The comparison of trunk muscles EMG activation between subjects with and without chronic low back pain during flexion-extension and lateral bending tasks.

The purpose of the study was to compare the electromyographic (EMG) activity of the trunk muscles between normal subjects and chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients during standardized trunk movements. Thirty-three male subjects (18 normals, 15 suffering from non specific CLBP) aged between 35 and 45 yr participated. A biomechanical analysis involving the recording of EMG signals from 12 trunk muscles, the kinematics of trunk segments and the computation of L5/S1 moments was performed. The subjects performed flexion-extension and lateral bending (left and right) tasks (three complete cycles) with and without a 12 kg load. Between group comparisons were performed on the full cycle average pattern of all biomechanical variables for each task. The reliability of EMG variables was evaluated for 10 subjects (5 normals and 5 CLBP) who performed the tasks on three different days. The reliability of EMG amplitude values was generally excellent for agonist muscles but poor to moderate for antagonists. The EMG amplitude analysis revealed significant differences between groups for some muscles (left lumbar and thoracic erector spinae). The abnormal (asymmetric) EMG patterns detected among CLBP patients were not explained by postural asymmetries.     

Surface electromyography assessment of back muscle intrinsic properties.

The purpose of this study was to assess (1) the reliability and (2) the sensitivity to low back pain status and gender of different EMG indices developed for the assessment of back muscle weakness, muscle fiber composition and fatigability. Healthy subjects (men and women) and chronic low back pain patients (men only) performed, in a static dynamometer, maximal and submaximal static trunk extension tasks (short and long duration) to assess weakness, fiber composition and fatigue. Surface EMG signals were recorded from four (bilateral) pairs of back muscles and three pairs of abdominal muscles. To assess reliability of the different EMG parameters, 40 male volunteers (20 controls and 20 chronic low back pain patients) were assessed on three occasions. Reliable EMG indices were achieved for both healthy and chronic low back pain subjects when specific measurement strategies were applied. The EMG parameters used to quantify weakness and fiber composition were insensitive to low back status and gender. The EMG fatigue parameters did not detect differences between genders but unexpectedly, healthy men showed higher fatigability than back pain patients. This result was attributed to the smaller absolute load that was attributed to the patients, a load that was defined relative to their maximal strength, a problematic measure with this population. An attempt was made to predict maximal back strength from anthropometric measurements but this prediction was prone to errors. The main difficulties and some potential solutions related to the assessment of back muscle intrinsic properties were discussed.     

Reliability of EMG measurements for trunk muscles during maximal and sub-maximal voluntary isometric contractions in healthy controls and CLBP patients.

The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability of trunk muscle activity measured by means of surface electromyography (EMG) during maximal and sub-maximal voluntary isometric contractions (MVC/sub-MVC) over repeated trials within-day and between-days in healthy controls and patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Eleven volunteers (six controls and five CLBP patients) were assessed twice with a 1-week interval. Surface EMG signals were recorded bilaterally from six trunk muscles. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and standard error of measurement as a percentage of the grand mean (%SEM) were calculated. MVC and sub-MVC showed excellent within-day reliability in both healthy controls and CLBP patients (ICC mean 0.91; range 0.75-0.98; %SEM mean 4%; range 1-12%). Sub-MVC for both groups between-days showed excellent reliability (ICC mean 0.88; range 0.78-0.97; %SEM mean 7%; range 3-11%). The between-days MVC for both groups showed trends towards lower levels of reliability (ICC mean 0.70; range 0.19-0.99; %SEM mean 17%; range 4-36%) when compared to sub-MVC. Findings of the study provide evidence that sub-MVC are preferable for amplitude normalisation when assessing EMG signals of trunk muscles between-days.     

Evaluation of measurement strategies to increase the reliability of EMG indices to assess back muscle fatigue and recovery.

The purpose of this study was to assess different measurement strategies to increase the reliability of different electromyographic (EMG) indices developed for the assessment of back muscle impairments. Forty male volunteers (20 controls and 20 chronic low back pain patients) were assessed on three sessions at least 2 days apart within 2 weeks. Surface EMG signals were recorded from four pairs (bilaterally) of back muscles (multifidus at the L5 level, iliocostalis lumborum at L3, and longissimus at L1 and T10) while the subjects performed, in a static dynamometer, two static trunk extension tasks at 75% of the maximal voluntary contraction separated by a 60 s rest period: (1) a 30 s fatigue task and (2) a 5 s recovery task. Different EMG indices (based on individual muscles or averaged across bilateral homologous muscles or across all muscles) were computed to evaluate muscular fatigue and recovery. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) in percentage of the grand mean were calculated for each EMG variable. Reliable EMG indices are achieved for both healthy and chronic low back pain subjects when (1) electrodes are positioned on medial back muscles (multifidus at the L5 level and longissimus at L1) and (2) measures are averaged across bilateral muscles and/or across two fatigue tests performed within a session. The most reliable EMG indices were the bilateral average of medial back muscles (ICC range: 0.68-0.91; SEM range: 5-35%) and the average of all back muscles (ICC range: 0.77-0.91; SEM range: 5-30%). The averaging of measures across two fatigue tests is predicted to increase the reliability by about 13%. With regards to EMG indices of fatigue, the identification of the most fatigable muscle also lead to satisfactory results (ICC range: 0.74-0.79; SEM range: 21-26%). The assessment of back muscle impairments through EMG analysis necessitates the use of multiple electrodes to achieve reliable results.     

Activity of deep abdominal muscles increases during submaximal flexion and extension efforts but antagonist co-contraction remains unchanged

Lumbo-pelvic stability relies, amongst other factors, on co-contraction of the lumbo-pelvic muscles. However, during submaximal trunk flexion and extension efforts, co-contraction of antagonist muscles is limited. It was predicted that activity of the deeper lumbo-pelvic muscles that are often excluded from analysis (transversus abdominis (TrA) and the deep fascicles of multifidus (DM)), would increase with load in each direction. In eleven healthy subjects, electromyographic activity (EMG) was recorded from eight trunk muscles using surface and fine-wire electrodes. Subjects performed isometric flexion and extension efforts to submaximal loads of 50, 100, 150 and 200 N and a maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). Loading tasks were then repeated in trials in which subjects knew that the load would release at an unpredictable time. Compared to the starting position, EMG of all muscles, except DM, increased during MVC efforts in both directions. During the flexion and extension submaximal tasks, there was no increased co-contraction of antagonist muscles. However, TrA EMG increased in both directions. In the unpredictable trials, EMG of all lumbo-pelvic muscles except TrA was decreased. These findings provide further support for a contribution of TrA to lumbo-pelvic stability. In submaximal tasks, TrA activation may enhance stability as a strategy to improve trunk stiffness without requiring a concurrent increase in activity of the larger torque producing trunk muscles.     

Lumbar and abdominal muscle activity during walking in subjects with chronic low back pain: Support of the “guarding” hypothesis?

It has been hypothesized that changes in trunk muscle activity in chronic low back pain (CLBP) reflect an underlying “guarding” mechanism, which will manifest itself as increased superficial abdominal – and lumbar muscle activity. During a functional task like walking, it may be further provoked at higher walking velocities. The purpose of this cross sectional study was to investigate whether subjects with CLBP show increased co-activation of superficial abdominal – and lumbar muscles during walking on a treadmill, when compared to asymptomatic controls. Sixty-three subjects with CLBP and 33 asymptomatic controls walked on a treadmill at different velocities. Surface electromyography data of the erector spinae, rectus abdominis and obliquus abdominis externus muscles were obtained and averaged per stride. Results show that, compared to asymptomatic controls, subjects with CLBP have increased muscle activity of the erector spinae and rectus abdominis, but not of the obliquus abdominis externus. These differences in trunk muscle activity between groups do not increase with higher walking velocities. In conclusion, the observed increased trunk muscle activity in subjects with CLBP during walking supports the guarding hypothesis.     

Influence of chronic low back pain and fear of movement on the activation of the transversely oriented abdominal muscles during forward bending

Introduction: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) and fear of movement (kinesiophobia) are associated with an overactivation of paravertebral muscles during forward bending. This impairs spine motor control and contributes to pain perpetuation. However, the abdominal muscles activation is engaged too in spine stabilization but its modulation with kinesiophobia remains unknown. Our study tested whether CLBP and kinesiophobia affected the activation pattern of abdominal muscles during trunk flexion/extension. Methods: Surface electromyographical recordings of the internal oblique/transversus abdominis (IO/TrA) and external oblique (EO) muscles were analyzed in 12 people with CLBP and 13 pain-free subjects during low-velocity forward bending back and forth from erected posture. Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia was also administrated. Results: IO/TrA activation, but not EO, was modulated across the phases of movement in both groups, i.e. maximal at onset of flexion and end of extension, and minimal at full flexion. In CLBP group only, IO/TrA activation was increased near to full trunk flexion and in correlation with kinesiophobia. Conclusions: The phase-dependence of IO/TrA activation during trunk flexion/extension in standing may have a role in spine motor control. The influence of kinesiophobia in CLBP should be further investigated as an important target in CLBP management.     

A comparison of a maximum exertion method and a model-based, sub-maximum exertion method for normalizing trunk EMG

The problem with normalizing EMG data from patients with painful symptoms (e.g., low back pain) is that such patients may be unwilling or unable to perform maximum exertions. Furthermore, the normalization to a reference signal, obtained from a maximal or sub-maximal task, tends to mask differences that might exist as a result of pathology. Therefore, we presented a novel method (GAIN method) for normalizing trunk EMG data that overcomes both problems. The GAIN method does not require maximal exertions (MVC) and tends to preserve distinct features in the muscle recruitment patterns for various tasks. Ten healthy subjects performed various isometric trunk exertions, while EMG data from 10 muscles were recorded and later normalized using the GAIN and MVC methods. The MVC method resulted in smaller variation between subjects when tasks were executed at the three relative force levels (10%, 20%, and 30% MVC), while the GAIN method resulted in smaller variation between subjects when the tasks were executed at the three absolute force levels (50 N, 100 N, and 145 N). This outcome implies that the MVC method provides a relative measure of muscle effort, while the GAIN-normalized data gives an estimate of the absolute muscle force. Therefore, the GAIN-normalized data tends to preserve the differences between subjects in the way they recruit their muscles to execute various tasks, while the MVC-normalized data will tend to suppress such differences. The appropriate choice of the EMG normalization method will depend on the specific question that an experimenter is attempting to answer.     

Immediate effects of co-contraction training on motor control of the trunk muscles in people with recurrent low back pain

Although deficits in the activation of abdominal muscles are present in people with low back pain (LBP), this can be modified with motor training. Training of deep abdominal muscles in isolation from the other trunk muscles, as an initial phase of training, has been shown to improve the timing of activation of the trained muscles, and reduce symptoms and recurrence of LBP. The aim of this study was to determine if training of the trunk muscles in a non-isolated manner can restore motor control of these muscles in people with LBP. Ten subjects with non-specific LBP performed a single session of training that involved three tasks: “abdominal curl up”, “side bridge” and “birdog”. Electromyographic activity (EMG) of trunk and deltoid muscles was recorded with fine-wire and surface electrodes during rapid arm movements and walking, before and immediately following the intervention. Onset of trunk muscle EMG relative to that of the prime mover (deltoid) during arm movements and the mean, standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation of abdominal muscle EMG during walking were calculated. There was no significant change in the times of onset of trunk muscle EMG during arm movements nor was there any change in the variability of EMG of the abdominal muscles during walking. However, the mean amplitude and SD of abdominal EMG was reduced during walking after training. The results of this study suggest that unlike isolated voluntary training, co-contraction training of the trunk muscles does not restore the motor control of the deep abdominal muscles in people with LBP after a single session of training.     

Evidence for a role of antagonistic cocontraction in controlling trunk stiffness during lifting

Activity of the abdominal muscles during symmetric lifting has been a consistent finding in many studies. It has been hypothesized that this antagonistic coactivation increases trunk stiffness to provide stability to the spine. To test this, we investigated whether abdominal activity in lifting is increased in response to destabilizing conditions.

Ten healthy male subjects lifted 35 l containers containing 15 l of water (unstable condition), or ice (stable condition). 3D-kinematics, ground reaction forces, and EMG of selected trunk muscles were recorded. Euler angles of the thorax relative to the pelvis were determined. Inverse dynamics was used to calculate moments about L5S1. Averaged normalized abdominal EMG activity was calculated to express coactivation and an EMG-driven trunk muscle model was used to estimate the flexor moment produced by these muscles and to estimate the L5S1 compression force.

Abdominal coactivation was significantly higher when lifting the unstable load. This coincided with significant increases in estimated moments produced by the antagonist muscles and in estimated compression forces on the L5S1 disc, except at the instant of the peak moment about L5S1. The lifting style was not affected by load instability as evidenced by the absence of effects on moments about L5S1 and angles of the thorax relative to the pelvis. The data support the interpretation of abdominal cocontraction during lifting as subserving spinal stability. An alternative function of the increased trunk stiffness due to cocontraction might be to achieve more precise control over the trajectory of lifted weight in order to avoid sloshing of the water mass in the box and the consequent perturbations.     

Trunk response to sudden forward perturbations – Effects of preload and sudden load magnitudes,posture and abdominal antagonistic activation

Unexpected loading of the spine is a risk factor for low back pain. The trunk neuromuscular and kinematics responses are likely influenced by the perturbation itself as well as initial trunk conditions. The effect of four parameters (preload, sudden load, initial trunk flexed posture, initial abdominal antagonistic activity) on trunk kinematics and back muscles reflex response were evaluated. Twelve asymptomatic subjects participated in sudden forward perturbation tests under six distinct conditions. Preload did not change the reflexive response of back muscles and the trunk displacement; while peak trunk velocity and acceleration as well as the relative load peak decreased. Sudden load increased reflex response of muscles, trunk kinematics and loading variables. When the trunk was initially flexed, back muscles latency was delayed, trunk velocity and acceleration increased; however, reflex amplitude and relative trunk displacement remained unchanged. Abdominal antagonistic preactivation increased reflexive response of muscles but kinematics variables were not affected. Preload, initial flexed posture and abdominal muscles preactivation increased back muscles preactivity. Both velocity and acceleration peaks of the trunk movement decreased with preload despite greater total load. In contrast, they increased in the initial flexed posture and to some extent when abdominal muscles were preactivated demonstrating the distinct effects of pre-perturbation variables on trunk kinematics and risk of injury.     

Criterion validity and between-day reliability of an inertial-sensor-based trunk postural stability test during unstable sitting

IntroductionAdequate neuromuscular control of the lumbar spine is required to prevent lumbar injuries. A trunk postural stability test has been proposed earlier, using a chair wobbling on a central pivot and four springs with adjustable positions to modulate task difficulty. An inertial sensor is fixed on the chair to measure postural sway. The aim of this study is to assess the criterion validity and between-day reliability of the calibration and testing components.MethodsThirty six subjects (with and without low back pain) followed a calibration procedure, four practice trials and three 60-s trials on 2 days. The criterion validity of the inertial sensor was tested against an optoelectronic system and a force platform. The reliability of 38 body sway measures obtained from the inertial sensor angular measures was estimated.ResultsThe inertial sensor led to valid estimates of postural sway. The reliability of the calibration procedure was moderate. Practically no learning effect was detected except for a few body sway measures in patients with CLBP. Three 60-s trials provided acceptable reliability for approximately half of the body sway measures, although this is more difficult to achieve in patients with CLBP.DiscussionThe use of an easy to use inertial sensor led to valid measures of postural sway. A number of body sway measures were identified as reliable tools for individual follow-ups but inter-subject comparisons were anticipated as more difficult when patients with CLBP are involved.     

The validity and reliability of surface EMG to assess the neuromuscular response of the abdominal muscles to rapid limb movement.

The transversus abdominus muscle (TrA) has been demonstrated to be active prior to rapid movements of the upper and lower limbs. This activity is termed feed forward motivation. The lack of feed-forward activation for TrA has been demonstrated in subjects with low back pain. The measures used for investigation of TrA function have been fine-wire needle EMG. This limits the practical application of TrA study due to the cost and level of specialisation required for this technique. The objective of the current study was to investigate the validity and reliability of using a surface EMG site to replicate the findings for the feed-forward activation of TrA prior to rapid limb movement. A population of healthy, young males (n = 20) were studied and it was found that four of the subjects did not meet feed-forward criteria. These results were shown to be highly reliable after a 2-week period for the TrA/IO site only. The validity of the signal was further investigated using several functional tasks to specifically target muscles of the abdominal region. Using a cross-correlation analysis to evaluate crosstalk from adjacent muscles, it was concluded that the signal representing TrA/IO accurately demonstrates the functional activity of the muscle. This study has demonstrated a viable surface EMG method to evaluate the feed-forward activation of TrA/IO prior to rapid limb movement. This may lead to opportunities for the clinical application of this method. It was also a finding of this study that four asymptomatic subjects did not pre-activate, therefore providing a rationale for future prospective investigations on whether the lack of TrA/IO feed-forward activation is a cause or an effect of low back pain.     

Alterations in trunk bending stiffness following changes in stability and equilibrium demands of a load holding task

The contribution of the trunk neuromuscular system (TNS) to spine stability has been shown in earlier studies by characterizing changes in antagonistic activity of trunk muscles following alterations in stability demands of a task. Whether and/or how much such changes in the response of TNS to alteration in stability demand of the task alter spinal stiffness remains unclear. To address this research gap, a repeated measure study was conducted on twenty gender-balanced asymptomatic individuals to evaluate changes in trunk bending stiffness throughout the lumbar spine’s range of flexion following alterations in both stability and equilibrium demands of a load holding task. Trunk bending stiffness was determined using trunk stiffness tests in upright posture on a rigid metal frame under different equilibrium and stability demands on the lower back. Increasing the stability demand by increasing the height of lifted load ∼30 cm only increased trunk bending stiffness (∼39%) over the lower range of lumbar flexion and under the low equilibrium demand condition. Similarly, increasing the equilibrium demand of the task by increasing the weight of lifted load by 3.5 kg only increased trunk bending stiffness (55%) over the low range of lumbar flexion and under the low stability demand condition. Our results suggest a non-linear relationship between changes in stability and equilibrium demands of a task and the contribution of TNS to trunk bending stiffness. Specifically, alterations in TNS response to changes in stability and equilibrium demand of a given task will increase stiffness of the trunk only if the background stiffness is low.     

Reliability of EMG spectral parameters in repeated measurements of back muscle fatigue.

The change in median frequency of the power spectrum of the electromyographic (EMG) signal may be used as a measure of muscle fatigue. The reliability of the median frequency parameters was investigated for EMG-recording sites at L1 and L5 right and left on the erector spinae. The reliability of subjective fatigue ratings of the back muscles (Borg CR-10 scale) and of maximal trunk extension torque (MVC) was also investigated. Eleven subjects with healthy backs performed a 45-s isometric trunk extension at 80% of MVC twice a day, on three different days. Two-factor analysis of variance was made to obtain the different variances from which the standard error of measurement (SEM) and the intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. The SEM within-day was somewhat lower than that between-days. Both were about the same at all four electrode sites. The 95% confidence interval for the studied variables was for the initial median frequency +/- 10 Hz, for the slope +/- 0.4-0.5%/s, for the MVC +/- 36 Nm and for the Borg ratings +/- 1.6. We conclude that, with the presently used method, changes or differences within these limits should be regarded as normal variability. The slope may be of limited value because of its large variability. Whether the low intraclass correlation coefficient for the EMG parameters in the presently studied test group implies a low potential in discriminating subjects with back pain can not be decisively concluded.     

Directional preference of activation of abdominal and paraspinal muscles during position-control tasks in sitting

Controversy exists in the literature regarding antagonist activity of trunk muscles during different types of trunk loading, and the direction-specificity of activation of trunk muscles, particularly the deeper trunk muscles. This study aimed to systematically compare activation of a range of trunk muscles between directions of statically applied loads, and to consider the impact of breathing in this activation. In a semi-seated position, 13 healthy male participants resisted moderate inertial loads applied to the trunk in eight different directions. Intramuscular electromyography was recorded from eight abdominal and back muscles on the right side during 1 s prior to peak inspiration/expiration. All muscles demonstrated a directional preference of activation. No muscle displayed antagonistic activation during loading conditions of an intensity that exceded that recorded in upright sitting without a load. During these moderate intensity sustained efforts, trunk muscle activation varied little between respiratory phases. Antagonistic muscle activation of amplitude equivalent to the activation recorded in upright sitting without load is sufficient to maintain control of the spine during predictable and sustained low load tasks.     

Trunk muscle responses to suddenly applied loads: Do individuals who develop discomfort during prolonged standing respond differently?

Individuals with low back pain or injury (LBP/LBI) have been shown to display altered muscle responses to trunk perturbations; however it is unclear whether these observations are a cause or a result of the LBP/LBI. In this study, a 6.78 kg load was suddenly applied to the hands to perturb the trunk prior to and following a 2-h standing period, during which trunk and hip electromyography (EMG) and centre of pressure (CoP) at the feet were recorded. Seven of the 13 participants developed substantial low back discomfort (LBDiscomfort) during the standing period. These individuals, both pre- and post-standing, showed a greater average number of responsive extensor muscles (3.8 compared to 3.1 in those who did not develop discomfort) and a greater occurrence of extensor muscle response (95–100% of trials) as compared to those who did not develop LBDiscomfort (73–86% of trials). Also, after discomfort developed, these individuals displayed an increased response in their abdominal muscles. This overall increase in trunk musculature activity could either be detrimental by potentially increasing spinal loading leading to LBDiscomfort, or beneficial in that this increased musculature responsiveness may reduce one’s likelihood of developing a future LBI through a pathway of increased spine stability. In either case, these responses indicate motor control characteristics that can distinguish the likelihood of an individual developing LBDiscomfort during common tasks such as prolonged standing.     

Comparing the local dynamic stability of trunk movements between varsity athletes with and without non-specific low back pain

The local dynamic stability of trunk movements, quantified using the maximum Lyapunov exponent (λ_max), can provide important information on the neuromuscular control of spine stability during movement tasks. Although previous research has displayed the promise of this technique, all studies were completed with healthy participants. Therefore the goal of this study was to compare the dynamic stability of spine kinematics and trunk muscle activations, as well as antagonistic muscle co-contraction, between athletes with and without low back pain (LBP). Twenty interuniversity varsity athletes (10 LBP, 10 healthy controls) were recruited to participate in the study. Each participant completed a repetitive trunk flexion task at 15 cycles per minute, both symmetrically and asymmetrically, while trunk kinematics and muscular activity (EMG) were monitored. The local dynamic stability of low back EMG was significantly higher (lower λ_max) in healthy individuals (p=0.002), whereas the dynamic stability of kinematics, the dynamic stability of full trunk system EMG, and the amount of antagonistic co-contraction were significantly higher when moving asymmetrically (p<0.05 for all variables). Although non-significant, kinematic and trunk system EMG stability also tended to be impaired in LBP participants, whereas they also tended to co-contract their antagonist muscles more. This study provides evidence that Lyapunov analyses of kinematic and muscle activation data can provide insight into the neuromuscular control of spine stability in back pain participants. Future research will repeat these protocols in patients with higher levels of pain, with hopes of developing a tool to assess impairment and treatment effectiveness in clinical and workplace settings.     

Adaptation to sudden unexpected loading of the low back--the effects of repeated trials

The purpose of this study was to investigate short-term changes in reactions to sudden unexpected loading of the low back. The study utilized a set-up where a horizontal force of 58 N pointing forward suddenly was applied to the upper part of the subject's trunk. EMG activity from the erector spinae muscles and trunk movement data were recorded during 10 trials for 19 subjects. The analysis included EMG reaction time, mean rectified EMG amplitude during the period 50-250 ms after the sudden loading, and time elapsed until stopping of the forward movement of the trunk (stopping time). Reaction time means ranged from 66 to 97 ms (79+/-9 ms), and no difference was found between the trials. Conversely, the mean stopping time for the first trial (468 ms) was significantly higher than for trials 3-10 (359- 371 ms), and the average EMG amplitude during the period 50-250 ms after the sudden loading was lower for the first trial. This study showed that some subjects adapted to sudden unexpected loadings of the low back through a reduction in stopping time and a progression in EMG response during the first few trials. This possible adaptation to repeated trials have been overlooked in previous studies.