Kinematics Of Cervical Spine Research Articles

Dynamic in vivo 3D atlantooccipital kinematics during multiplanar physiologic motions

Normal biomechanics of the upper cervical spine, particularly at the atlantooccipital joint, remain poorly characterized. The purpose of this study was to determine the intervertebral kinematics of the atlantooccipital joint (occiput-C1) during three-dimensional in vivo physiologic movements. Twenty healthy young adults performed dynamic flexion/extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending while biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second. Motion at occiput-C1 was tracked using a validated volumetric model-based tracking process that matched subject-specific CT-based bone models to the radiographs. The occiput-C1 total range of motion (ROM) and helical axis of motion (HAM) was calculated for each movement. During flexion/extension, the occiput-C1 moved almost exclusively in-plane (ROM: 17.9 ± 6.9°) with high variability in kinematic waveforms (6.3°) compared to the in-plane variability during axial rotation (1.4°) and lateral bending (0.9°) movements. During axial rotation, there was small in-plane motion (ROM: 4.2 ± 2.5°) compared to out-of-plane flexion/extension (ROM: 12.7 ± 5.4°). During lateral bending, motion occurred in-plane (ROM: 9.0 ± 3.1°) and in the plane of flexion/extension (ROM: 7.3 ± 2.7°). The average occiput-C1 axis of rotation intersected the sagittal and coronal planes 7 mm to 18 mm superior to the occipital condyles. The occiput-C1 axis of rotation pointed 60° from the sagittal plane during axial rotation but only 10° from the sagittal plane during head lateral bending. These novel results are foundational for future work on upper cervical spine kinematics.

Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-segment cervical spinal stenosis: a retrospective, propensity score-matched study.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the standard procedure for the treatment of cervical spinal stenosis (CSS), but complications such as adjacent segment degeneration can seriously affect the long-term efficacy. Currently, posterior endoscopic surgery has been increasingly used in the clinical treatment of CSS. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of single-segment CSS patients who underwent full endoscopic laminotomy decompression or ACDF. 138 CSS patients who met the inclusion criteria from June 2018 to August 2020 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into endoscopic and ACDF groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to adjust the imbalanced confounding variables between the groups. Then, perioperative data were recorded and clinical outcomes were compared, including functional scores and imaging data. Functional scores included Visual Analog Scale of Arms (A-VAS) and Neck pain (N-VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and imaging data included Disc Height Index (DHI), Cervical range of motion (ROM), and Ratio of grey scale (RVG). After PSM, 84 patients were included in the study and followed for 24-30months. The endoscopic group was significantly superior to the ACDF group in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and hospital stay (P < 0.001). Postoperative N-VAS, A-VAS, JOA, and NDI were significantly improved in both groups compared with the preoperative period (P < 0.001), and the endoscopic group showed better improvement at 7days postoperatively (P < 0.05). The ROM changes of adjacent segments were significantly larger in the ACDF group at 12months postoperatively and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). The RVG of adjacent segments showed a decreasing trend, and the decrease was more marked in the ACDF group at last follow-up (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates in the endoscopic group and ACDF group were 90.48% and 88.10%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression is demonstrated to be an efficacious alternative technique to traditional ACDF for the treatment of single-segment CSS, with the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, and less impact on cervical spine kinematics and adjacent segmental degeneration.

The move-C cervical artificial disc can restore intact range of motion and 3-D kinematics

BACKGROUND CONTEXTIn contrast to cervical discectomy and fusion, total disc replacement (TDR) aims at preserving the motion at the treated vertebral level. Spinal motion is commonly evaluated with the range of motion (ROM). However, more qualitative information about cervical kinematics before and after TDR is still lacking. PURPOSEThe aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of cervical TDR on ROM, instantaneous centers of rotation (ICR) and three-dimensional helical axes. STUDY DESIGNAn in vitro study with human spine specimens under pure moment loading was conducted to evaluate the kinematics of the intact cervical spine and compare it to cervical TDR. METHODSSix fresh frozen human cervical specimens (C4–5, median age 28 years, range 19–47 years, two female and four male) were biomechanically characterized in the intact state and after implantation of a cervical disc prosthesis (MOVE-C, NGMedical, Germany). To mimic in vivo conditions regarding temperature and humidity, water steam was used to create a warm and humid test environment with 37°C. Each specimen was quasistatically loaded with pure moments up to ±2.5 Nm in flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB) and axial rotation (AR) in a universal spine tester for 3.5 cycles at 1 °/s. For each third cycle of motion the ROM was evaluated and an established method was used to determine the helical axis and COR and to project them into three planar X-rays. Statistical analysis was conducted using a Friedman-test and post hoc correction with Dunn-Bonferroni-tests (p<.05). RESULTSAfter TDR, total ROM was increased in FE from 19.1° to 20.1°, decreased in LB from 14.6° to 12.6° and decreased in AR from 17.7° to 15.5°. No statistical differences between the primary ROM in the intact condition and ROM after TDR were detected. Coupled rotation between LB and AR were also maintained. The position and orientation of the helical axes after cervical TDR was in good agreement with the results of the intact specimens in all three motion directions. The ICR in FE and AR before and after TDR closely matched, while in LB the ICR after TDR were more caudal. The intact in vitro kinematics we found also resembled in vivo results of healthy individuals. CONCLUSIONThe results of this in vitro study highlight the potential of artificial cervical disc implants to replicate the quantity as well as the quality of motion of the intact cervical spine. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCEPhysiological motion preservation was a driving factor in the development of cervical TDR. Our results demonstrate the potential of cervical TDR to replicate in vivo kinematics in all three motion directions.

Assessment of Cervical and Lumbar Kinematics in Simulated Open and Closed Kinetic Chain.

The pelvic girdle and spine vertebral column work as a long chain influenced by pelvic tilt. This study aims to assess the effect of open and closed chain anterior pelvic tilt (APT) or posterior pelvic tilt (PPT) on cervical and lumbar spine kinematics using an in vitro cadaveric spine model. Three human cadaveric spines with intact pelvis were suspended with the skull fixed in a metal frame. Optotrak 3-dimensional motion system captured coordinates of pin markers at 24 different points for real-time tracking of cervical and lumbar regions. Additional geometric parameters were measured to calculate pelvic incidence and pelvic tilt. A force-torque digital gauge applied consistent force to standardize the acetabular or sacral axis' APT and PPT during simulated open- and closed-chain movements, respectively. In closed-chain PPT, significant differences in relative intervertebral decompression were noted between spinal levels C2/C3 (4.85 mm) and C5/C6 (1.26 mm), while compression was noted between L1/L2 (-2.54 mm) and L5/S1 (-11.84 mm) and between L3/L4 (-2.78 mm) and L5/S1 (-11.84 mm) (P < 0.05). Displacement during closed-chain PPT was significantly greater than during open-chain PPT for cervical and lumbar spines. In closed-chain APT, significant differences in relative intervertebral decompression were noted between spinal levels L1/L2 (2.87 mm) and L5/S1 (24.48 mm) and between L3/L4 (2.94 mm) and L5/S1 (24.48 mm) (P < 0.05). Pelvic incidence remained the same as the pelvis tilted anterior and posterior. In PPT, open-chain pelvic tilts did not produce as much cervical and lumbar intervertebral displacement compared with closed-chain pelvic tilts. In contrast, APT saw fewer differences between open- and closed-chain tilting. There was a reciprocal relationship between pelvic tilt and sacral slope, producing a constant pelvic incidence throughout all pelvic tilt angles. The results of this study may help determine how a patient's pelvic tilt is causing pain and using that knowledge to guide rehabilitation of stabilizing muscles. The data produced here may also be helpful in determining which rehabilitation exercises may be more difficult or prone to injury for patients with either excessive anterior or posterior pelvic tilt.

Segmental range of motion after cervical total disc arthroplasty at long-term follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

As an alternative procedure to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, total disc arthroplasty (TDA) facilitates direct neural decompression and disc height restoration while also preserving cervical spine kinematics. To date, few studies have reported long-term functional outcomes after TDA. This paper reports the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis that investigated how segmental range of motion (ROM) at the operative level is maintained with long-term follow-up. PubMed and MEDLINE were queried for all published studies pertaining to cervical TDA. The methodology for screening adhered strictly to the PRISMA guidelines. All English-language prospective studies that reported ROM preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and/or at long-term follow-up of 5 years or more were included. A meta-analysis was performed using Cochran's Q and I2 to test data for statistical heterogeneity, in which case a random-effects model was used. The mean differences (MDs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Of the 12 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 8 reported the long-term outcomes of 944 patients with an average (range) follow-up of 99.86 (60-142) months and were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference between preoperative segmental ROM and segmental ROM at 1-year follow-up (MD 0.91°, 95% CI -1.25° to 3.07°, p = 0.410). After the exclusion of 1 study from the comparison between preoperative and 1-year ROM owing to significant statistical heterogeneity according to the sensitivity analysis, ROM significantly improved at 1 year postoperatively (MD 1.92°, 95% CI 1.04°-2.79°, p < 0.001). However, at longer-term follow-up, the authors again found no difference with preoperative segmental ROM, and no study was excluded on the basis of the results of further sensitivity analysis (MD -0.22°, 95% CI -1.69° to -1.23°, p = 0.760). In contrast, there was a significant decrease in ROM from 1 year postoperatively to final long-term follow-up (MD -0.77°, 95% CI -1.29° to -0.24°, p = 0.004). Segmental ROM was found to initially improve beyond preoperative values for as long as 1 year postoperatively, but then ROM deteriorated back to values consistent with preoperative motion at long-term follow-up. Although additional studies with further longitudinal follow-up are needed, these findings further support the notion that cervical TDA may successfully maintain physiological spinal kinematics over the long term.

P75. Range of motion on flexion and extension at long term followup after cervical total disc arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> As an alternative procedure to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), total disc arthroplasty (TDA) facilitates direct neural decompression and disc height restoration while also preserving cervical spine kinematics. To date, few studies have reported long-term functional outcomes following TDA. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> This study sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating how range of motion (ROM) at the operative level is maintained with long-term followup. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Systematic review and meta-analysis <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> Patients in the literature of prospective studies of 1-level cervical TDA with a minimum of 5 years followup. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Segmental ROM at the preoperative, 1 year postoperative, and final (>5 years) postoperative time points. <h3>METHODS</h3> PubMed and MEDLINE were queried for all published studies pertaining to cervical TDA. The methodology for screening adhered strictly to the PRISMA guidelines. All English language prospective studies reporting ROM preoperatively, one year postoperatively, and/or at long-term follow-up of 5 or more years were included. A meta-analysis was performed using Cochran's Q and I2 to test data for statistical heterogeneity, in which case a random-effects model was used. The mean difference (MD) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. <h3>RESULTS</h3> After an initial search yielding 2,309 results, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria and 8 were included for meta-analysis. Overall, 1,158 patients were enrolled across the 8 studies and 944 (81.52%) were available for long-term followup. Of the patients who followed up, 163 (17.27%) were implanted with PCM, 131 (13.88%) with Mobi-C, 184 (19.49%) with Secure-C, 230 (24.36%) with Prestige LP, 229 (24.26%) with Bryan, and 27 (2.86%) with ProDisc-C prostheses. There was no difference found between operative segment ROM on flexion and extension preoperatively and at 1-year followup (MD = -0.91, CI: -3.07 to 1.25, p = .410). However, after excluding one study identified to contribute significantly to statistical heterogeneity via sensitivity analysis, ROM was found to significantly improve at 1-year postoperatively (MD = 1.92, CI: -2.79 to -1.04, p < .0001). There was no difference between ROM preoperatively and at long-term followup (MD = 0.52, CI: -0.98 to 2.03, p = .500). However, there was a significant decrease in ROM from 1-year postoperatively to final long-term followup (MD = 0.77, CI: 0.24 to 1.29, p = .004). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Operative segment ROM on flexion and extension was found to significantly deteriorate with long-term followup after TDA when compared to the early postoperative period. However, ROM on flexion and extension in the long-term following TDA remained similar to baseline function. While additional studies with further longitudinal follow-up investigating how much are needed, these findings further support the notion that cervical TDA may be successful in maintaining physiological spinal kinematics over the long-term. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

Analysis of control strategies for VIVA OpenHBM with active reflexive neck muscles

Modeling muscle activity in the neck muscles of a finite element (FE) human body model can be based on two biological reflex systems. One approach is to approximate the Vestibulocollic reflex (VCR) function, which maintains the head orientation relative to a fixed reference in space. The second system tries to maintain the head posture relative to the torso, similar to the Cervicocolic reflex (CCR). Strategies to combine these two neck muscle controller approaches in a single head-neck FE model were tested, optimized, and compared to rear-impact volunteer data. The first approach, Combined-Control, assumed that both controllers simultaneously controlled all neck muscle activations. In the second approach, Distributed-Control, one controller was used to regulate activation of the superficial muscles while a different controller acted on deep neck muscles. The results showed that any muscle controller that combined the two approaches was less effective than only using one of VCR- or CCR-based systems on its own. A passive model had the best objective rating for cervical spine kinematics, but the addition of a single active controller provided the best response for both head and cervical spine kinematics. The present study demonstrates the difficulty in completely capturing representative head and cervical spine responses to rear-impact loading and identified a controller capturing the VCR reflex as the best candidate to investigate whiplash injury mechanisms through FE modeling.

Kinematics of Cervical Spine during Rowing Ergometer at Different Stroke Rates in Young Rowers: A Pilot Study.

Background: Research on biomechanics in rowing has mostly focused on the lumbar spine. However, injuries can also affect other body segments. Thus, the aim of this pilot study was to explore any potential variations in the kinematics of the cervical spine during two different stroke rates on the rowing ergometer in young rowers. Methods: Twelve young rowers of regional or national level were recruited for the study. The experimental protocol consisted of two separate test sessions (i.e., a sequence of 10 consecutive strokes for each test session) at different stroke rates (i.e., 20 and 30 strokes/min) on an indoor rowing ergometer. Kinematics of the cervical spine was assessed using an inertial sensor capable of measuring joint ROM (angle of flexion, angle of extension, total angle of flexion–extension). Results: Although there were no differences in the flexion and total flexion–extension movements between the test sessions, a significant increase in the extension movement was found at the highest stroke rate (p = 0.04, d = 0.66). Conclusion: Young rowers showed changes in cervical ROM according to stroke rate. The lower control of the head during the rowing stroke cycle can lead to a higher compensation resulting in an augmented effort, influencing sports performance, and increasing the risk of injury.

Cervical spine degeneration specific segmental angular rotational and displacements: A quantitative study

BackgroundThe objective of the present isolated spine study was to evaluate the kinematic differences between groups of normal and degenerated cervical spine specimens. Previous studies on cervical spine degeneration support the existence of the unstable phase during the degeneration process; however, there is a lack of quantitative data available to fully characterize this early stage of degeneration. MethodFor this effort five degenerated and eight normal cervical spines (C2-T1) were isolated and were subject to pure bending moments of flexion, extension, axial rotation and lateral bending. The specimen quality was assessed based on the grading scale. In the present study, the degeneration was at the C5-C6 level. A four-camera motion analysis system was used to measure the overall primary and segmental motions. FindingIn the extension mode, the degenerated group demonstrated a significant larger angular rotation as well as antero-posterior displacement at the degenerated level (C5-C6). In contrast, in flexion mode, the degenerated group measured a drastic decrease in angular rotation, at the adjacent level (C6-C7). In other modes of loading as well as in other segmental levels, the degenerated group had similar segmental motion as the normal group. InterpretationThese preliminary results provide single level degeneration specific cervical spine kinematics. The finding demonstrates the influence of degeneration on the kinematics of the normal sub adjacent segment. The degenerated group observed larger translation displacement in the extension mode, which would potentially be a critical parameter in assisting early detection of cervical spine spondylosis with just a functional X-ray scan.

Analysis of cervical movements with accelerometer during gnathological screening: Clinical-Experimental study

During the gnathological examination, the dentist often evaluates the tract of the cervical spine, for example through the palpation of the cervical and sternocleidomastoid muscles. The accelerometer is an electromedical device that allows the evaluation of the cervical range of motion and speed of execution of the main movements of the head on the neck (rotation, flexion-extension, and lateroflexion). Even though it is a rather simple instrument to use, the correct execution of the examination requires attention from the clinician to check that all the movements of the head are performed correctly and without unwanted movements of the shoulders. No studies have analyzed the repeatability of the tests when performed by dentists. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze the repeatability of acquired cervical movements on a sample of volunteer subjects. Thirty-two volunteers (mainly dentistry students) were included in the sample. An accurate protocol based on a review of the existing literature was prepared for the standardized execution of the exams. The test was performed twice for each volunteer and the interval between the tests was 2 weeks. The results demonstrate the importance of correct execution of the test and the control of the operator to obtain data reliability. The accelerometer is a medical device that seems promising for a standardized examination of cervical spine kinematics during gnathological screening. It opens new perspectives for an interdisciplinary approach between dentist and physiatrist for craniocervical-mandibular problems.

Cervical Spine Motion Requirements From Night Vision Goggles May Play a Greater Role in Chronic Neck Pain than Helmet Mass Properties.

Chronic Neck Pain (CNP) among rotary-wing aircrew is thought to stem from night vision goggles (NVG) and counterweight (CW) systems which displace the centre of mass of the head. This investigation aimed to quantify the loads acting on the neck as a function of movement magnitude (MM), helmet conditions, and movement axes in rapid movements. Cervical spine kinematics during rapid head repositioning tasks for flexion-extension (FE) and axial rotation (AR) movements were measured from 15 males and 15 females. Participants moved in either a 35° (Near MM) or 70° arc (Far MM), while donning a helmet, helmet with NVG, helmet with NVG and a typical CW, and a CW Liner (CWL). Measured EMG from three muscles bilaterally and used to drive a biomechanical model to quantify the compression and shear acting at the C5-C6 joint. In AR, the NVGs were associated with the largest compression magnitudes, 252 (24) N. CW conditions decreased the maximum compression to 249 (53) N. For FE, the compression was 340N for the Far MM trials and 246N for Near MMs. Changing the helmet configuration only modestly influenced these magnitudes in FE. Every 30° of MM increased compression by 57 to 105N. The reduction of the moment of inertia by 16% in the CWL did not reduce reaction forces. Joint loads scaled proportionately with head-supported weight by a factor of 2.05. The magnitudes of loads suggest a cumulative loading pathway for CNP development.

Validation and application of a novel in vivo cervical spine kinematics analysis technique

To validate the accuracy of Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) cervical spine modeling with three dimensional (3D)-3D registration for in vivo measurements of cervical spine kinematics. CBCT model accuracy was validated by superimposition with computed tomography (CT) models in 10 healthy young adults, and then cervical vertebrae were registered in six end positions of functional movements, versus a neutral position, in 5 healthy young adults. Registration errors and six degrees of freedom (6-DOF) kinematics were calculated and reported. Relative to CT models, mean deviations of the CBCT models were < 0.6 mm. Mean registration errors between end positions and the reference neutral position were < 0.7 mm. During flexion–extension (F–E), the translation in the three directions was small, mostly < 1 mm, with coupled LB and AR both < 1°. During lateral bending (LB), the bending was distributed roughly evenly, with coupled axial rotation (AR) opposite to the LB at C1–C2, and minimal coupled F–E. During AR, most of the rotation occurred in the C1–C2 segment (29.93 ± 7.19° in left twist and 31.38 ± 8.49° in right twist) and coupled LB was observed in the direction opposite to that of the AR. Model matching demonstrated submillimeter accuracy in cervical spine kinematics data. The presently evaluated low-radiation-dose CBCT technique can be used to measure 3D spine kinematics in vivo across functional F–E, AR, and LB positions, which has been especially challenging for the upper cervical spine.

In vitro upper cervical spine kinematics: Rotation with combined movements and its variation after alar ligament transection

Previous studies indicate that maximum upper cervical axial rotation occurs only through a combination of transverse, frontal, and sagittal plane motions. This study explores the relationship between transection of the alar ligament and combined upper cervical axial rotation movements. Ten cryopreserved upper cervical spines were manually mobilized in bilateral axial rotation and two different motion combinations with simultaneous motion in the three anatomical planes: rotation in extension (extension + axial rotation + contralateral lateral bending) and rotation in flexion (flexion + axial rotation + ipsilateral lateral bending). These three motions were performed before and after right alar ligament transection. The occiput-axis axial rotation was measured using an optical motion capture system while measuring the applied load. With intact alar ligament, the axial rotation in flexion showed the lowest range of motion (right, R: 9.81 ± 3.89°; left, L: 15.54 ± 5.89°). Similar results were found between the other two mobilizations: axial rotation (R: 33.87 ± 6.64°; L: 27.99 ± 6.90°) and rotation in extension (R: 35.15 ± 5.97°; L: 28.96 ± 6.47°). After right alar ligament transection, rotation in flexion (particularly in left rotation) showed the largest increase in motion: rotation in flexion (R: 13.78 ± 9.63°; L: 23.04 ± 5.59°), rotation in extension (R: 36.39 ± 7.10°; L: 31.71 ± 7.67°), and axial rotation (R: 38.50 ± 9.47°; L: 31.59 ± 6.55°). Different combinations of movements should be evaluated when analyzing the maximum axial rotation of the upper cervical spine, as axial rotation alone and rotation in extension showed a larger range of motion than rotation in flexion. After unilateral alar ligament injury, rotation to the non-injured side in flexion demonstrates the most movement increase.

Estimating Facet Joint Apposition with Specimen-Specific Computer Models of Subaxial Cervical Spine Kinematics.

Computational models of experimental data can provide a noninvasive method to estimate spinal facet joint biomechanics. Existing models typically consider each vertebra as one rigid-body and assume uniform facet cartilage thickness. However, facet deflection occurs during motion, and cervical facet cartilage is nonuniform. Multi rigid-body computational models were used to investigate the effect of specimen-specific cartilage profiles on facet contact area estimates. Twelve C6/C7 segments underwent non-destructive intervertebral motions. Kinematics and facet deflections were measured. Three-dimensional models of the vertebra and cartilage thickness estimates were obtained from pre-test CT data. Motion-capture data was applied to two model types (2RB: C6, C7 vertebrae each one rigid body; 3RB: left and right C6 posterior elements, and C7 vertebrae, each one rigid body) and maximum facet mesh penetration was compared. Constant thickness cartilage (CTC) and spatially-varying thickness cartilage (SVTC) profiles were applied to the facet surfaces of the 3RB model. Cartilage apposition area (CAA) was compared. Linear mixed-effects models were used for all quantitative comparisons. The 3RB model significantly reduced penetrating mesh elements by accounting for facet deflections (p=0.001). The CTC profile resulted in incongruent facet articulation, whereas realistic congruence was observed for the SVTC profile. The SVTC profile demonstrated significantly larger CAA than the CTC model (p<0.001).

Normative cervical spine kinematics of a circumduction task

Neck pain is a prevalent condition and clinical examination techniques are limited and unable to assess out-of-plane motion. Recent works investigating cervical kinematics during neck circumduction (NC), a dynamic 3D task, has shown the ability to discern those with and without neck pain. The purposes of this study were to establish 1) confidence and prediction intervals of head-to-torso kinematics during NC in a healthy cohort, 2) a baseline summative metric to quantify the duration and magnitude of deviations outside the prediction interval, and 3) the reliability of NC. Thirty-nine participants (25.6 ± 6.3 years, 19F/20M) without neck pain completed left and right NC. A two-way smoothing spline analysis of variance was utilized to determine the mean-fitted values and 90% confidence and prediction intervals for NC. A standardized effect size was calculated and aggregated across all axes (Delta RMSD aggregate), as a summative metric of motion quality. Confidence and prediction intervals were comparable for left and right NC and demonstrated excellent reliability. The average sum of the Delta RMSD aggregate was 2.76 ± 0.55 for left NC and 2.74 ± 0.63 for right NC. The results of this study demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing normative intervals of a NC task to assess head-to-torso kinematics.

Intersegmental Kinematics of the Upper Cervical Spine: Normal Range of Motion and Its Alteration After Alar Ligament Transection.

Biomechanical study using cadaveric cervical spines. To evaluate joint mobility and stiffness at the craniovertebral junction. Data on the intersegmental kinematics of the craniovertebral joints are available in the literature with a widespread range of values. The effect that alar ligament injuries have on intersegmental kinematics remains unclear and requires further biomechanical investigation. Ten occipito-atlanto-axial (C0-C1-C2) human specimens were articulated to flexion, extension, bilateral lateral bending, and bilateral axial rotation. The moment-rotation response was continuously tracked through the entire range of motion before and after unilateral alar ligament transection of the right side. The intersegmental (C0-C1/C1-C2) moment-rotation response was continuously quantified in full flexion (7.2 ± 6.6°/12.1 ± 5.8°), extension (11.1 ± 6.4°/3.0 ± 2.8°), lateral bending to the right (3.1 ± 2.2°/1.6 ± 1.2°) and left sides (3.3 ± 1.6°/2.1 ± 1.5°), and axial rotation to the right (1.2 ± 3.5°/32.3 ± 9.3°) and left sides (2.7 ± 2.6°/25.3 ± 8.3°). Unilateral alar ligament transection increased the range of motion of C0-C2 in the three planes of movement; however, intersegmental motion alterations were not always observed. Increases in the range of extension and lateral bending at C0-C1, which had not been reported previously, were observed. Further, the range of rotation on the right and left sides increased, in conjunction with the increased ranges at C0-C1 and C1-C2.Level of Evidence: N/A.

Effects of occipital-atlas stabilization in the upper cervical spine kinematics: an in vitro study

This study compares upper cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in the three cardinal planes before and after occiput-atlas (C0–C1) stabilization. After the dissection of the superficial structures to the alar ligament and the fixation of C2, ten cryopreserved upper cervical columns were manually mobilized in the three cardinal planes of movement without and with a screw stabilization of C0–C1. Upper cervical ROM and mobilization force were measured using the Vicon motion capture system and a load cell respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 19.8° ± 5.2° in flexion and 14.3° ± 7.7° in extension. With stabilization, the ROM was 11.5° ± 4.3° and 6.6° ± 3.5°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 4.7° ± 2.3° in right lateral flexion and 5.6° ± 3.2° in left lateral flexion. With stabilization, the ROM was 2.3° ± 1.4° and 2.3° ± 1.2°, respectively. The ROM without C0–C1 stabilization was 33.9° ± 6.7° in right rotation and 28.0° ± 6.9° in left rotation. With stabilization, the ROM was 28.5° ± 7.0° and 23.7° ± 8.5° respectively. Stabilization of C0–C1 reduced the upper cervical ROM by 46.9% in the sagittal plane, 55.3% in the frontal plane, and 15.6% in the transverse plane. Also, the resistance to movement during upper cervical mobilization increased following C0–C1 stabilization.

Unilateral and bilateral training competitive archers differ in some potentially unhealthy neck-shoulder region movement behaviour characteristics

BackgroundExcessive unilateral joint loads may lead to overuse disorders. Bilateral training in archery is only performed as a supportive coordination training and as a variation of typical exercise. However, a series of studies demonstrated a crossover transfer of training-induced motor skills to the contralateral side, especially in case of mainly unilateral skills. We compared the cervical spine and shoulder kinematics of unilateral and bilateral training archers.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, 25 (5 females, 48 ± 14 years) bilaterally training and 50 age-, sex- and level-matched (1:2; 47.3 ± 13.9 years) unilaterally training competitive archers were included. Cervical range of motion (RoM, all planes) and glenohumeral rotation were assessed with an ultrasound-based 3D motion analysis system. Upward rotation of the scapula during abduction and elevation of the arm were measured by means of a digital inclinometer and active shoulder mobility by means of an electronic caliper. All outcomes were compared between groups (unilaterally vs. bilaterally) and sides (pull-hand- vs. bow-hand-side).ResultsUnilateral and bilateral archers showed no between group and no side-to-side-differences in either of the movement direction of the cervical spine. The unilateral archers had higher pull-arm-side total glenohumeral rotation than the bilateral archers (mean, 95% CI), (148°, 144–152° vs. 140°, 135°-145°). In particular, internal rotation (61°, 58–65° vs. 56°, 51–61°) and more upward rotation of the scapula at 45 degrees (12°, 11–14° vs. 8°, 6–10°), 90 degrees (34°, 31–36° vs. 28°, 24–32°), 135 degrees (56°, 53–59° vs. 49°, 46–53°), and maximal (68°, 65–70° vs. 62°, 59–65°) arm abduction differed. The bow- and pull-arm of the unilateral, but not of the bilateral archers, differed in the active mobility of the shoulder (22 cm, 20–24 cm vs. 18 cm, 16–20 cm).ConclusionsUnilaterally training archers display no unphysiologic movement behaviour of the cervical spine, but show distinct shoulder asymmetris in the bow- and pull-arm-side when compared to bilateral archers in glenohumeral rotation, scapula rotation during arm abduction, and active mobility of the shoulder. These asymmetries in may exceed physiological performance-enhancing degrees. Bilateral training may seems appropriate in archery to prevent asymmetries.

Cervical movement kinematic analysis in patients with chronic neck pain: A comparative study with healthy subjects

BackgroundSeveral studies have investigated cervical kinematic performance in patients with chronic neck pain, especially with fast movements. A recent systematic review recommended further study of cervical spine kinematics cervical motions in individuals with neck pain. ObjectivesThis study aimed to examine cervical spine kinematics of naturally paced cervical motions in patients with chronic neck pain compared with a group of asymptomatic participants. Also, the relationships between cervical kinematic measures with neck pain intensity and disability were determined. MethodKinematic performance was measured in 20 individuals with chronic nonspecific neck pain and 20 healthy controls. Data were captured using a 7-camera motion analysis system. Parameters were range of cervical motion, peak velocity, duration of movement, and jerk index (smoothness of movement). Pain intensity and Neck Disability Index were also measured. ResultsDuration of movements, peak velocities, and jerk indexes were significantly different between the two groups (p < 0.05). Pain intensity was significantly associated with duration of movement, range of motion, peak velocity, and smoothness predominantly in extension (r range = 0.4 to 0.6, p < 0.05). ConclusionThis study's findings indicated altered cervical kinematic performance during naturally paced motions (particularly reduced smoothness of movement)in patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain compared to asymptomatic participants. Also, pain intensity was moderately associated with most kinematic measures, especially in extension. This study's results can help to understand better the impairments associated with chronic nonspecific neck pain.

Load-Sharing and Kinematics of the Human Cervical Spine Under Multi-Axial Transverse Shear Loading: Combined Experimental and Computational Investigation.

The cervical spine experiences shear forces during everyday activities and injurious events yet there is a paucity of biomechanical data characterizing the cervical spine under shear loading. This study aimed to (1) characterize load transmission paths and kinematics of the subaxial cervical spine under shear loading, and (2) assess a contemporary finite element cervical spine model using this data. Subaxial functional spinal units (FSUs) were subjected to anterior, posterior, and lateral shear forces (200 N) applied with and without superimposed axial compression preload (200 N) while monitoring spine kinematics. Load transmission paths were identified using strain gauges on the anterior vertebral body and lateral masses and a disc pressure sensor. Experimental conditions were simulated with cervical spine finite element model FSUs (GHBMC M50 version 5.0). The mean kinematics, vertebral strains, and disc pressures were compared to experimental results. The shear force-displacement response typically demonstrated a toe region followed by a linear response, with higher stiffness in anterior shear relative to lateral and posterior shear. Compressive axial preload decreased posterior and lateral shear stiffness and increased initial anterior shear stiffness. Load transmission patterns and kinematics suggest the facet joints play a key role in limiting anterior shear while the disc governs motion in posterior shear. The main cervical spine shear responses and trends are faithfully predicted by the GHBMC cervical spine model. These basic cervical spine biomechanics and the computational model can provide insight into mechanisms for facet dislocation in high severity impacts, and tissue distraction in low severity impacts.