School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Center for Brain and Mental Health Research, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia; Recover Injury Research Centre, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Recovery Following Road Traffic Injuries, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.
School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Center for Brain and Mental Health Research, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Braz J Phys Ther. 2020 Jan-Feb;24(1):69-78. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.10.013. Epub 2018 Nov 11.
Sensorimotor control is commonly reported in neck pain research and rapidly gaining interest in clinical practice. Joint position error (conventional and torsion), postural balance, subjective visual vertical, head tilt response, The Fly®, smooth pursuit neck torsion and head steadiness are tests that have been reported to assess cervical sensorimotor control. However, it is unknown whether clinicians could use one test, or a test battery, to appropriately assess cervical sensorimotor control and improve efficiency. Our main research question is: Do seven cervical sensorimotor control tests measure unique or similar characteristics of sensorimotor control in individuals with chronic idiopathic neck pain?
Principle components factor analysis. Data from seven cervical sensorimotor control tests of 50 participants with chronic idiopathic neck pain were included. Individual factors, potentially related to sensorimotor control, were determined by Eigen values >1.00 and inspection of a loading plot. Items with loadings ≥0.40 were considered satisfactory for inclusion in a factor.
All cervical sensorimotor control tests were found to measure unique skills. Four factors were isolated with two, postural balance and head steadiness, accounting for most of the variance across tests. The remaining two factors, continuous movement accuracy and perceived verticality, contributed less to the observed variance.
Postural balance and head steadiness were the major underlying factors explaining cervical sensorimotor control in the current sample. However, our results imply that all seven tests are independent and measure different skills. It is not possible to recommend a test battery for clinical practice, as all tests measure unique skills which appear to be independent of each other.
感觉运动控制在颈部疼痛研究中经常被报道，并在临床实践中迅速受到关注。关节位置误差（常规和扭转）、姿势平衡、主观视觉垂直、头部倾斜反应、The Fly®、平滑追踪颈部扭转和头部稳定性是用于评估颈椎感觉运动控制的测试。然而，尚不清楚临床医生是否可以使用一项测试或一组测试来适当评估颈椎感觉运动控制并提高效率。我们的主要研究问题是：七种颈椎感觉运动控制测试是否测量慢性特发性颈痛患者感觉运动控制的独特或相似特征？
主成分因子分析。纳入了 50 名慢性特发性颈痛患者的七种颈椎感觉运动控制测试的数据。通过特征值>1.00 和载荷图检查确定与感觉运动控制相关的个体因素。具有载荷≥0.40 的项目被认为可以满意地包含在一个因素中。
所有颈椎感觉运动控制测试均被发现测量独特的技能。分离出四个因素，其中两个是姿势平衡和头部稳定性，它们占测试间大部分变异。其余两个因素，连续运动准确性和感知垂直性，对观察到的变异贡献较小。
姿势平衡和头部稳定性是当前样本中解释颈椎感觉运动控制的主要潜在因素。然而，我们的结果表明，所有七种测试都是独立的，测量不同的技能。不可能推荐一种用于临床实践的测试组合，因为所有测试都测量独特的技能，这些技能似乎彼此独立。
