Umeå University's logo

Reduced cervical range of motion (ROM) is a common finding in people with neck pain. With few exceptions, only the angle between head and thorax has been measured. Our aim was to use an extended model to compare active cervical flexion and extension, separate for upper and lower cervical levels, between people with chronic non-traumatic neck pain and controls. We also investigated associations between ROM measures, symptoms and self-rated functioning. In this cross-sectional study, 102 subjects with neck pain and 33 healthy controls participated. An electromagnetic tracker system was used to measure the kinematics to construct a three-segment model including the thorax, cervical spine and head. Neutral flexion/extension were defined at subjects’ self-selected seated posture. We found that in the neck pain group, extension in the upper cervical levels and predominately flexion for the lower levels were reduced. The ratio between ROM for the upper and lower levels was altered in the neck pain group so that the lower levels contributed to a lesser extent to the total sagittal ROM compared to controls. These findings could not be explained by a greater forward head posture but must have other origins. For the neck pain group, ROM measures were weakly associated to pain and self-rated functioning. Altogether, this implies that using a three-segment model for assessment of ROM can be a valuable improvement for characterisation of patients and treatment evaluation.

Background Cervical range of motion (ROM) is commonly assessed in clinical practice and research. In a previous study we decomposed active cervical sagittal ROM into contributions from lower and upper levels of the cervical spine and found level- and direction-specific impairments in women with chronic non-specific neck pain. The present study aimed to validate these results and investigate if the specific impairments can be explained by the neutral posture (defining zero flexion/extension) or a movement strategy to avoid large gravitationally induced torques on the cervical spine.

Methods Kinematics of the head and thorax was assessed in sitting during maximal sagittal cervical flexion/extension (high torque condition) and maximal protraction (low torque condition) in 120 women with chronic non-specific neck pain and 40 controls. We derived the lower and upper cervical angles, and the head centre of mass (HCM), from a 3-segment kinematic model. Neutral head posture was assessed using a standardized procedure. 

Findings Previous findings of level- and direction-specific impairments in neck pain were confirmed. Neutral head posture was equal between groups and did not explain the direction-specific impairments. The relative magnitude of group difference in HCM migration did not differ between high and low torques conditions, lending no support for our hypothesis that impairments in sagittal ROM are due to torque avoidance behaviour. 

Interpretation The direction-and level-specific impairments in cervical sagittal ROM can be generalised to the population of women with non-specific neck pain. Further research is necessary to clarify if torque avoidance behaviour can explain the impairments.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of neck coordination exercise on sensorimotor function in women with neck pain compared with best-available treatment and sham treatment.

DESIGN: Observer-blinded randomized controlled trial with short-term and 6-month follow-ups.

SUBJECTS: Women with chronic non-specific neck pain were randomized to 3 groups: neck coordination exercise with a novel training device; strength training for the neck and shoulders; or massage. Each group had 36 participants.

METHODS: The intervention period was 11 weeks with 22 individually supervised sessions. Primary outcomes were postural sway measures and precision of goal-directed arm movements. Secondary outcomes were range of motion for the neck, peak speed of axial rotation, and neck pain. A repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted separately on the primary outcomes for the short-term and 6-month evaluations and on the sensorimotor secondary outcomes for the 6-month effect. The 6-month effect on pain was analysed with a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS: No significant treatment effects in favour of neck coordination exercise were found for short-term or 6-month evaluations.

CONCLUSION: Neck coordination exercise is no better than strength training and massage in improving sensorimotor function. Further research should investigate the use of cut-offs for sensorimotor dysfunctions prior to proprioceptive or coordinative training.

Kinematic motor variability is extensively studied in occupational, clinical and sports biomechanics, but the consistency of most motor variability metrics have never been reported. In this study, fourteen subjects performed a repetitive pipetting task on three separate days. Movements of hand, arm and pipette tip were recorded in 3D and used to compute shoulder elevation, elbow flexion and shoulder-arm coordination angles, as well as pipette-tip endpoint precision. Cycle-to-cycle motor variability was quantified using linear dispersion measures of standard kinematics properties such as peak velocity, range of motion, and inter-segmental relative phase. Between- and within-subject consistencies of these variability metrics were quantified by variance components estimated using a nested random effects model. For most metrics, the variance between subjects was larger than that between days and cycles. Entering the variance components in statistical power equations showed that for most metrics, a total of 80-100 subjects will be required to detect a 20% difference between two groups with sufficient power, while this difference can typically be detected in repeated-measures (paired) designs using 25 subjects. The reported between- and within-subject variance components can be used as a data base to facilitate efficient designs of future studies of kinematic motor variability.