Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (20)
- Conference Proceeding (8)
- Book (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Other (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (31)
Keywords
- electromyography (2)
- muscle activity (2)
- muscle fatigue (2)
- Alar ligaments (1)
- Hyperalgesie (1)
- Kiefergelenk (1)
- Kraniomandibuläre Dysfunktion (1)
- PRMD (1)
- Physiotherapie (1)
- Stenose (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (31)
Introduction: Hamstring injuries are among the most common injuries in soccer players. Especially the danger of hamstring injuries increases in the final third of each half, with the biceps femoris muscle being highly susceptible, but currently there is no supporting evidence in soccer players. It is important to investigate to provide a basis for further clinical investigations in order to reduce the risk of hamstring injuries.
Objective: To investigate a soccer-specific muscle fatigue protocol has an effect on the activation patterns of the biceps and semitendinosus muscles and correlates with the subjectively perceived exertion of the soccer players.
Methods: 19 healthy soccer players aged 19 - 35 years were included and underwent a standardized procedure that included: (1) performance of the nordic hamstring curls (NHC) and a 10m sprint (pre-test), (2) a soccer-specific muscle fatigue loading protocol for 30 minutes with subsequent rating of perceived exertion (RPE), (3) re-assessed like pre-assessment (post- test). Electromyography (EMG) data were recorded the biceps and
semitendinosus muscles of both legs. Two parameters were analyzed: the peak amplitude during the NHC and the mean amplitude during the 10m sprint.
Results: The RPE score (9.5, p<0.001) and 10m sprint shows significant differences between pre- and post- test for the biceps (standing leg: -82.45, kicking leg: -81.77; p<0.01) and semitendinosus muscle (standing leg: -60.08, p=0.001); kicking leg: -65.30, p=0.03). Significant correlation exists between RPE score and biceps muscles at posttest (standing leg: r=-0.54, kicking leg: r=-0.51; p<0.05).
Conclusion: Muscle fatigue leads to significant changes in the activation behavior of the hamstring muscles. In particular, the biceps muscle shows a correlation with perceived exertion, the higher the exertion, the lower the muscle activity. This may help explain the higher prevalence of the biceps muscle in hamstring injuries and offers a basis for further clinical investigations
Despite normal neurological bedside and electrodiagnostic, some patients with non-specific neck arm pain (NSNAP) have heightened nerve mechanosensitivity upon neurodynamic testing [1, 2]. It remains however unclear whether this is associated with a minor nerve injury. The aim of this study was to evaluate potential differences in somatosensory function among patients with unilateral NSNAP with and without positive neurodynamic tests and healthy controls.
Quantitative sensory testing was performed in 40 patients with unilateral NSNAP; 23 with positive upper limb neurodynamic tests (ULNTPOS) and 17 with negative neurodynamic tests (ULNTNEG). The protocol comprised thermal and mechanical detection and pain thresholds as well as mechanical pain sensitivity, wind-up ratio and dynamic mechanical allodynia. All parameters were measured in the maximal pain area on the affected side as well as over the corresponding area on the unaffected side. Symptom severity, functional deficits, psychological parameters, quality of life and sleep disturbance were also recorded.
Fifty-seven percent of patients with NSNAP had positive neurodynamic tests despite normal bedside neurological integrity tests and nerve conduction parameters. Clinical profiles did not differ between patient groups. Somatosensory profiling revealed a more pronounced loss of function phenotype in ULNTPOS patients compared to healthy controls. Hyperalgesia (cold, heat and pressure pain) was present bilaterally in both NSNAP group. The ULNTNEG subgroup represented an intermediate phenotype between ULNTPOS patients and healthy controls in both thermal and pressure pain thresholds as well as mechanical detection thresholds.
In conclusion, heightened nerve mechanosensitivity was present in over half of patients with NSNAP. Our data suggest that NSNAP presents as a spectrum with some patients showing signs suggestive of a minor nerve dysfunction.
[1] Elvey RL. Physical evaluation of the peripheral nervous system in disorders of pain and dysfunction. J Hand Ther 1997;10:122-129.
[2] van der Heide B, Bourgoin C, Eils G, Garnevall B, Blackmore M. Test-retest reliability and face validity of a modified neural tissue provocation test in patients with cervicobrachial pain syndrome. J Man Manip Ther 2006;14:30-36.
Abstract
Background
The clinical presentation of neck-arm pain is heterogeneous with varying underlying pain types (nociceptive/neuropathic/mixed) and pain mechanisms (peripheral/central sensitization). A mechanism-based clinical framework for spinally referred pain has been proposed, which classifies into (1) somatic pain, (2) neural mechanosensitivity, (3) radicular pain, (4) radiculopathy and mixed pain presentations. This study aims to (i) investigate the application of the clinical framework in patients with neck-arm pain, (ii) determine their somatosensory, clinical and psychosocial profile and (iii) observe their clinical course over time.
Method
We describe a study protocol. Patients with unilateral neck-arm pain (n = 180) will undergo a clinical examination, after which they will be classified into subgroups according to the proposed clinical framework. Standardized quantitative sensory testing (QST) measurements will be taken in their main pain area and contralateral side. Participants will have to complete questionnaires to assess function (Neck Disability Index), psychosocial factors (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Depression, anxiety and stress scale), neuropathic pain (Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions, PainDETECT Questionnaire) and central sensitization features (Central Sensitization Inventory). Follow-ups at three, six and 12 months include the baseline questionnaires. The differences of QST data and questionnaire outcomes between and within groups will be analyzed using (M)AN(C)OVA and/or regression models. Repeated measurement analysis of variance or a linear mixed model will be used to calculate the differences between three, six, and 12 months outcomes. Multiple regression models will be used to analyze potential predictors for the clinical course.
Conclusion
The rationale for this study is to assess the usability and utility of the proposed clinical framework as well as to identify possible differing somatosensory and psychosocial phenotypes between the subgroups. This could increase our knowledge of the underlying pain mechanisms. The longitudinal analysis may help to assess possible predictors for pain persistency.
Comparison of quantitative sensory testing profles between people living in Germany and Australia
(2021)
Currently, the treatment of musicians is an interprofessional approach. Playing-related health complaints may impact the performance of a musician. In Germany, a medical consulting hour for musicians exists, but those for athletes in sports medicine are not so common. The diagnosing and treatment procedure within the physiotherapy consultation for musicians follows a specific concept-b and requires knowledge of instruments and musician-specific complaints. Based on the consulting hour in a clinic in Osnabrueck, 614 case reports were part of this sample, of which 558 data sets were complete. The focus of the analysis is the instrument and the primary complaint. Also, the type of therapy is characterized, and the amount is calculated. Primary complaints of musicians, in general, are found most frequently in the spine and upper extremity. Musician complaints are different between instruments. Instrumentalists have a significantly higher chance to suffer from a primary complaint in the area of the upper extremity. Furthermore, the groups without an instrument (e.g., singing or dancing) are developing complaints in the anatomical area which they primarily use. Therefore, these types of therapy were used: physiotherapy, manual therapy, and osteopathy with an average of 5.9 treatment units. This study underpinned the importance of musician-specific physiotherapy as a profession to treat musicians. Also, an interdisciplinary approach is necessary to treat all aspects of complaints.
Rationale: Three-dimensional (3D) motion analysis has proved helpful in the diagnosis of different musculoskeletal syndromes and identifying injurious movement patterns in high string players. Furthermore, an optoelectronic 3D motion capture system allows an accurate and objective assessment of upper body posture and motion during violin and viola performance. However, no reference upper body model of high string players has been proposed as yet. Moreover, a more physiological shoulder model that separates the joints of the shoulder complex has not been reported. Especially in view of given the role of the scapula in the normal movement of the humerus, it cannot be disregarded when evaluating musculoskeletal strain in the shoulder.
The International Society of Biomechanics recommends definitions of joint coordinate systems for the report of upper body joint motion using anatomical landmarks as reference for the placement of surface markers. Using markers on the skin for some of the proposed locations is, however, inappropriate when an instrument is being played. There are skin movement artifacts, e. g. caused by the movement of the scapula underneath the skin, whereas some markers interfere with the instrument on the shoulder or might be occluded by the bowing arm in motion.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop a marker-based method for quantifying 3D upper body kinematics of high string players and to demonstrate its clinical feasibility in violin and viola performance. The method is intended to provide an objective evaluation of high string players’ motor strategies, especially in the shoulder complex, while minimizing skin movement artifacts, marker occlusions and limitations in instrument placement.
Methods: A custom marker set was developed consisting of thirty-one single markers to define the anatomical coordinate systems of sixteen upper body segments including the pelvis, thorax, spine and head, as well as both scapulae, upper arms, forearms and hands. Twenty-one of these markers as well as two pre-built and four custom-made rigid marker clusters were used for tracking the segment motions.
Twelve professional violinists without history of musculoskeletal or neurological problems were recruited for assessing the clinical feasibility of the method. They were asked to perform a single sequence of two consecutive musical notes on each of two adjacent strings (G- and D-string) in real time, played at 50 bpm with tempo audibly regulated by a metronome, and using a standardized violin and bow. The participants played up- and down-bow alternately using the whole length of the bow.
A custom biomechanical model was applied to the motion capture data and the rotation angles of fifteen joints were calculated. The location of each glenohumeral joint rotation center was computed by upper arm movements with respect to the scapula based on a functional method. For a description of the motion patterns, minimum, maximum and range of angular motion were averaged across participants for each string and rotation. Inter-subject variability was assessed by calculating the standard deviation (SD) at each sample of the angle-time series between participants for each rotation and for both strings. Then SD was averaged over sequences for each rotation and string. For comparing mean rotation angles between strings over time, random effect models were used.
Results: The highest range of motion was observed in the right elbow flexion and right wrist flexion/extension. Also, high ranges of motion (> 10°) were found in all right glenohumeral rotations and right wrist deviation and pronation/supination. In conclusion, lumbar and thoracic spine, thorax, neck, and left upper limb were quite static, while large motion occurred in the right upper limb during up and down bowing.
Most rotation angles showed a reasonable inter-subject variability except for left and right glenohumeral plane of elevation as well as left glenohumeral internal/external rotation, and left and right wrist pronation/supination (> 10°).
Significant differences in the rotation angles between G- and D-string bowing were detected especially in the left wrist and right shoulder joints.
Conclusions: This is the first study that used quantitative 3D analysis to explore the upper body kinematics of high string players during performance, providing a detailed view of the motor control in the shoulder as well as in the lumbar and thoracic spine. The biggest advantage over previously published methods is the more physiological shoulder and spine models while providing a simple application.
The method was found to give consistent motion patterns across participants and to be sensitive to differences between adjacent strings. Although the method appears to be valid, more rigorous validation is necessary. Since there is no gold standard with which we could compare results, we were only able to assess the clinical feasibility. We believe that our method represents a good compromise between accuracy and practicability for clinical application.
Due to the inclusion of multi-segmented shoulder and spine models, it will improve understanding of the motor strategies adopted by high string players and may contribute to injury prevention, diagnosis and treatment.