Movement Disorders, Neck Pain
Conditions
Brief summary
This is a descriptive, observational, longitudinal, prospective study consecutively enrolling patients with non-specific neck pain and age-matched asymptomatic participants. The investigators will register sensorimotor control variables, including active range of motion, movement speed, acceleration, smoothness of motion, head repositioning accuracy and motion coupling patterns. These variables will be recorded by means of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors during the following tests consecutively performed in two measuring sessions separated by 12 months: (a) kinematics of planar movements, (b) kinematics of the craniocervical flexion movement, (c) kinematics during functional tasks and (d) kinematics of task-oriented neck movements in response to visual targets.
Interventions
DIAGNOSTIC_TESTsensorimotor control analysis using inertial sensor technology
Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors will measure sensorimotor control variables including active range of motion, movement speed, acceleration, smoothness of motion, head repositioning accuracy and motion coupling patterns
Sponsors
CEU San Pablo University
Study design
Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Population aged between 18 and 65 years old
Exclusion criteria
* Visual impairment not corrected by the use of glasses/contact lenses * Migraine headache * Complex regional syndrome * Previous surgeries in the neck and/or head region * Sensory and/or vestibular alterations, (f) Otogenic or idiopathic vertigo/dizziness * Presence of tumors in the craniocervical region * Previous fracture in the head or neck region * Osseous deformities in the thoracic, cervical or cranial region
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Motion coupling patterns | 1 year | Calculated as the angular displacement occurring in a different anatomical plane to the one that is being tested for each of the planar movements |
| Movement speed | 1 year | Expressed as angular velocity (°/sec) in 3 full-movements (flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation) |
| Smoothness of motion | 1 year | expressed as movement jerk (º/sec3) |
| Head repositioning accuracy | 1 year | Calculated as the repositioning error considering the difference between the neutral starting position and the following positions reached after the performance of any of the movements |
| Active range of motion | 1 year | Expressed as an angular displacement (°) in 3 full-movements (flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation) |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Fear of movement and injury | 1 year | Measured using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11). It consists of 11 questions scored from 1 to 4. Therefore, a score of 11 is the lowest possible level of kinesiphobia, while 44 is the highest. |
| Pain-related fear-avoidance | 1 year | Measured using the Fear Avoidance Components Scale (FACS). It has 20 itemsmeasured on a 6-point Likert scale for total possible score of 100 and the lowest possible score of 0. Higher scores indicate higher levels of fear avoidance. |
| Physical activity level | 1 year | Measured using the short version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). The score of the scale is expressed in MET level x minutes of activity/day x days per week. Levels of 3.3 METs are considered light, 4.0 METs are moderate and 8.0 METs are vigorous. |
Contacts
Primary ContactAitor Martin Pintado Zugasti, PhD
Outcome results
None listed