" components. This study provides unique insight into how individuals with LBP consider their condition, which is largely biomedical and narrower than clinician/researcher perspectives. Findings highlight challenges for changing public perception of LBP, and provide a method with potential utility to understand how individuals conceptualize their condition. PERSPECTIVE: Collaborative modeling was used to understand how individuals with low back pain conceptualize their own condition, the condition in general, and compare this with models of expert researchers/clinicians. Data revealed issues in how individuals with back pain conceptualize their condition, and the method's potential utility for clinical evaluation of patients.

The effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain and disability in patients with chronic neck pain: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain (NP) affects up to 70% of individuals at some point in their lives. Systematic reviews indicate that manual treatments can be moderately effective in the management of chronic, nonspecific NP. However, there is a paucity of studies specifically evaluating the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of OMT in reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic NP. DESIGN: Single-blinded, cross-over, randomized-controlled trial. SETTING: University-based, osteopathic manipulative medicine outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-seven participants, 21 to 65 years of age, with chronic, nonspecific NP. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to two trial arms: immediate OMT intervention or waiting period first. The intervention consisted of three to four OMT sessions over 4 to 6 weeks, after which the participants switched groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were pain intensity (average and current) on the numerical rating scale and Neck Disability Index. Secondary outcomes included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) health domains and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. Outcomes obtained prior to the cross-over allocation were evaluated using general linear models and after adjusting for baseline values. RESULTS: A total of 38 and 37 participants were available for the analysis in the OMT and waiting period groups, respectively. The results showed significantly better primary outcomes in the immediate OMT group for reductions in average pain (-1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.72, -0.32; p = .005), current pain (-1.02, 95% CI -1.75, -0.30; p = .006), disability (-5.30%, 95% CI -9.2%, -1.3%; p = .010) and improved secondary outcomes (PROMIS) related to sleep (-3.25, 95% CI -6.95, -1.54; p = .003), fatigue (-3.26, 95% CI -6.04, -0.48; p = .022), and depression (-2.59, 95% CI -4.73, -0.45; p = .018). The effect sizes were in the clinically meaningful range between 0.5 and 1 standard deviation. No study-related serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: OMT is relatively safe and effective in reducing pain and disability along with improving sleep, fatigue, and depression in patients with chronic NP immediately following treatment delivered over approximately 4 to 6 weeks.

Stability threshold during seated balancing is sensitive to low back pain and safe to assess.

Challenging trunk neuromuscular control maximally using a seated balancing task is useful for unmasking impairments that may go unnoticed with traditional postural sway measures and appears to be safe to assess in healthy individuals. This study investigates whether the stability threshold, reflecting the upper limits in trunk neuromuscular control, is sensitive to pain and disability and is safe to assess in low back pain (LBP) patients. Seventy-nine subjects with non-specific LBP balanced on a robotic seat while rotational stiffness was gradually reduced. The critical rotational stiffness, KCrit, that marked the transition between stable and unstable balance was used to quantify the individual's stability threshold. The effects of current pain, 7-day average pain, and disability on KCrit were assessed, while controlling for age, sex, height, and weight. Adverse events (AEs) recorded at the end of the testing session were used to assess safety. Current pain and 7-day average pain were strongly associated with KCrit (current pain p < 0.001, 7-day pain p = 0.023), reflecting that people experiencing more pain have poorer trunk neuromuscular control. There was no evidence that disability was associated with KCrit, although the limited range in disability scores in subjects may have impacted the analysis. AEs were reported in 13 out of 79 total sessions (AE Severity: 12 mild, 1 moderate; AE Relatedness: 1 possibly, 11 probably, 1 definitely-related to the study). Stability threshold is sensitive to pain and appears safe to assess in people with LBP, suggesting it could be useful for identifying trunk neuromuscular impairments and guiding rehabilitation.

Comparison of trunk proprioception between patients with low back pain and healthy controls.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether proprioceptive impairments exist in patients with low back pain (LBP). We hypothesized that patients with LBP would exhibit larger trunk proprioception errors than healthy controls. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: University laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: 24 patients with nonspecific LBP and 24 age-matched healthy controls. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured trunk proprioception in all 3 anatomical planes using motion perception threshold, active repositioning, and passive repositioning tests. RESULTS: LBP patients had significantly greater motion perception threshold than controls (P<.001) (1.3+/-0.9 degrees vs 0.8+/-0.6 degrees ). Furthermore, all subjects had the largest motion perception threshold in the transverse plane (P<.001) (1.2+/-0.7 degrees vs 1.0+/-0.8 degrees for all other planes averaged). There was no significant difference between LBP and healthy control groups in the repositioning tasks. Errors in the active repositioning test were significantly smaller than in the passive repositioning test (P=.032) (1.9+/-1.2 degrees vs 2.3+/-1.4 degrees ). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that impairments in proprioception may be detected in patients with LBP when assessed with a motion perception threshold measure.

Optimal control of the spine system.

The goal of this work is to present methodology to first evaluate the performance of an in vivo spine system and then to synthesize optimal neuromuscular control for rehabilitation interventions. This is achieved (1) by determining control system parameters such as static feedback gains and delays from experimental data, (2) by synthesizing the optimal feedback gains to attenuate the effect of disturbances to the system using modern control theory, and (3) by evaluating the robustness of the optimized closed-loop system. We also apply these methods to a postural control task, with two different control strategies, and evaluate the robustness of the spine system with respect to longer latencies found in the low back pain population. This framework could be used for rehabilitation design. To this end, we discuss several future research needs necessary to implement our framework in practice.

MSU classification for herniated lumbar discs on MRI: toward developing objective criteria for surgical selection.

Currently, there are over 300,000 lumbar discectomies performed in the US annually without an objective standard for patient selection. A prospective clinical outcome study of 200 cases with 5-year follow-up was used to develop and validate an MRI-based classification scheme to eliminate as much ambiguity as possible. 100 consecutive lumbar microdiscectomies were performed between 1992 and 1995 based on the criteria for "substantial" herniation on MRI. This series was used to develop the MSU Classification as an objective measure of lumbar disc herniation on MRI to define "substantial". It simply classifies herniation size as 1-2-3 and location as A-B-C, with inter-examiner reliability of 98%. A second prospective series of 100 discectomies was performed between 2000 and 2002, based on the new criteria, to validate this classification scheme. All patients with size-1 lesions were electively excluded from surgical consideration in our study. The Oswestry Disability Index from both series was better than most published outcome norms for lumbar microdiscectomy. The two series reported 96 and 90% good to excellent outcomes, respectively, at 1 year, and 84 and 80% at 5 years. The most frequent types of herniation selected for surgery in each series were types 2-B and 2-AB, suggesting the combined importance of both size and location. The MSU Classification is a simple and reliable method to objectively measure herniated lumbar disc. When used in correlation with appropriate clinical findings, the MSU Classification can provide objective criteria for surgery that may lead to a higher percentage of good to excellent outcomes.

The effects of a three-week use of lumbosacral orthoses on trunk muscle activity and on the muscular response to trunk perturbations.

BACKGROUND: The effects of lumbosacral orthoses (LSOs) on neuromuscular control of the trunk are not known. There is a concern that wearing LSOs for a long period may adversely alter muscle control, making individuals more susceptible to injury if they discontinue wearing the LSOs. The purpose of this study was to document neuromuscular changes in healthy subjects during a 3-week period while they regularly wore a LSO. METHODS: Fourteen subjects wore LSOs 3 hrs a day for 3 weeks. Trunk muscle activity prior to and following a quick force release (trunk perturbation) was measured with EMG in 3 sessions on days 0, 7, and 21. A longitudinal, repeated-measures, factorial design was used. Muscle reflex response to trunk perturbations, spine compression force, as well as effective trunk stiffness and damping were dependent variables. The LSO, direction of perturbation, and testing session were the independent variables. RESULTS: The LSO significantly (P < 0.001) increased the effective trunk stiffness by 160 Nm/rad (27%) across all directions and testing sessions. The number of antagonist muscles that responded with an onset activity was significantly reduced after 7 days of wearing the LSO, but this difference disappeared on day 21 and is likely not clinically relevant. The average number of agonist muscles switching off following the quick force release was significantly greater with the LSO, compared to without the LSO (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The LSO increased trunk stiffness and resulted in a greater number of agonist muscles shutting-off in response to a quick force release. However, these effects did not result in detrimental changes to the neuromuscular function of trunk muscles after 3 weeks of wearing a LSO 3 hours a day by healthy subjects.

Quantifying trunk neuromuscular control using seated balancing and stability threshold.

Performance during seated balancing is often used to assess trunk neuromuscular control, including evaluating impairments in back pain populations. Balancing in less challenging environments allows for flexibility in control, which may not depend on health status but instead may reflect personal preferences. To make assessment less ambiguous, trunk neuromuscular control should be maximally challenged. Thirty-four healthy subjects balanced on a robotic seat capable of adjusting rotational stiffness. Subjects balanced while rotational stiffness was gradually reduced. The rotational stiffness at which subjects could no longer maintain balance, defined as critical stiffness (kCrit), was used to quantify the subjects' trunk neuromuscular control. A higher kCrit reflects poorer control, as subjects require a more stable base to balance. Subjects were tested on three days separated by 24 hours to assess test-retest reliability. Anthropometric (height and weight) and demographic (age and sex) influences on kCrit and its reliability were assessed. Height and age did not affect kCrit; whereas, being heavier (p < 0.001) and female (p = 0.042) significantly increased kCrit. Reliability was also affected by anthropometric and demographic factors, highlighting the potential problem of inflated reliability estimates from non-control related attributes. kCrit measurements appear reliable even after removing anthropometric and demographic influences, with adjusted correlations of 0.612 (95%CI: 0.433-0.766) versus unadjusted correlations of 0.880 (95%CI: 0.797-0.932). Besides assessment, trainers and therapists prescribing exercise could use the seated balance task and kCrit to precisely set difficulty level to a percentage of the subject's stability threshold to optimize improvements in trunk neuromuscular control and spine health.

Trunk stiffness decreases and trunk damping increases with experimental low back pain.

Movement adaptations to low back pain (LBP) are believed to protect the painful area. Increased trunk stiffness and decreased trunk damping have been shown in people with recurrent LBP. However, no study has examined these properties using external force perturbations to the trunk during acute LBP when protective adaptations might be expected to have most relevance. Adaptations to an acute painful stimulus via unilateral injection of hypertonic saline into the right longissimus muscle were assessed using a trunk force perturbation paradigm and a mass-spring-damper model to describe effective trunk dynamical properties. Equal weights (15% body weight) were connected to the front and back of the trunk via a cable. Either one was dropped at random to perturb the trunk. Effective trunk dynamical properties were estimated in fourteen males (mean (standard deviation) age 25 (6) years) assuming that trunk movement can be modelled as a second order linear system. Effective trunk dynamical properties were compared before, during and after the experimentally induced painful period. Estimates of effective trunk stiffness (K) decreased and damping (B) increased during pain compared to both before ([mean contrast, 95% CI] K: -403 [-651 to -155] Nm-1, B: 28 [9-50] Nms-1) and after (K: -324 [-58 to -591] Nm-1, B: 20 [4-33] Nms-1) the experimentally induced painful period. We interpret our results to show that, when challenged by a step force perturbation, a healthy system adapts to noxious input by controlling trunk velocity rather than trunk displacement, in contrast to observations during remission from recurrent clinical LBP.

Cohort profile: why do people keep hurting their back?

OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most disabling and costly conditions worldwide. It remains unclear why many individuals experience persistent and recurrent symptoms after an acute episode whereas others do not. A longitudinal cohort study was established to address this problem. We aimed to; (1) evaluate whether promising and potentially modifiable biological, psychological, social and behavioural factors, along with their possible interactions, predict LBP outcome after an acute episode; (2) compare these factors between individuals with and without acute LBP; and (3) evaluate the time-course of changes in these factors from LBP onset. This paper outlines the methodology and compares baseline characteristics between acute LBP and control, and LBP participants with and without follow-up. RESULTS: 133 individuals with acute LBP and 74 pain-free individuals participated. Bio-psycho-social and behavioural measures were collected at baseline and 3-monthly for 12 months (LBP) or 3 months (control). Pain and disability were recorded fortnightly. Baseline characteristics were mostly similar between those who did and did not return for follow-up. Initial analyses of this cohort have revealed important insights into the pathways involved in acute-to-chronic LBP. These and future findings will provide new targets for treatment and prevention of persistent and recurrent LBP.

Changes in the mechanical properties of the trunk in low back pain may be associated with recurrence.

Exercise is one of the few effective treatments for LBP. Although exercise is often based on the premise of reduced spinal stiffness, trunk muscle adaptation may increase stiffness. This study developed and validated a method to assess trunk stiffness and damping, and tested these parameters in 14 people with recurring LBP and 17 pain-free individuals. Effective trunk stiffness, mass and damping were estimated with the trunk modeled as a linear second-order system following trunk perturbation. Equal weights (12-15% body weight) were attached to the front and back of the trunk via pulleys such that the trunk could move freely and no muscle activity was required to hold the weights. The trunk was perturbed by the unexpected release of one of the weights. Trunk kinematics and cable force were used to estimate system properties. Reliability was assessed in 10 subjects. Trunk stiffness was greater in recurrent LBP patients (forward perturbation only), but damping was lower (both directions) than healthy controls. Estimates were reliable and validated by accurately estimated mass. Contrary to clinical belief, trunk stiffness was increased, not reduced, in recurrent LBP, most likely due to augmented trunk muscle activity and changes in reflex control of trunk muscles. Although increased stiffness may aid in the protection of spinal structures, this may have long-term consequences for spinal health and LBP recurrence due to compromised trunk dynamics (decreased damping).

Effects of reflex delays on postural control during unstable seated balance.

Patients with low-back pain (LBP) exhibit longer trunk muscle reflex latencies and poorer postural control than healthy individuals. We hypothesized that balance during a simulated postural control task would become impaired when the delays exhibited by LBP patients were incorporated into neuromuscular control. The task chosen for this investigation was seated balancing, which emphasizes trunk muscles' contribution in postural control. This task was modeled in Simulink as a fourth order linearized dynamic system with feedback delays. Optimization (minimizing error between experimental and model data) of state variables was used to determine neuromuscular control parameters. Experimental data were obtained from 7 subjects during 5 perturbation trials while balancing on the seat with eyes closed. Model accuracy, reflecting the ability of the model to capture the dynamics of seated balance, was correlated with seated balance performance (r=0.91, p<0.001). To minimize the risk of erroneous findings from inaccurate modeling, only the best five balancers' data were used for hypothesis testing. In these five subjects, feedback delays in modeled neuromuscular control were increased to determine their effect on task stability, trunk displacement and trunk moment. Simulations showed that longer delays found in LBP, in general, did not produce unstable balancing, but did result in increased trunk displacement (p<0.001) and trunk moment (p=0.001). This impairment in neuromuscular control in chronic LBP patients could possibly exacerbate their condition by increasing tissue strain (more spinal displacement) and stress (more spinal loading).

Time to Reflect on the Role of Motor Control in Low Back Pain.

The articles in this special issue on low back pain are the outcome of work undertaken by a series of working parties established during the meeting, "State-of-the-Art in Motor Control and Low Back Pain: International Clinical and Research Expert Forum," held in Chicago in October 2015. This multidisciplinary meeting provided an opportunity for discussion of key issues that interconnect motor control, pain, and the spine. What started as a relatively straightforward objective to summarize the field subsequently developed into an extensive process of literature review and discussion that culminated in the commentaries and articles presented in this special issue. We hope that the up-to-date information and in-depth insights into pain, motor control, and rehabilitation provide novel insights and a clear trajectory for future work and form the foundation for ongoing lively discussion. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):367-369. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.0104.

Are Stability and Instability Relevant Concepts for Back Pain?

SYNOPSIS: Individuals with back pain are often diagnosed with spine instability, even though it is unclear whether the spine is susceptible to unstable behavior. The spine is a complex system with many elements that cannot be directly observed, which makes the study of spine function and direct assessment of spine instability difficult. What is known is that trunk muscle activation is adjusted to meet stability demands, which highlights that the central nervous system closely monitors threats to spine stability. The spine appears to be protected by neural coupling and mechanical coupling that prevent erroneous motor control from producing segmental instability; however, this neural and mechanical coupling could be problematic in an injured spine. Finally, instability traditionally contemplated from a mechanical and control perspective could potentially be applied to study processes involved in pain sensitization, and possibly back pain that is iatrogenic in nature. This commentary argues for a more contemporary and broadened view of stability that integrates interdisciplinary knowledge in order to capture the complexity of back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):415-424. Epub 25 Apr 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8144.

Model Simulations Challenge Reductionist Research Approaches to Studying Chronic Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, low back pain (LBP) is studied using a reductionist approach, in which the factors contributing to the clinical presentation of LBP are studied in isolation to identify the primary pathology or condition linked to LBP. We argue that reductionism may not be suitable for studying LBP, considering the complex, multifactorial nature of this condition. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the likelihood of successfully subclassifying patients with LBP and effectively targeting treatment based on a single dominant factor contributing to LBP. METHODS: Both analytical and numerical simulations (Monte Carlo) of 1 million patients with LBP were performed. Several factors contributing to LBP were randomly assigned to each individual. The following outcome measures were computed, as a function of the number of factors: the percentage of individuals who could be subclassified by identifying a single factor exceeding a certain threshold, and the average reduction in LBP when treatment eliminates the largest contributing factor versus a multimodal treatment that eliminates a number of the randomly selected factors. RESULTS: With an increasing number of factors, the probability of subclassifying an individual to a subgroup based on a single factor tends toward zero. A multimodal treatment arbitrarily addressing any 2 or more factors was more effective than diagnosing and treating a single factor that maximally contributed to LBP. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that reductionism is not appropriate for subclassifying patients with LBP or for targeting treatment. The use of reductionist approaches may explain some of the challenges when creating LBP classification systems and designing effective treatment interventions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):477-481. Epub 15 May 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8791.