Background: Ambient particulate matter and nanoparticles have been shown to translocate to the brain, and potentially influence the central nervous system. No data are available whether this may lead to functional changes in the brain.

Spinal postural variability (SPV) is a prerequisite to prevent musculoskeletal complaints during functional tasks. Our objective was to evaluate SPV in cervicogenic headache (CeH) since CeH is characterized by such complaints. A non-randomized repeated-measure design was applied to compare SPV between 18 participants with reporting CeH aged 29–51 years, and 18 matched controls aged 26–52 years during a 30-min-laptop-task. Habitual spinal postures (degrees) of the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine were analysed using 3D-Vicon motion analysis. SPV, to express variation in mean habitual spinal posture, was deducted from the postural analysis. Mean SPV of each spinal segment was lower in the CeH-group compared to the control-group. Within the CeH-group, SPV of all except one spinal segment (lower-lumbar) was higher compared to the group’s mean SPV. Within the control-group, SPV was more comparable to the group’s mean SPV. SPV differed between groups. Averaging data resulted in decreased SPV in the CeH-group compared to the control-group during the laptop-task. However, the higher within-group-SPV in the CeH-group compared to the group’s mean SPV accentuated more postural heterogeneity. It should be further determined if addressing individual SPV is a relevant intervention.

Objective: Although multidimensional interventions including physiotherapy, psychology, and education are generally recommended in managing headache, and to prevent chronification, such approach is lacking in cervicogenic headache (CeH). Therefore, exploring CeH within a biopsychosocial framework is deemed an essential first step.Methods: Non-randomized cross-sectional design to compare pain processing, lifestyle, and psychosocial characteristics between 18 participants with CeH (CeH group) (40.2 ± 10.9 years) and 18 matched controls (control group) (39.2 ± 13.1 years). Pain processing characteristics included degree of central sensitization (CentralSensitization Inventory), and (extra)-cephalic pressure pain thresholds (kPa/cmš/s). Lifestyle characteristics included sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), physical activity, screen time, and sedentary time (hours a week). Psychosocial characteristics included degree of depression, anxiety and stress (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21), and quality of life (Headache Impact Test-6). Results: Pain processing characteristics: More (p = .04) participants in the CeH group showed higher degrees of central sensitization compared to the control group. Lower (p < .05) (extra)-cephalic pressure pain thresholds were revealed in the CeH group compared to the control group for each muscle. Lifestyle and psychosocial characteristics: Compared to the control group, sleep quality and headache-related quality of life were worse (p < .0001) in the CeH group. Severe to extreme stress was experienced by more participants in the CeH group (p = .02). Further, significant relations between pain processing and (1) lifestyle characteristics and (2) psychosocial characteristics were seen in the CeH group. Conclusion: Exploring multidimensional characteristics in CeH exposed relations between pain processing, lifestyle, and psychosocial characteristics. These novel findings fill a gap in the current scientific literature, and highlight the need for outcome research targeting lifestyle and psychosocial factors.

The headache-group showed a larger passive head-protraction with a habitual forward head-position further located from the end-range. During the laptop-task forward head position and head-tilt behaved biphasically with a more static forward head position and a more dynamic head-tilt.

Patients with cervicogenic headache (CeH) showed lower spinal postural variability (SPV). In a next step, the complex character of such SPV needs to be analysed. Therefore, variables influencing SPV need to be explored. A non-randomized repeated-measure design was applied to analyse relations between biopsychosocial variables and SPV within a CeH-group (n = 18), 29–51 years, and matched control-group (n = 18), 26–52 years. Spinal postural variability, expressed by standard deviations, was deducted from 3D-Vicon motion analysis of habitual spinal postures (degrees). Interactions between SPV and pain processing, lifestyle, psychosocial characteristics were analysed. Pain processing characteristics included symptoms of central sensitization (Central Sensitization Inventory), (extra)-cephalic pressure pain thresholds (kPa/cm2/s). Lifestyle characteristics included sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), physical activity, screen-time, sedentary-time (hours a week), position (cm) and inclination (degrees) of the laptop (= desk-setup). Psychosocial characteristics included degree of depression, anxiety and stress (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21), impact of headache on quality of life (Headache Impact Test-6). Spinal postural variability related significantly to intrinsic (stress, anxiety, extra-cephalic pressure pain thresholds, sleep-duration) and extrinsic (desk-setup, screen-time) variables in the CeH-group. In the control-group, SPV related significantly to extra-cephalic pressure pain thresholds. Spinal postural variability related to diverse variables in the CeH-group compared to the control-group. More research is needed into a possible causal relationship and its clinical implication.