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) (remove)
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) (remove)
Zielsetzung
Bis dato konnte keine Studie eine Veränderung der Druckempfindlichkeit der myofaszialen Tender- oder Triggerpunkte (MTrP) bei Patienten mit kraniomandibulärer Dysfunktion (CMD) im extratrigeminalen Versorgungsgebiet nachweisen. Ziel dieser Studie war herauszufinden, ob die Druckempfindlichkeit der MTrP bei CMD-Patienten sowohl im trigeminalen als auch im extratrigeminalen Versorgungsgebiet im Vergleich zu gesunden Kontrollen erhöht ist. Außerdem sollte untersucht werden, inwieweit MTrP als Marker geeignet sind, eine Hyperalgesie bei CMD-Patienten zu diagnostizieren.
Probanden und Methoden
Für die Studie wurden 34 CMD-Patienten und 30 Probanden ohne CMD rekrutiert. In beiden Gruppen wurde die mechanische Schmerzschwelle an trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen MTrP gemessen und verglichen. Zusätzlich wurde mittels ROC-Kurve untersucht, welcher Marker am besten geeignet ist, CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch zu klassifizieren.
Ergebnis
Die Druckempfindlichkeit aller MTrP der trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen Körperregionen war in der CMD-Gruppe signifikant erhöht. Selbst nach Korrektur für multiples Testen blieben die meisten Effekte signifikant. Von den untersuchten MTrP war der M. trapezius am besten geeignet, CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch zu klassifizieren. Bei einer falsch-positiven Rate <5 % wurden ca. 42 % der CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch klassifiziert.
Schlussfolgerung
Die signifikanten Unterschiede der Druckempfindlichkeit der MTrP in trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen Körperregionen lassen auf eine Hyperalgesie bei CMD-Patienten schließen. Diese kann möglicherweise mit dem Marker des M. trapezius diagnostiziert werden. Hierzu sind jedoch weitere Studien notwendig, die u. a. geschlechts- und altersspezifische Referenzwerte ermitteln.
Objective
To identify assessment tools used to evaluate patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) considered to be clinically most useful by a panel of international experts in TMD physical therapy (PT).
Methods
A Delphi survey method administered to a panel of international experts in TMD PT was conducted over three rounds from October 2017 to June 2018. The initial contact was made by email. Participation was voluntary. An e-survey, according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES), was posted using SurveyMonkey for each round. Percentages of responses were analysed for each question from each round of the Delphi survey administrations.
Results
Twenty-three experts (completion rate: 23/25) completed all three rounds of the survey for three clinical test categories: 1) questionnaires, 2) pain screening tools and 3) physical examination tests. The following was the consensus-based decision regarding the identification of the clinically most useful assessments. (1) Four of 9 questionnaires were identified: Jaw Functional Limitation (JFL-8), Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire (MFIQ), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular disorders (TSK/TMD) and the neck disability index (NDI). (2) Three of 8 identified pain screening tests: visual analog scale (VAS), numeric pain rating scale (NRS) and pain during mandibular movements. (3) Eight of 18 identified physical examination tests: physiological temporomandibular joint (TMJ) movements, trigger point (TrP) palpation of the masticatory muscles, TrP palpation away from the masticatory system, accessory movements, articular palpation, noise detection during movement, manual screening of the cervical spine and the Neck Flexor Muscle Endurance Test.
Conclusion
After three rounds in this Delphi survey, the results of the most used assessment tools by TMD PT experts were established. They proved to be founded on test construct, test psychometric properties (reliability/validity) and expert preference for test clusters. A concordance with the screening tools of the diagnostic criteria of TMD consortium was noted. Findings may be used to guide policymaking purposes and future diagnostic research.
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.
AIM: In this prospective longitudinal study, the physical and psychological health status of music students is assessed at the beginning of their university music study and tracked over time. Analysis strategies and interim results from the first-year cohort, including 1-year incidences, monthly prevalences, and predictors of developing musculoskeletal health complaints (MHC), are presented.
METHODS: This prospective longitudinal study is calculated to enlist a total sample of 370 participants, including musicians and non-musicians, over 5 years. Baseline measurements include a self-designed questionnaire, core strength endurance, hypermobility, finger-floor-distance, motor control, mechanosensitivity, health-related quality of life (SF36), and stress and coping inventory (SCI). The occurrence of MHC is based on monthly online questionnaires.
RESULTS: The first-year subcohort enrolled 33 music students and 30 non-music control students. The mean monthly completion rate for the questionnaire was 55.7±8.7%. At baseline, music students showed significantly more stress symptoms, reduced physical function¬ing, and increased bodily pain compared to control students. The 1-year incidence of MHC was 59% for music students and 44% for controls. Risk factors for MHC included being a music student, previous pain, reduced physical functioning, stress symptoms, reduced emotional functioning, and mechanosensitivity. Being a music student, physical functioning, sleep duration, positive thinking, and general mechanosensitivity had a predictive ability of 0.77 (ROC curve) for MHC.
CONCLUSION: A total of 63 students enrolled in the first cohort is in line with the precalculated sample size. This prospective study design enables the measurement of MHC incidence and provides insight into mechanisms in the development of MHC among music students, including the interaction of physical, psychological, and psychosocial factors.