Vibration-Induced Alteration in Trunk Extensor Muscle Proprioception as a Model for Impaired Trunk Control in Low Back Pain
Issued Date
2024-07-01
Resource Type
eISSN
20763425
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85199650965
Journal Title
Brain Sciences
Volume
14
Issue
7
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Brain Sciences Vol.14 No.7 (2024)
Suggested Citation
Gilliam J.R., Mandal D., Wattananon P., Banerjee S., Herter T.M., Silfies S.P. Vibration-Induced Alteration in Trunk Extensor Muscle Proprioception as a Model for Impaired Trunk Control in Low Back Pain. Brain Sciences Vol.14 No.7 (2024). doi:10.3390/brainsci14070657 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/100192
Title
Vibration-Induced Alteration in Trunk Extensor Muscle Proprioception as a Model for Impaired Trunk Control in Low Back Pain
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
This study examined the impact of personalizing muscle vibration parameters on trunk control. We assessed how altered trunk extensor muscle (TEM) proprioception affects seated trunk control in healthy controls (HCs). To explore the link between altered TEM proprioception and impaired trunk control in chronic low back pain (cLBP), we performed equivalence testing between HCs undergoing TEM vibration and cLBP without vibration. Twenty HCs performed active joint reposition error (AJRE) testing to determine personalized vibration parameters. Each participant maintained balance on an unstable chair with eyes open and closed, with and without TEM vibration. We compared trunk control between HCs and twenty age- and sex-matched cLBP participants, using mean velocity and 95% confidence ellipse area of center-of-pressure changes to quantify trunk postural control. Equivalence was examined by comparing mean difference scores to minimal detectable change values and calculating between-group effect sizes. Personalized vibration parameters led to larger lumbopelvic repositioning errors (d = 0.89) than any single vibration frequency (d = 0.31–0.36). In healthy adults with no back pain, vision had large effects on postural control (ηp2 = 0.604–0.842), but TEM vibration had no significant effects (p > 0.105) or interactions with vision (p > 0.423). Between-group effect sizes (d = 0.32–0.51) exceeded our threshold for performance equivalence (d < 0.2). Muscle vibration altered position sense during AJRE testing, and personalizing parameters amplified this effect. However, TEM vibration had minimal impact on seated trunk postural control in adults with no back pain and did not lead to performance degradation comparable to that in cLBP.