Effect of external lumbar supports on joint position sense, postural control, and postural adjustment: a systematic review

Azadinia, Fatemeh; Kingma, Idsart; Mazaheri, Masood

doi:10.1080/09638288.2022.2043464

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(243 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The limits of stability are important in KOA individuals to maintain a dynamic balance [22]. It is postulated that impaired joint position sense can reduce postural control, limit stability, and cause individuals to fall [23]. As knee proprioception, postural control, and limits of stability are significant factors that can significantly cause impairment, disability, and falls in individuals with KOA [21,24], it is essential to determine the magnitude of knee JPE and impairment to the limits of stability in this population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Knee Joint Proprioception and Its Impact on Limits of Stability Using Dynamic Posturography in Individuals with Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis—A Cross-Sectional Study of Comparisons and Correlations

Raizah

Reddy

Alshahrani

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Proprioception and limits of stability can significantly impact static and dynamic balance. Knee proprioception and limits of stability may be impaired in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Impaired knee proprioception may impact the limits of stability, and understanding the associations between these factors is important for formulating treatment strategies in this population. The objectives of this study are to (a) compare the knee joint position error (JPE) and limits of stability between KOA and asymptomatic individuals and (b) assess the correlation between knee JPE and the limits of stability in KOA individuals. (2) Methods: This cross-sectional study included 50 individuals diagnosed with bilateral KOA and 50 asymptomatic individuals. Knee JPE was measured using a dual digital inclinometer at 25° and 45° of knee flexion (in the dominant and nondominant legs). The limits of stability variables, including reaction time (s), maximum excursion (%), and direction control (%), were evaluated using computerized dynamic posturography. (3) Results: The magnitude of the mean knee JPE is significantly larger in KOA individuals (p < 0.001) compared to asymptomatic individuals assessed at 25° and 45° of knee flexion in both the dominant and nondominant legs. The limits of stability test showed that KOA group individuals had a longer reaction time (1.64 ± 0.30 s) and reduced maximum excursion (4.37 ± 0.45) and direction control (78.42 ± 5.47) percentages compared to the asymptomatic group (reaction time = 0.89 ± 0.29, maximum excursion = 5.25 ± 1.34, direction control = 87.50 ± 4.49). Knee JPE showed moderate to strong correlations with the reaction time (r = 0.60 to 0.68, p < 0.001), maximum excursion (r = −0.28 to −0.38, p < 0.001) and direction control (r = −0.59 to −0.65, p < 0.001) parameters in the limits of stability test. (4) Conclusions: Knee proprioception and limits of stability are impaired in KOA individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals, and knee JPE showed significant relationships with the limits of stability variables. These factors and correlations may be considered when evaluating and developing treatment strategies for KOA patients.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Knee Joint Proprioception and Its Impact on Limits of Stability Using Dynamic Posturography in Individuals with Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis—A Cross-Sectional Study of Comparisons and Correlations

Raizah

Reddy

Alshahrani

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies have shown that patients with LBP have altered postural adjustment strategies and performance in voluntary postural tasks ( Azadinia et al, 2023 ; Rum et al, 2023 ). In this study, the LBP group showed lower AUC values on the SwayDA tests and performance in the mobility tests, and there was a positive linear association between the SwayDA tests and mobility tests.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voluntary postural sway control and mobility in adults with low back pain

Chen,

Tirosh,

Han

et al. 2024

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLow back pain (LBP) is associated with altered somatosensory perception, which is involved in both involuntary and voluntary control of posture. Currently, there is a lack of methods and tools for assessing somatosensory acuity in patients with LBP. The purpose of this study was (1) to assess the reliability of the sway discrimination apparatus (SwayDA) (2) to evaluate the differences in somatosensory acuity between patients with LBP and pain-free individuals, and (3) to examine relationships between somatosensory acuity, severity of LBP, and mobility in patients with LBP.MethodsTwenty participants (10 patients with LBP and 10 matched asymptomatic controls) were recruited in a test–retest reliability test. Another 56 participants were recruited for this study with 28 individuals presenting with LBP and a further twenty-eight being asymptomatic. The SwayDA was custom-built to measure somatosensory perception during voluntary anterior–posterior (SwayDA-AP), medial-lateral to the dominant side (SwayDA-ML-D), and non-dominant side (SwayDA-ML-ND) postural sway control. Participants also completed mobility tests, including 10 times and 1-min sit-to-stand tests (10-STS, 1 m-STS). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to quantify somatosensory acuity in discriminating different voluntary postural sway extents.ResultsThe ICC (2.1) for the SwayDA-AP, SwayDA-ML-D, and SwayDA-ML-ND were 0.741, 0.717, and 0.805 with MDC95 0.071, 0.043, and 0.050. Patients with LBP demonstrated significantly lower SwayDA scores (tSwayDA-AP = −2.142, p = 0.037; tSwayDA-ML-D = -2.266, p = 0.027) than asymptomatic controls. The AUC values of the SwayDA-AP test were significantly correlated with ODI (rSwayDA-AP-ODI = −0.391, p = 0.039). Performances on the 1 m-STS and the 10-STS were significantly correlated with the AUC scores from all the SwayDA tests (−0.513 ≤ r ≤ 0.441, all p < 0.05).DiscussionThe SwayDA tests evaluated showed acceptable reliability in assessing somatosensory acuity during voluntary postural sway. Somatosensory acuity was diminished in patients with LBP compared to asymptomatic controls. In patients with LBP, lower somatosensory acuity was associated with increased LBP-related disability. Future research could focus on investigating the factors contributing to the decreased somatosensory perception and mobility in individuals with LBP.

show abstract

“…An IPD meta-analysis enables calculating more precise estimates of effects (due to increased statistical power) [36][37][38][39][40], inclusion of explanatory covariates [36][37][38], adjustment for confounding factors [38][39][40], more powerful investigation of interactions [36][37][38]40], and exploring between-study heterogeneity [37,38,40]. Although prior systematic reviews have considered postural control among individuals with and/or without LBP during static/perturbed sitting [41][42][43][44], semi-sitting [41][42][43], standing [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54], or walking [55], trunk postural control has not been evaluated in unstable sitting, and no reviews have used an IPD meta-analysis.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Trunk postural control during unstable sitting among individuals with and without low back pain: A systematic review with an individual participant data meta-analysis

Alshehri,

Alzahrani,

van den Hoorn

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Sitting on an unstable surface is a common paradigm to investigate trunk postural control among individuals with low back pain (LBP), by minimizing the influence lower extremities on balance control. Outcomes of many small studies are inconsistent (e.g., some find differences between groups while others do not), potentially due to confounding factors such as age, sex, body mass index [BMI], or clinical presentations. We conducted a systematic review with an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to investigate whether trunk postural control differs between those with and without LBP, and whether the difference between groups is impacted by vision and potential confounding factors. Methods We completed this review according to PRISMA-IPD guidelines. The literature was screened (up to 7th September 2023) from five electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Outcome measures were extracted that describe unstable seat movements, specifically centre of pressure or seat angle. Our main analyses included: 1) a two-stage IPD meta-analysis to assess the difference between groups and their interaction with age, sex, BMI, and vision on trunk postural control; 2) and a two-stage IPD meta-regression to determine the effects of LBP clinical features (pain intensity, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear-avoidance beliefs) on trunk postural control. Results Forty studies (1,821 participants) were included for the descriptive analysis and 24 studies (1,050 participants) were included for the IPD analysis. IPD meta-analyses revealed three main findings: (a) trunk postural control was worse (higher root mean square displacement [RMSdispl], range, and long-term diffusion; lower mean power frequency) among individuals with than without LBP; (b) trunk postural control deteriorated more (higher RMSdispl, short- and long-term diffusion) among individuals with than without LBP when vision was removed; and (c) older age and higher BMI had greater adverse impacts on trunk postural control (higher short-term diffusion; longer time and distance coordinates of the critical point) among individuals with than without LBP. IPD meta-regressions indicated no associations between the limited LBP clinical features that could be considered and trunk postural control. Conclusion Trunk postural control appears to be inferior among individuals with LBP, which was indicated by increased seat movements and some evidence of trunk stiffening. These findings are likely explained by delayed or less accurate corrective responses. Systematic review registration This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021124658).

show abstract

Effect of external lumbar supports on joint position sense, postural control, and postural adjustment: a systematic review

Cited by 8 publications

References 67 publications

Investigating Knee Joint Proprioception and Its Impact on Limits of Stability Using Dynamic Posturography in Individuals with Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis—A Cross-Sectional Study of Comparisons and Correlations

Investigating Knee Joint Proprioception and Its Impact on Limits of Stability Using Dynamic Posturography in Individuals with Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis—A Cross-Sectional Study of Comparisons and Correlations

Voluntary postural sway control and mobility in adults with low back pain

Trunk postural control during unstable sitting among individuals with and without low back pain: A systematic review with an individual participant data meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About