Pierre-Michel Dugailly1,2, Roberta De Santis3, Mathieu Tits4, Stéphane Sobczak3,5,6, Anna Vigne5, Véronique Feipel5. 1. Research Unit in Osteopathy, Faculty of Motor Sciences (FSM), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium. pdugaill@ulb.ac.be. 2. Laboratory of Functional Anatomy, FSM, ULB, Brussels, Belgium. pdugaill@ulb.ac.be. 3. Research Unit in Osteopathy, Faculty of Motor Sciences (FSM), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium. 4. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Erasmus Academic Hospital, Brussels, Belgium. 5. Laboratory of Functional Anatomy, FSM, ULB, Brussels, Belgium. 6. Department of Anatomy, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, UQTR, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervicocephalic kinesthetic deficiencies have been demonstrated in patients with chronic neck pain (NP). On the other hand, authors emphasized the use of different motion speeds for assessing functional impairment of the cervical spine. PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were (1) to investigate the head repositioning accuracy in NP patients and control subjects and (2) to assess the influence of target distance, motion speed, motion direction and pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-one subjects (36 healthy subjects and 35 NP patients; age 30-55 years) performed the head repositioning test (HRT) at two different speeds for horizontal and vertical movements and at two different distances. For each condition, six consecutive trials were sampled. RESULTS: The study showed the validity and reproducibility of the HRT, confirming a dysfunctional threshold of 4.5°. Normative values of head repositioning error up to 3.6° and 7.1° were identified for healthy and NP subjects, respectively. A distance of 180 cm from the target and a natural motion speed increased HRT accuracy. Repositioning after extension movement showed a significantly larger error in both groups. Intensity, duration of pain as well as pain level did not significantly alter head repositioning error. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of proprioceptive performance in healthy and NP subjects allowed the validation of the HRT. The HRT is a simple, not expensive and fast test, easily implementable in daily practice to assess and monitor treatment and evolution of proprioceptive cervical deficits.
BACKGROUND:Cervicocephalic kinesthetic deficiencies have been demonstrated in patients with chronic neck pain (NP). On the other hand, authors emphasized the use of different motion speeds for assessing functional impairment of the cervical spine. PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were (1) to investigate the head repositioning accuracy in NP patients and control subjects and (2) to assess the influence of target distance, motion speed, motion direction and pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-one subjects (36 healthy subjects and 35 NP patients; age 30-55 years) performed the head repositioning test (HRT) at two different speeds for horizontal and vertical movements and at two different distances. For each condition, six consecutive trials were sampled. RESULTS: The study showed the validity and reproducibility of the HRT, confirming a dysfunctional threshold of 4.5°. Normative values of head repositioning error up to 3.6° and 7.1° were identified for healthy and NP subjects, respectively. A distance of 180 cm from the target and a natural motion speed increased HRT accuracy. Repositioning after extension movement showed a significantly larger error in both groups. Intensity, duration of pain as well as pain level did not significantly alter head repositioning error. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of proprioceptive performance in healthy and NP subjects allowed the validation of the HRT. The HRT is a simple, not expensive and fast test, easily implementable in daily practice to assess and monitor treatment and evolution of proprioceptive cervical deficits.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical motion; Concurrent validity; Head repositioning; Neck pain; Proprioception
Authors: Petteri Koho; Tage Orenius; Hannu Kautiainen; Maija Haanpää; Timo Pohjolainen; Heikki Hurri Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.912
Authors: Nicolas Pinsault; Anthony Fleury; Gilles Virone; Benjamin Bouvier; Jacques Vaillant; Nicolas Vuillerme Journal: Physiother Theory Pract Date: 2008 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Victor Chang; Azam Basheer; Timothy Baumer; Daniel Oravec; Colin P McDonald; Michael J Bey; Stephen Bartol; Yener N Yeni Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2017-03-25 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: Simon J Summers; Siobhan M Schabrun; Rogerio P Hirata; Thomas Graven-Nielsen; Rocco Cavaleri; Lucy S Chipchase Journal: Pain Rep Date: 2019-04-02