Larsen Lars Henrik, Hirata Rogerio Pessoto, Graven-Nielsen Thomas
Department of Health Science and Technology, Center for Neuroplasticity and Pain (CNAP), SMI, Faculty of Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark; Department of Physiotherapy, University College North Denmark, Aalborg, Denmark.
Department of Health Science and Technology, Center for Neuroplasticity and Pain (CNAP), SMI, Faculty of Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
J Pain. 2016 Feb;17(2):223-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.10.012. Epub 2015 Nov 5.
Low back pain changes trunk muscle activity after external perturbations but the relationship between pain intensities and distributions and their effect on trunk muscle activity remains unclear. The effects of unilateral and bilateral experimental low back pain on trunk muscle activity were compared during unpredictable multidirectional surface perturbations in 19 healthy participants. Pain intensity and distribution were assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and pain drawings. Root mean square (RMS) of the electromyographic (EMG) signals from 6 trunk muscles bilaterally after each perturbation was extracted and averaged across perturbations. The difference (ΔRMS-EMG) and absolute difference (absolute ΔRMS-EMG) RMS from baseline conditions were extracted for each muscle during pain conditions and averaged bilaterally for back and abdominal muscle groups. Bilateral compared with unilateral pain induced higher VAS scores (P < .005) and larger pain areas (P < .001). Significant correlation was present between VAS scores and muscle activity during unilateral (P < .001) and bilateral pain (P < .001). Compared with control injections ΔRMS-EMG increased in the back (P < .03) and abdominal (P < .05) muscles during bilateral and decreased in the back (P < .01) and abdominal (P < .01) muscles during unilateral pain. Bilateral pain caused greater absolute ΔRMS-EMG changes in the back (P < .01) and abdominal (P < .01) muscle groups than unilateral pain.
This study provided novel observations of differential trunk muscle activity in response to perturbations dependent on pain intensity and/or pain distribution. Because of complex and variable changes the relevance of clinical examination of muscle activity during postural tasks is challenged.
下背痛会在外部扰动后改变躯干肌肉活动,但疼痛强度和分布与其对躯干肌肉活动的影响之间的关系仍不清楚。在19名健康参与者进行不可预测的多方向表面扰动期间,比较了单侧和双侧实验性下背痛对躯干肌肉活动的影响。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和疼痛图评估疼痛强度和分布。每次扰动后,从双侧6块躯干肌肉的肌电图(EMG)信号中提取均方根(RMS),并对扰动进行平均。在疼痛状态下,提取每块肌肉相对于基线条件的差异(ΔRMS-EMG)和绝对差异(绝对ΔRMS-EMG)RMS,并对背部和腹部肌肉组进行双侧平均。与单侧疼痛相比,双侧疼痛导致更高的VAS评分(P <.005)和更大的疼痛区域(P <.001)。在单侧疼痛(P <.001)和双侧疼痛(P <.001)期间,VAS评分与肌肉活动之间存在显著相关性。与对照注射相比,双侧疼痛期间背部(P <.03)和腹部(P <.05)肌肉的ΔRMS-EMG增加,而单侧疼痛期间背部(P <.01)和腹部(P <.01)肌肉的ΔRMS-EMG减少。与单侧疼痛相比,双侧疼痛在背部(P <.01)和腹部(P <.01)肌肉组中引起更大的绝对ΔRMS-EMG变化。
本研究提供了关于根据疼痛强度和/或疼痛分布对扰动做出反应时躯干肌肉活动差异的新观察结果。由于变化复杂且多样,姿势任务期间肌肉活动临床检查的相关性受到挑战。