C M Bauer1, F M Rast2, M J Ernst2, A Meichtry2, J Kool2, S M Rissanen3, J H Suni4, M Kankaanpää5. 1. Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Department of Health, Institute of Physiotherapy, Technikumstrasse 71, 8400 Winterthur, Switzerland; University of Tampere, School of Medicine, Kalevantie 4, 33014 University of Tampere, Finland. Electronic address: christoph.bauer@zhaw.ch. 2. Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Department of Health, Institute of Physiotherapy, Technikumstrasse 71, 8400 Winterthur, Switzerland. 3. University of Eastern Finland, Department of Applied Physics, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland. Electronic address: saara.rissanen@uef.fi. 4. UKK Institute for Health Promotion Research, Kaupinpuistonkatu 1, 33500 Tampere, Finland. Electronic address: jaana.h.suni@uta.fi. 5. University of Tampere, School of Medicine, Kalevantie 4, 33014 University of Tampere, Finland; Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Outpatient Clinic, Box 2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland. Electronic address: markku.kankaanpaa@pshp.fi.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Changes in movement variability and complexity may reflect an adaptation strategy to fatigue. One unresolved question is whether this adaptation is hampered by the presence of low back pain (LBP). This study investigated if changes in movement variability and complexity after fatigue are influenced by the presence of LBP. It is hypothesised that pain free people and people suffering from LBP differ in their response to fatigue. METHODS: The effect of an isometric endurance test on lumbar movement was tested in 27 pain free participants and 59 participants suffering from LBP. Movement variability and complexity were quantified with %determinism and sample entropy of lumbar angular displacement and velocity. Generalized linear models were fitted for each outcome. Bayesian estimation of the group-fatigue effect with 95% highest posterior density intervals (95%HPDI) was performed. RESULTS: After fatiguing %determinism decreased and sample entropy increased in the pain free group, compared to the LBP group. The corresponding group-fatigue effects were 3.7 (95%HPDI: 2.3-7.1) and -1.4 (95%HPDI: -2.7 to -0.1). These effects manifested in angular velocity, but not in angular displacement. DISCUSSION: The effects indicate that pain free participants showed more complex and less predictable lumbar movement with a lower degree of structure in its variability following fatigue while participants suffering from LBP did not. This may be physiological responses to avoid overload of fatigued tissue, increase endurance, or a consequence of reduced movement control caused by fatigue.
INTRODUCTION: Changes in movement variability and complexity may reflect an adaptation strategy to fatigue. One unresolved question is whether this adaptation is hampered by the presence of low back pain (LBP). This study investigated if changes in movement variability and complexity after fatigue are influenced by the presence of LBP. It is hypothesised that pain free people and people suffering from LBP differ in their response to fatigue. METHODS: The effect of an isometric endurance test on lumbar movement was tested in 27 pain free participants and 59 participants suffering from LBP. Movement variability and complexity were quantified with %determinism and sample entropy of lumbar angular displacement and velocity. Generalized linear models were fitted for each outcome. Bayesian estimation of the group-fatigue effect with 95% highest posterior density intervals (95%HPDI) was performed. RESULTS: After fatiguing %determinism decreased and sample entropy increased in the pain free group, compared to the LBP group. The corresponding group-fatigue effects were 3.7 (95%HPDI: 2.3-7.1) and -1.4 (95%HPDI: -2.7 to -0.1). These effects manifested in angular velocity, but not in angular displacement. DISCUSSION: The effects indicate that pain free participants showed more complex and less predictable lumbar movement with a lower degree of structure in its variability following fatigue while participants suffering from LBP did not. This may be physiological responses to avoid overload of fatigued tissue, increase endurance, or a consequence of reduced movement control caused by fatigue.
Authors: Danica Hendry; Amity Campbell; Anne Smith; Luke Hopper; Leon Straker; Peter O'Sullivan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-19 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Charles Philip Gabel; Hamid Reza Mokhtarinia; Jonathan Hoffman; Jason Osborne; E-Liisa Laakso; Markus Melloh Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-08-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Noelia González-Gálvez; Raquel Vaquero-Cristóbal; Abraham López-Vivancos; Mario Albaladejo-Saura; Pablo Jorge Marcos-Pardo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Thorvaldur S Palsson; Alessandro Andreucci; Christian Lund Straszek; Michael Skovdal Rathleff; Morten Hoegh Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2021-12-05