Electronic measures of movement impairment, repositioning, and posture in people with and without neck pain—a systematic review

Abstract

Background Neck pain is a major public health problem. Our objective was to describe differences in measures of movement and posture between people with and without neck pain. Methods PubMed and Embase were searched before 15 February 2019 for studies comparing people with neck pain with controls using electronic measurements of neck movement and/or posture. Data were extracted on participants, device, test methods, active range of motion (RoM) and quality of motion, joint positioning sense, and posture. Study quality was assessed using the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (QUADAS) and Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) guidelines. Results Thirty-six studies were included: 24 studies included measurement of active RoM, 15 quality of motion, 12 joint positioning sense, and 5 cervical spine posture. Measurements and test methods were heterogeneous. The reporting of study populations and methods were poor, whereas devices and statistics were well described. All studies on RoM showed reduced active RoM in people with neck pain when compared with controls, 5 of 10 studies reported reduced movement speed for people with neck pain, and 5 of 9 studies reported significantly greater joint positioning error for people with neck pain compared with controls. Due to heterogeneous test parameters and methods, no conclusion regarding differences in conjunct motion, tracking a motion pattern, and measures of posture could be drawn. Conclusions People with neck pain appear to have reduced active RoM, movement speed, and head repositioning accuracy when compared with controls. However, quality of reviewed studies was low and better descriptions of participants and methods are required before firm conclusions can be drawn. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1125-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Physical therapist attitude and opinion about cervical spine examination: A national Spanish survey

“…Ten years ago, those were the most important properties but in reverse order. Quantity of angle seems decreased in neck pain patients 14 compared with healthy subjects and is recommended as a physical examination measure related to clinical prognosis. However, there is a weak correlation between quantity of angle and disability 19 .…”

“…1,2 Although a large cohort study recommended to not consider cervical range of movement (CROM) as indicator to measure the progress of chronic neck pain 13 a systematic review reported reduced active CROM in people with neck pain compared with healthy subjects. 14 Also, PAM tests such as cranio-cervical flexion test, neck muscles endurance tests and JPE tests have moderate evidence for use in patients with non-specific neck pain 1,2 and have been shown to exhibit acceptable reliability and validity during the clinical examination. 8 A previous survey study conducted over 10 years ago 15…”

“…Assessing cervical flexion, extension, rotation and side bending range of motion using an inclinometer or a cervical device exhibits acceptable reliability and there is moderate evidence for the use of these procedures during the screening of non‐specific neck pain patients 1,2 . Although a large cohort study recommended to not consider cervical range of movement (CROM) as indicator to measure the progress of chronic neck pain 13 a systematic review reported reduced active CROM in people with neck pain compared with healthy subjects 14 . Also, PAM tests such as cranio‐cervical flexion test, neck muscles endurance tests and JPE tests have moderate evidence for use in patients with non‐specific neck pain 1,2 and have been shown to exhibit acceptable reliability and validity during the clinical examination 8 …”

A Two Joint Neck Model to Identify Malposition of the Head Relative to the Thorax

“…Even though these approaches seem promising, economic measurement systems are needed for reliable, valid, and objective ongoing monitoring, for example during computer work or gaming. Existing IMU models measure the angles of the neck accurately to some extent, but none of these models include an estimate of translation which would be important for the study of forward head postures [34][35][36]. In contrast, camera-based systems limit a persons' range of motion because the person must always act within the field of view of the cameras [32,34,37].…”

Impaired neck motor control in chronic whiplash and tension‐type headache

“…Chronic whiplash and tension‐type headache were studied together since these conditions are clinically similar by having chronic muscular pain and tenderness in the neck. Previous studies have indicated dyscoordination of head movements in whiplash and in chronic neck pain conditions as measured by various methods such as “Fastrak” and the “Fly” 1‐7 and reviewed by Hesby et al 8 Recently, an additional “clinical cervical movement sense” test involving head laser tracking of a “ZZ” like figure was used to measure head movements in chronic neck pain and monitor a possible effect of training 9 . While it appears that each of these methods may have good reliability within the local settings of the respective studies, these methods are not easily standardizable nor transferable for comparison in other clinical settings.…”