Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0280835, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36689435

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The vibration-induced postural reaction paradigm (VIB-PR) offers a unique way for investigating sensorimotor control mechanisms. Measures of VIB-PR are usually calculated from the whole VIB period, yet recent evidence proposed that distinctive mechanisms are likely at play between the early vs. later phases of the postural reaction. OBJECTIVES: The present work verified if spatiotemporal analyses of center of pressure (COP) displacements can detect differences between these early/later phases of VIB-PR. Also, we further characterized the intra/inter-individual variability of COP measurements, since the underlying variability of VIB-PR remains largely unexplored. METHODS: Twenty young volunteers realized two experimental conditions of bipodal stance with eyes closed: (i) bilateral VIB of tibialis anterior (TIB) and (ii) Achilles' (ACH) tendons. Each condition consisted of five trials and lasted 30 s as follows: 10 s baseline, 10 s VIB and 10 s post-VIB. Linear COP variables (antero-posterior (AP) amplitude & velocity) were computed for both VIB and post-VIB periods using the following time-windows: early 2 s, the later 8 s and the whole 10 s duration. Intra- and inter-individual variability were respectively estimated using the standard error of the measurement and the coefficient of variation. Both variability metrics were obtained using five vs. the first three trials. RESULTS: Significant contrasts were found between time-windows for both VIB and post-VIB periods. COP variables were generally higher during the early 2 s phase compared to the later 8 s phase for both TIB [mean difference between 8 s- 2 s phases: Amplitude AP = -1.11 ± 1.14 cm during VIB and -2.99 ± 1.31 during post-VIB; Velocity AP = -1.17 ± 0.86 cm/s during VIB and -3.13 ± 1.31 cm/s during post-VIB] and ACH tendons [Amplitude AP = -0.37 ± 0.98 cm during VIB and -3.41 ± 1.20 during post-VIB; Velocity AP = -0.31 ± 0.59 cm/s during VIB and -3.89 ± 1.52 cm/s during post-VIB]. Most within- and between-subject variability scores were below 30% and using three instead of five trials had no impact on variability. VIB-PR patterns were quite similar within a same person, but variable behaviors were observed between individuals during the later phase. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the relevance of identifying and separately analyzing distinct phases within VIB-PR patterns, as well as characterizing how these patterns vary at the individual level.


Subject(s)
Achilles Tendon , Postural Balance , Humans , Proprioception , Vibration , Muscle, Skeletal
2.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol ; 68: 102728, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36512937

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Multijoint EMG-assisted optimization models are reliable tools to predict muscle forces as they account for inter- and intra-individual variations in activation. However, the conventional method of normalizing EMG signals using maximum voluntary contractions (MVCs) is problematic and introduces major limitations. The sub-maximal voluntary contraction (SVC) approaches have been proposed as a remedy, but their performance against the MVC approach needs further validation particularly during dynamic tasks. METHODS: To compare model outcomes between MVC and SVC approaches, nineteen healthy subjects performed a dynamic lifting task with two loading conditions. RESULTS: Results demonstrated that these two approaches produced highly correlated results with relatively small absolute and relative differences (<10 %) when considering highly-aggregated model outcomes (e.g. compression forces, stability indices). Larger differences were, however, observed in estimated muscle forces. Although some model outcomes, e.g. force of abdominal muscles, were statistically different, their effect sizes remained mostly small (ηG2 ≤ 0.13) and in a few cases moderate (ηG2 ≤ 0.165). CONCLUSION: The findings highlight that the MVC calibration approach can reliably be replaced by the SVC approach when the true MVC exertion is not accessible due to pain, kinesiophobia and/or the lack of proper training.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Muscles , Muscle, Skeletal , Humans , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Electromyography/methods , Pain , Pressure , Muscle Contraction/physiology , Isometric Contraction
3.
J Anat ; 242(4): 666-682, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36521728

ABSTRACT

Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) exhibit remodelling of the lumbar soft tissues such as muscle fatty infiltrations (MFI) and fibrosis of the lumbar multifidus (LuM) muscles, thickness changes of the thoracolumbar fascia (TLF) and perimuscular connective tissues (PMCT) surrounding the abdominal lateral wall muscles. Rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI) parameters such as thickness and echogenicity are sensitive to this remodelling. This experimental laboratory study aimed to explore whether these RUSI parameters (LuM echogenicity and fascia thicknesses), hereafter called dependent variables (DV) were linked to independent variables (IV) such as (1) other RUSI parameters (trunk muscle thickness and activation) and (2) physical and psychological measures. RUSI measures, as well as a clinical examination comprising physical tests and psychological questionnaires, were collected from 70 participants with LBP. The following RUSI dependent variables (RUSI-DV), measures of passive tissues were performed bilaterally: (1) LuM echogenicity (MFI/fibrosis) at three vertebral levels (L3/L4, L4/L5 and L5/S1); (2) TLF posterior layer thickness, and (3) PMCT thickness of the fasciae between subcutaneous tissue thickness (STT) and external oblique (PMCTSTT/EO ), between external and internal oblique (PMCTEO/IO ), between IO and transversus abdominis (PMCTIO/TrA ) and between TrA and intra-abdominal content (PMCTTrA/IA ). RUSI measures of trunk muscle's function (thickness and activation), also called measures of active muscle tissues, were considered as independent variables (RUSI-IV), along with physical tests related to lumbar stability (n = 6), motor control deficits (n = 7), trunk muscle endurance (n = 4), physical performance (n = 4), lumbar posture (n = 2), and range of motion (ROM) tests (n = 6). Psychosocial measures included pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, psychological distress, illness perceptions and concepts related to adherence to a home-based exercise programme (physical activity level, self-efficacy, social support, outcome expectations). Six multivariate regression models (forward stepwise selection) were generated, using RUSI-DV measures as dependent variables and RUSI-IV/physical/psychosocial measures as independent variables (predictors). The six multivariate models included three to five predictors, explaining 63% of total LuM echogenicity variance, between 41% and 46% of trunk superficial fasciae variance (TLF, PMCTSTT/EO ) and between 28% and 37% of deeper abdominal wall fasciae variance (PMCTEO/IO , PMCTIO/TrA and PMCTTrA/IA ). These variables were from RUSI-IV (LuM thickness at rest, activation of IO and TrA), body composition (percent fat) and clinical physical examination (lumbar and pelvis flexion ROM, aberrant movements, passive and active straight-leg raise, loaded-reach test) from the biological domain, as well as from the lifestyle (physical activity level during sports), psychological (psychological distress-cognitive subscale, fear-avoidance beliefs during physical activities, self-efficacy to exercise) and social (family support to exercise) domains. Biological, psychological, social and lifestyle factors each accounted for substantial variance in RUSI-passive parameters. These findings are in keeping with a conceptual link between tissue remodelling and factors such as local and systemic inflammation. Possible explanations are discussed, in keeping with the hypothesis-generating nature of this study (exploratory). However, to impact clinical practice, further research is needed to determine if the most plausible predictors of trunk fasciae thickness and LuM fatty infiltrations have an effect on these parameters.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Muscles , Paraspinal Muscles , Humans , Ultrasonography/methods , Abdominal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Abdominal Muscles/physiology , Lumbosacral Region , Fascia
4.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 45(6): 425-435, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36400598

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the immediate effects of lumbosacral orthosis and the abdominal drawing-in maneuver on the trunk postural control of adults with chronic low back pain compared with asymptomatic controls during 1-legged and semi-tandem stances. METHODS: An experimental and comparative study (cross-sectional design) was conducted in a laboratory setting. Twenty adults with chronic low back pain and 20 asymptomatic controls randomly performed 2 postural balance tasks over a force platform, considering 3 experimental conditions: (1) natural posture (baseline-control), (2) lumbosacral orthosis, and (3) abdominal drawing-in maneuver. Linear variables (mean amplitude, ellipse area, and sway velocity) derived from the center of pressure were computed, and 2-way analysis of variance (group × condition) for repeated measures were conducted. RESULTS: No group × condition interactions (.139 ≤ P ≤.938) were detected in any center of pressure parameters. No condition effect was detected, but a group effect (P = .042) was observed for 1 center of pressure parameter. The chronic low back pain group presented with a lower mean anteroposterior center of pressure amplitude than asymptomatic controls (∆ = 0.31 ± 0.66 cm [95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.56], P = .019) during the semi-tandem stance balance task. CONCLUSION: Neither lumbosacral orthosis nor the abdominal drawing-in maneuver showed immediate improvement in trunk postural control in any group. Thus, clinicians should not expect immediate benefits or improvements yielded by lumbosacral orthosis or the abdominal drawing-in maneuver when patients with chronic low back pain undergo these interventions.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Adult , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Low Back Pain/therapy , Orthotic Devices , Postural Balance , Posture
5.
Sensors (Basel) ; 22(17)2022 Aug 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36080913

ABSTRACT

Inertial motion capture (IMC) has gained popularity in conducting ergonomic studies in the workplace. Because of the need to measure contact forces, most of these in situ studies are limited to a kinematic analysis, such as posture or working technique analysis. This paper aims to develop and evaluate an IMC-based approach to estimate back loading during manual material handling (MMH) tasks. During various representative workplace MMH tasks performed by nine participants, this approach was evaluated by comparing the results with the ones computed from optical motion capture and a large force platform. Root mean square errors of 21 Nm and 15 Nm were obtained for flexion and asymmetric L5/S1 moments, respectively. Excellent correlations were found between both computations on indicators based on L5/S1 peak and cumulative flexion moments, while lower correlations were found on indicators based on asymmetric moments. Since no force measurement or load kinematics measurement is needed, this study shows the potential of using only the handler's kinematics measured by IMC to estimate kinetics variables. The assessment of workplace physical exposure, including L5/S1 moments, will allow more complete ergonomics evaluation and will improve the ecological validity compared to laboratory studies, where the situations are often simplified and standardized.


Subject(s)
Ergonomics , Posture , Biomechanical Phenomena , Humans , Mechanical Phenomena , Range of Motion, Articular
6.
Appl Ergon ; 93: 103377, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33556886

ABSTRACT

Work-related low back disorders are commonly associated with handling tasks. The objective of this study was to determine the combined influence of distance, pace, handled mass and height, on back loading and posture during free box transfer. Kinematics and kinetics of 17 handlers were recorded during a box transfer task between two pallets. Four-way repeated measures ANOVA were conducted on four lift-deposit height conditions (from lift and deposit of 0.16 or 1.16 m), three distances between pallets (1.5, 1.0 and 0.5 m), two handled masses (10 and 20 kg) and two paces (free and faster). The interaction between distance and height on back loading and posture (P < 0.001) showed that increasing distance to more than 1 m is not recommended to avoid unnecessary cumulative loading. The shorter distance of 0.5 m, which generally reduced the most spine loading, may increase it for transfers varying in height. The effect of pace to reduce spine cumulative loading and increase the peak asymmetric loading (P < 0.05) was accentuated by mass, height and distance. The combined factors revealed the importance of tradeoff between peak, cumulative and asymmetric loading.


Subject(s)
Lifting , Spine , Biomechanical Phenomena , Humans , Posture , Weight-Bearing
7.
J Bodyw Mov Ther ; 24(4): 293-302, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33218526

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: With low back pain (LBP), remodelling of the lumbar soft tissues involves both trunk muscles and neighbouring passive connective tissues. The aim of the present study was to compare three quantitative measures of these tissues, using ultrasound imaging (USI), among healthy controls and individuals with LBP. METHODS: USI measures from 30 healthy subjects and 34 patients with non-acute LBP were compared between groups and sexes. The measures employed were (1) lumbar multifidus echogenicity (fatty/fibrosis infiltration) at three vertebral levels; (2) posterior layer thickness of the thoracolumbar fascia, and (3) thickness of the perimuscular tissues surrounding the external oblique, internal oblique and transversus abdominis (TrA). RESULTS: USI measures of (1) multifidus echogenicity showed statistically significant changes between vertebral levels and sexes (females > males; p = 0.02); (2) differences in thoracolumbar fascia thickness approached statistical significance between groups (LBP > controls; p = 0.09) and sexes (females < males; p = 0.07); and (3) perimuscular tissue surrounding the TrA was significantly thinner (p ≤ 0.001) in patients with LBP compared to controls. DISCUSSION: The thinner perimuscular tissues surrounding the TrA in patients with LBP is a new finding, concurring with previous findings with regard to the lower activation of this deep muscle as well as more recent findings on other perimuscular tissue. CONCLUSION: Overall, USI measures were sensitive to different potential changes (pain status, sex, vertebral level), and this is useful in studying the remodelling of various soft tissues of the trunk.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Wall , Paraspinal Muscles , Abdominal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Abdominal Wall/diagnostic imaging , Cross-Sectional Studies , Fascia/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Male , Paraspinal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography
8.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol ; 51: 102386, 2020 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32014802

ABSTRACT

Mechanical vibration of tendons induces large postural reactions (PR-VIB) but little is known about how these reactions vary within and between subjects. We investigated the intra- and inter-individual variability of PR-VIB and determined the reliability of center of pressure (COP) measures. Bipodal postural control (eyes closed) of 30 healthy adults were evaluated using a force platform under 02 conditions: bilateral VIB of the tibialis anterior (TA) and Achilles tendons (ACH-T) at 80 Hz. Each condition consisted of 03 trials of 30 s duration (Baseline: 10 s; VIB: 10 s; POST-VIB: 10 s). The Amplitude and Velocity of the COP in the antero-posterior/medio-lateral (AP/ML) directions were recorded and analyzed according to 5 time-windows incremented every 2 s of vibration (i.e. the first 2 s; 4 s; 6 s; 8 s & 10 s), whereas the COP position/AP was monitored every 0.5 s. All postural parameters increased significantly during TA and ACH-T vibration compared to the Baseline. The reliability of the COP measures showed good ICC scores (0.40-0.84) and measurement errors that varied depending on the duration of VIB time-windows. The COP position/AP reveals a lower intra- and inter-subject variability of PR-VIB in the first 2 s of VIB. The metrological characteristics of PR-VIB should be investigated further to guide their future use by clinicians and researchers.


Subject(s)
Achilles Tendon/physiology , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Postural Balance , Proprioception , Vibration , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Reaction Time , Reproducibility of Results
9.
Ergonomics ; 63(3): 283-292, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31043140

ABSTRACT

Handling tasks can expose workers to risk factors. The objective was to describe the feasibility of using magnetic and inertial measurement units (MIMUs) to quantify the physical exposure of materials handlers in the workplace. Full-body kinematics were obtained with MIMUs on 10 handlers gathering products ordered by retailers with a pallet truck. An observer classified the visual difference (VD) of segment orientation between a MIMUs avatar and video recordings in three categories (none, minor and major) for each product transfer. The feet, arms, shoulders and head were considered similar for ≥97% of observations. The trunk segment obtained the most differences with 9% of minor VD and 5% of major VD, which were related to the duration of the magnetic disturbances of the MIMUs. Estimating parameters of the physical exposure of handlers in the workplace is feasible with kinematics and an order list, but visual verification remains important for scientific rigour.Practitioner Summary: The feasibility of measuring physical exposure with magnetic and inertial measurement units was evaluated on materials handlers in the workplace. Visual observation of the postures indicated that most of the data is considered acceptable. Magnetic disturbances can increase the measurement error, so data must be verified to ensure validity.


Subject(s)
Lifting , Movement , Occupational Exposure , Workplace , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Magnetic Phenomena , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Task Performance and Analysis , Virtual Reality , Wearable Electronic Devices
10.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol ; 46: 55-62, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30927631

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spine stability is regularly studied by positioning different loads at different heights and distance and measuring trunk muscle activation changes. Some of these studies have reported sex differences, but this needs to be revisited while controlling for confounding factors. METHOD: 20 males and 20 females sustained three static standing postures, with various loads (0, 5 and 10% of body weight), to evaluate the effect of height and distance. Activation of 12 trunk muscles was recorded with surface electromyography (EMG). RESULTS: Females activated their external obliques a little more than males, with increases ranging between 1.5 and 2.3% of maximal voluntary activation (MVA), which corresponds to strong effect sizes (Cohen's d ranging between 0.86 and 1.13). However, the significant Sex × Height, Sex × Distance and Sex × Load interactions observed for different trunk muscles led to small differential effects (≤1% MVA). Increasing load height slightly increased and decreased back and abdominal muscle activation, respectively, generally by less than 1% MVA. CONCLUSION: The higher activation of the external obliques observed in females might be of clinical value, relative to the required overall trunk muscle activation (5%), to preserve lumbar stability. Other effects were negligible.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Oblique Muscles/physiology , Electromyography , Manipulation, Spinal , Sex Factors , Abdominal Muscles , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anthropometry , Biomechanical Phenomena , Body Weight , Female , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae/physiology , Lumbosacral Region , Male , Middle Aged , Posture/physiology , Stress, Mechanical , Surveys and Questionnaires , Torso/physiology , Young Adult
11.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther ; 49(4): 262-271, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30658047

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Two potential interventions for enhancing lumbar stability are to actively increase abdominal muscle activity, either through the abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM) or bracing, and passively increase lumbar stiffness using a lumbosacral orthosis (LSO). OBJECTIVE: To compare the increase in lumbar stiffness after 2 active interventions (ADIM versus bracing) and 1 passive intervention (LSO), and to evaluate the combined effect of active (abdominal bracing) and passive interventions. METHODS: In this experimental and comparative study, lumbar stiffness, a surrogate measure of lumbar stability, was estimated in 25 healthy individuals during 7 trunk perturbation conditions: (1) control, (2) ADIM, (3) bracing at 5% of right external oblique maximal voluntary activation (5% bracing), (4) bracing at 10% of right external oblique maximal voluntary activation (10% bracing), (5) LSO, (6) LSO plus 5% bracing, and (7) LSO plus 10% bracing. Electromyographic biofeedback of the external oblique was provided on a monitor, while ultrasound was used for the ADIM to ensure a sustained contraction of the transversus abdominis. RESULTS: The ADIM, 5% bracing, and 10% bracing active interventions generated comparable lumbar stiffness. However, considering that bracing can range from 10% to 20%, it may be superior to hollowing, as further estimated with a mixed-effect statistical model. Combining bracing and an LSO resulted in an additive effect on lumbar stiffness. CONCLUSION: Bracing and ADIM produced comparable lumbar stiffness, as they were performed at the same overall abdominal activation levels (5% and 10% maximal voluntary activation). The independent effects of bracing and LSO raises the possibility of combining these interventions in some circumstances. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(4):262-271. Epub 18 Jan 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8565.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Muscles/physiology , Braces , Isometric Contraction/physiology , Lumbar Vertebrae/physiology , Postural Balance/physiology , Abdominal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biofeedback, Psychology , Child , Electromyography , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ultrasonography , Young Adult
12.
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) ; 48: 1-8, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28668552

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lumbar stabilization exercise programs should normalize the aberrant movements patterns often observed in patients with low back pain. This study aimed to determine the effect of an 8-week lumbar stabilization program on EMG/kinematics measures of the aberrant movement patterns in such patients. A secondary goal was to assess the 8-week test-retest reliability of these measures. METHODS: The patients followed an 8-week lumbar stabilization program while no intervention was carried out on the controls. Before and after this period, kinematics of the spine along with the EMG of paraspinal muscles were recorded during trunk maximal flexion-extension. ANOVAs tested the effect of the intervention in the patients, relative to the controls. Within the patients, correlation of the EMG/kinematics measures with the change in disability and pain following the intervention was investigated. FINDINGS: A significant reduction in pain (Hedges's g effect size=2.31) and improvement in function (g=1.74) was reported in the patients. While EMG/kinematics measures disclosed impairments in the patients at baseline compared to the controls, no change was observed over the intervention. Nevertheless, the change of lumbar range of motion was positively correlated (r=0.42; P=0.015) with the change in disability. INTERPRETATION: Although pain and disability decreased following the intervention, the EMG/kinematics measures did not change concomitantly suggesting that the patients learned to stiffen the lumbar spine during the treatment, and this technique was applied even if pain and disability unequivocally decreased after the treatment, which would not necessarily be beneficial to the patient.


Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy , Exercise/physiology , Low Back Pain/physiopathology , Lumbar Vertebrae/physiopathology , Lumbosacral Region/physiology , Range of Motion, Articular/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Movement/physiology , Muscle Relaxation/physiology , Paraspinal Muscles/physiopathology , Pelvis , Reproducibility of Results , Torso/physiopathology , Young Adult
13.
Appl Ergon ; 63: 123-132, 2017 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28502401

ABSTRACT

Inertial measurement units (IMUs), a practical motion analysis technology for field acquisition, have magnetometers to improve segment orientation estimation. However, sensitivity to magnetic disturbances can affect their accuracy. The objective of this study was to determine the joint angles accuracy of IMUs under different timing of magnetic disturbances of various durations and to evaluate a few correction methods. Kinematics from 12 individuals were obtained simultaneously with an Xsens system where an Optotrak cluster acting as the reference system was affixed to each IMU. A handling task was executed under normal laboratory conditions and imposed magnetic disturbances. Joint angle RMSE was used to conduct a three-way repeated measures analysis of variance in order to contrast the following disturbance factors: duration (0, 30, 60, 120 and 240 s), timing (during the disturbance, directly after it and a 30-second delay after it) and axis (X, Y and Z). The highest joint angle RMSE was observed on rotations about the Y longitudinal axis and during the longer disturbances. It stayed high directly after a disturbance, but returned close to baseline after a 30-second delay. When magnetic disturbances are experienced, waiting 30 s in a normal condition is recommended as a way to restore the IMUs' initial accuracy. The correction methods performed modestly or poorly in the reduction of joint angle RMSE.


Subject(s)
Data Accuracy , Magnetic Fields , Magnetometry/statistics & numerical data , Movement/physiology , Adult , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Magnetometry/methods , Male , Task Performance and Analysis , Young Adult
14.
Gait Posture ; 54: 80-86, 2017 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28279850

ABSTRACT

Portable inertial measurement units (IMUs) are suitable for motion analysis outside the laboratory. However, IMUs depend on the calibration of each body segment to measure human movement. Different calibration approaches have been developed for simplicity of use or similarity to laboratory motion analysis, but they have not been extensively examined. The main objective of the study was to determine the accuracy and repeatability of two common single-pose calibrations (N-pose and T-pose) under different conditions of placement (self-placement and passive placement), as well as their similarity to laboratory analysis based on anatomical landmarks. A further aim of the study was to develop two additional single-pose calibrations (chair-pose and stool-pose) and determine their accuracy and repeatability. Postures and movements of 12 healthy participants were recorded simultaneously with a full-body IMU suit and an optoelectronic system as the criterion measure. Three repetitions of the T-pose and the N-pose were executed by self-placement and passive placement, and three repetitions of the chair-pose and stool-pose were also performed. Repeatability for each single-pose calibration showed an average intraclass correlation coefficient for all axes and joints between 0.90 and 0.94 and a standard error of measurement between 1.5° and 2.1°. The T-pose with passive placement is recommended to reduce longitudinal axis offset error and to increase similarity to laboratory motion analysis. Finally, the chair-pose obtained the least longitudinal axis offset error amongst the tested poses, which shows potential for IMU calibration.


Subject(s)
Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Movement/physiology , Posture/physiology , Adult , Analysis of Variance , Anatomic Landmarks , Biomechanical Phenomena , Calibration/standards , Female , Humans , Male , Reproducibility of Results , Young Adult
15.
Med Biol Eng Comput ; 55(4): 609-619, 2017 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27379397

ABSTRACT

The potential of inertial measurement units (IMUs) for ergonomics applications appears promising. However, previous IMUs validation studies have been incomplete regarding aspects of joints analysed, complexity of movements and duration of trials. The objective was to determine the technological error and biomechanical model differences between IMUs and an optoelectronic system and evaluate the effect of task complexity and duration. Whole-body kinematics from 12 participants was recorded simultaneously with a full-body Xsens system where an Optotrak cluster was fixed on every IMU. Short functional movements and long manual material handling tasks were performed and joint angles were compared between the two systems. The differences attributed to the biomechanical model showed significantly greater (P ≤ .001) RMSE than the technological error. RMSE was systematically higher (P ≤ .001) for the long complex task with a mean on all joints of 2.8° compared to 1.2° during short functional movements. Definition of local coordinate systems based on anatomical landmarks or single posture was the most influent difference between the two systems. Additionally, IMUs accuracy was affected by the complexity and duration of the tasks. Nevertheless, technological error remained under 5° RMSE during handling tasks, which shows potential to track workers during their daily labour.


Subject(s)
Models, Theoretical , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Adult , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Male , Motion , Movement , Optics and Photonics/instrumentation , Optics and Photonics/methods , Posture
16.
J Biomech Eng ; 138(8)2016 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27245737

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to evaluate eight methods for aligning the orientation of two different local coordinate systems. Alignment is very important when combining two different systems of motion analysis. Two of the methods were developed specifically for biomechanical studies, and because there have been at least three decades of algorithm development in robotics, it was decided to include six methods from this field. To compare these methods, an Xsens sensor and two Optotrak clusters were attached to a Plexiglas plate. The first optical marker cluster was fixed on the sensor and 20 trials were recorded. The error of alignment was calculated for each trial, and the mean, the standard deviation, and the maximum values of this error over all trials were reported. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that the alignment error differed significantly across the eight methods. Post-hoc tests showed that the alignment error from the methods based on angular velocities was significantly lower than for the other methods. The method using angular velocities performed the best, with an average error of 0.17 ± 0.08 deg. We therefore recommend this method, which is easy to perform and provides accurate alignment.


Subject(s)
Accelerometry/methods , Algorithms , Image Enhancement , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted , Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Monitoring, Ambulatory/methods , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity
17.
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) ; 30(9): 933-9, 2015 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26253690

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adequate neuromuscular control of the lumbar spine is required to prevent lumbar injuries. A trunk postural control test protocol, controlling for the influence of body size on performance, was implemented to carry out between-subject comparisons. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of sex and low back pain status with the use of two measures of trunk postural control, the first based on chair motion, and the second based on trunk motion. METHODS: Thirty-six subjects (with and without low back pain) performed three 60-s trunk postural control trials with their eyes closed while seated on an instrumented wobble chair, following a calibration procedure. Chair and trunk angular kinematics were measured with an optoelectronic system. A chair-based stabilogram and a trunk-based (lumbar spine) stabilogram were created using the angular motions produced in the sagittal and frontal planes. Twenty body-sway measures were computed for each stabilogram. FINDINGS: The calibration task efficiently controlled for the influence of body size. Several sex effects were detected, with most of them originating from the trunk-based measures. Subjects with low back pain and healthy controls showed comparable trunk postural control. INTERPRETATION: Sex differences were substantiated for the first time, but almost only with the trunk-based stabilogram, showing that the kinematic information captured on the trunk segments is quite different from what is captured on the wobble chair. Contrary to previous studies, pain status was not related to lowered trunk postural control, which can be attributed to the patients recruited or measurement reliability issues.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain/physiopathology , Postural Balance/physiology , Torso/physiology , Adult , Biomechanical Phenomena , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae/physiology , Male , Movement , Reproducibility of Results , Sex Factors
18.
J Biomech ; 48(2): 254-61, 2015 Jan 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25529140

ABSTRACT

This study aimed at testing the reliability and construct validity of a trunk perturbation protocol (TPP) that estimates the intrinsic and reflexive contributions to low-back stiffness. The TPP consists of a series of pseudorandom position-controlled trunk perturbations in an apparatus measuring forces and displacements at the harness surrounding the thorax. Intrinsic and reflexive contributions to low-back stiffness were estimated using a system identification procedure, leading to 12 parameters. Study 1 methods (reliability): 30 subjects performed five 75-s trials, on each of two separate days (eight weeks apart). Reliability was assessed using the generalizability theory, which allowed computing indexes of dependability (ϕ, analogous to intraclass correlation coefficient) and standard errors of measurement (SEM). Study 2 methods (validity): 20 healthy subjects performed three 75-s trials for each of five experimental conditions assumed to provide different lumbar stiffness; testing the construct validity of the TPP using four conditions with different lumbar belt designs and one control condition without. Study 1 results (reliability): Learning was seen between the first and following trials. Consequently, reliability analyses were performed without the first trial. Simulations showed that averaging the scores of three trials can lead to acceptable reliability results for some TPP parameters. Study 2 results (validity): All lumbar belt designs increased low-back intrinsic stiffness, while only some of them decreased reflex stiffness, which support the construct validity of the TPP. Overall, these findings support the use of the TPP to test the effect of rehabilitation or between-groups differences with regards to trunk stiffness.


Subject(s)
Back/physiology , Materials Testing/methods , Mechanical Phenomena , Reflex , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biomechanical Phenomena , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , Thorax , Young Adult
19.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 15: 307, 2014 Sep 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25234136

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that in some patients with low back pain, lumbar belts (LB) may derive secondary prophylactic benefits. It remains to be determined, however, which patients are most likely to benefit from prophylactic LB use, and which LB design is optimal for this purpose. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of different lumbar belts designs on range of motion and lumbopelvic rhythm. METHODS: Healthy subjects (10 males; 10 females) performed five standing lumbar flexion/extension cycles, with knees straight, during a control (no belt) and four lumbar belt experimental conditions (extensible, with and without dorsal and ventral panels; non-extensible). Motion of the pelvis and lumbar spine was measured with 3D angular inertial sensors. RESULTS: The results suggest that adding dorsal and ventral panels to an extensible LB produces the largest lumbar spine restrictions among the four tested lumbar belt designs, which in turn also altered the lumbopelvic rhythm. On a more exploratory basis, some sex differences were seen and the sex × experimental condition interaction just failed to reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: LB may provide some biomechanical benefit for patients with low back disorders, based on the protection that may be provided against soft tissue creep-based injury mechanisms. More comprehensive assessment of different LB designs, with additional psychological and neuromuscular measurement outcomes, however, must first be conducted in order to produce sound recommendations for LB use. Future research should also to take sex into account, with sufficient statistical power to clearly refute or confirm the observed trends.


Subject(s)
Lumbosacral Region/physiology , Pelvis/physiology , Protective Devices , Range of Motion, Articular/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Low Back Pain/prevention & control , Male , Young Adult
20.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol ; 24(3): 394-403, 2014 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24726611

ABSTRACT

Unexpected loading of the spine is a risk factor for low back pain. The trunk neuromuscular and kinematics responses are likely influenced by the perturbation itself as well as initial trunk conditions. The effect of four parameters (preload, sudden load, initial trunk flexed posture, initial abdominal antagonistic activity) on trunk kinematics and back muscles reflex response were evaluated. Twelve asymptomatic subjects participated in sudden forward perturbation tests under six distinct conditions. Preload did not change the reflexive response of back muscles and the trunk displacement; while peak trunk velocity and acceleration as well as the relative load peak decreased. Sudden load increased reflex response of muscles, trunk kinematics and loading variables. When the trunk was initially flexed, back muscles latency was delayed, trunk velocity and acceleration increased; however, reflex amplitude and relative trunk displacement remained unchanged. Abdominal antagonistic preactivation increased reflexive response of muscles but kinematics variables were not affected. Preload, initial flexed posture and abdominal muscles preactivation increased back muscles preactivity. Both velocity and acceleration peaks of the trunk movement decreased with preload despite greater total load. In contrast, they increased in the initial flexed posture and to some extent when abdominal muscles were preactivated demonstrating the distinct effects of pre-perturbation variables on trunk kinematics and risk of injury.


Subject(s)
Abdominal Muscles/physiology , Isometric Contraction/physiology , Movement/physiology , Posture/physiology , Spine/physiology , Weight-Bearing/physiology , Adult , Analysis of Variance , Back Muscles/physiology , Biomechanical Phenomena , Humans , Male , Muscle Strength Dynamometer , Range of Motion, Articular , Reference Values , Reflex/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...