Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Aug 26;10(8):e0135838.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135838. eCollection 2015.

The Effects of Vibration and Muscle Fatigue on Trunk Sensorimotor Control in Low Back Pain Patients

Jean-Alexandre Boucher  1 , Jacques Abboud  2 , François Nougarou  3 , Martin C Normand  4 , Martin Descarreaux  3
Affiliations

The Effects of Vibration and Muscle Fatigue on Trunk Sensorimotor Control in Low Back Pain Patients

Jean-Alexandre Boucher et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Introduction: Changes in sensorimotor function and increased trunk muscle fatigability have been identified in patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP). This study assessed the control of trunk force production in conditions with and without local erector spinae muscle vibration and evaluated the influence of muscle fatigue on trunk sensorimotor control.

Methods: Twenty non-specific cLBP patients and 20 healthy participants were asked to perform submaximal isometric trunk extension torque with and without local vibration stimulation, before and after a trunk extensor muscle fatigue protocol. Constant error (CE), variable error (VE) as well as absolute error (AE) in peak torque were computed and compared across conditions. Trunk extensor muscle activation during isometric contractions and during the fatigue protocol was measured using surface electromyography (sEMG).

Results: Force reproduction accuracy of the trunk was significantly lower in the patient group (CE = 9.81 ± 2.23 Nm; AE = 18.16 ± 3.97 Nm) than in healthy participants (CE = 4.44 ± 1.68 Nm; AE = 12.23 ± 2.44 Nm). Local erector spinae vibration induced a significant reduction in CE (4.33 ± 2.14 Nm) and AE (13.71 ± 3.45 Nm) mean scores in the patient group. Healthy participants conversely showed a significant increase in CE (8.17 ± 2.10 Nm) and AE (16.29 ± 2.82 Nm) mean scores under vibration conditions. The fatigue protocol induced erector spinae muscle fatigue as illustrated by a significant decrease in sEMG median time-frequency slopes. Following the fatigue protocol, patients with cLBP showed significant decrease in sEMG root mean square activity at L4-5 level and responded in similar manner with and without vibration stimulation in regard to CE mean scores.

Conclusions: Patients with cLBP have a less accurate force reproduction sense than healthy participants. Local muscle vibration led to significant trunk neuromuscular control improvements in the cLBP patients before and after a muscle fatigue protocol. Muscle vibration stimulation during motor control exercises is likely to influence motor adaptation and could be considered in the treatment of cLBP. Further work is needed to clearly identify at what levels of the sensorimotor system these gains are achievable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Testing position in neutral standing posture with and without erector spinae vibration.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Precise timeline of the experiment.
Participants were asked to perform a set of five trials (force reproduction task at 60% of their MCV) following an auditory signal which was heard every thirty seconds, for each of the vibration conditions (no vibration, 80 Hz). The order of appearance of vibration conditions (no vibration, 80 Hz vibration) differed between block 1 and block 2 (and between block 3 and block 4) to limit any vibration sequence effect.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Representative data defining the Constant Error (CE) and Variable Error (VE) calculations for one experimental condition of a participant.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Comparison of mean constant errors for both groups in each condition (mean ± standard error)
Fig 5
Fig 5. Comparison of mean absolute errors for both groups in each condition (mean ± standard error)
Fig 6
Fig 6. Means and standard errors of the sEMG activity of the erector spinae at L4-5 level for both groups in each condition.
The presence of back muscle fatigue led patients with cLBP to a significant decrease in sEMGRMS activity as compared to the no fatigue condition.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Newcomer KL, Laskowski ER, Yu B, Johnson JC, An KN. Differences in repositioning error among patients with low back pain compared with control subjects. Spine. 2000;25(19):2488–93. - PubMed
    1. Sharma L, Pai YC. Impaired proprioception and osteoarthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1997;9(3):253–8. - PubMed
    1. van Dieen JH, Selen LP, Cholewicki J. Trunk muscle activation in low-back pain patients, an analysis of the literature. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2003;13:333–51. - PubMed
    1. Hodges PW, van den Hoorn W, Dawson A, Cholewicki J. Changes in the mechanical properties of the trunk in low back pain may be associated with recurrence. J Biomech. 2009;42:61–6. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.10.001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Flor H, Braun C, Elbert T, Birbaumer N. Extensive reorganization of primary somatosensory cortex in chronic back pain patients. Neurosci Lett. 1997;224(1):5–8. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources