Neck flexor muscle strength, efficiency, and relaxation times in normal subjects and subjects with unilateral neck pain and headache
Neck flexor muscle strength, efficiency, and relaxation times in normal subjects and subjects with unilateral neck pain and headache
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0003-9993(96)90008-8
复制
发表时间：
1996-07-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Hayes, KC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Barton, PM;Hayes, KC
目的：为了确定一种新的方法来测量肌肉力量，效率和放松时间的颈部屈肌肌肉组织的健康成年人的重测信度，并比较这些颈部屈肌肌肉的属性在受试者谁有单侧颈部疼痛和头痛与那些在controls.Design：受试者仰卧和isometrically弯曲他们的脖子对一个力传感器连接到后面的织带和尼龙搭扣头盔。用体表电极记录胸锁乳突肌肌电。连续两届会议的生活收缩的不同程度的努力，从最小到中度和最大的efforts.Setting：门诊转诊center.Participants：志愿者对照组（n = 10，3名男性和7名女性）被招募从医院和大学的人员。志愿者颈部疼痛受试者结果：在对照组中，前两个最大颈部屈曲收缩的组内相关系数（ICC）分别为：峰值力ICC = 0.81;峰值力/体重ICC = 0.75;平均力ICC = 0.75;力松弛时间ICC = 0.73; SCM EMG松弛时间：右ICC = 0.60和左ICC = 0.67。比较第1和第2次会议，SCM效率的组内相关性为右ICC = 0.58和左ICC = 0.97。对照组的峰值力（（x）超过条= 45.3 +/- 17.6 N）在颈部疼痛受试者中降低了50%（（x）超过条= 22.4 +/- 13.1 N）（p = 0.004）。同样，颈部疼痛受试者的峰值力/体重（x）超过条= 0.3 +/- 0.2 N/kg）是对照组的46%（（x）超过条= 0.7 +/- 0.2 N/kg）（p = .001），颈部疼痛受试者的平均力（（x）超过条= 12.1 +/- 7.5 N）是对照组（（x）超过条= 28.5 +/- 11.0 N）的43%（p = .001）。在两个颈部疼痛的主题，SCM肌电图和力松弛时间异常长，在受影响和未受影响的SCM肌肉，超过控制值大于3个标准差。对照受试者的右SCM效率（（x）上条= 0.3 +/-0.2 N/mu V）和颈痛受试者的受影响SCM效率（（x）上条= 0.1 +/-0.1 N/mu V）之间的差异接近p <0.05的显著性标准结论：发现该技术对于测量颈部屈肌峰值力、峰值力/体重、平均力和力松弛时间是高度可靠的，并且对于SCM EMG松弛时间和SCM效率的定量是中等可靠的。与对照组相比，颈部疼痛人群的所有力值均显著降低。在颈部疼痛人群中，力和SCM EMG松弛时间以及效率提示异常。颈部疼痛受试者在SCM EMG松弛时间或SCM效率受影响和未受影响的SCM肌肉之间没有显着差异。(C)1996年由美国康复医学大会和美国物理医学与康复学会
Objective: To determine the test-retest reliability of a new method for measuring muscular strength, efficiency, and relaxation times of the neck flexor musculature of healthy adults, and to compare these neck flexor muscle properties in subjects who have unilateral neck pain and headache with those in controls.Design: Subjects lay supine and isometrically flexed their necks against a force transducer attached to the back of a webbing and velcro helmet. Electromyograms (EMGs) were recorded from surface electrodes on the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscles. Two consecutive sessions of live contractions of varying levels of effort from minimal through moderate and maximal effort were analyzed.Setting: Ambulatory referral center.Participants: Volunteer control subjects (n = 10, 3 men and 7 women) were recruited from hospital and university personnel. Volunteer neck pain subjects (n = 10; 3 men and 7 women) were recruited from a physiatric chronic pain practice and a hospital outpatient physical therapy practice.Results: In the controls, the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) or the, first two maximum neck; flexion contractions were: peak force ICC = .81; peak force/body weight ICC = .75; average force ICC = .75; force relaxation time ICC = .73; SCM EMG relaxation times: right ICC = .60 and left ICC = .67, Comparing sessions 1 and 2 the intraclass correlations for SCM efficiencies were right ICC = .58 and left ICC = .97. The peak force in controls ((x) over bar = 45.3 +/- 17.6 N) was reduced by 50% in the neck pain subjects ((x) over bar = 22.4 +/- 13.1 N) (p = .004). Similarly, peak force/body weight in the neck pain subjects (x) over bar = 0.3 +/- 0.2 N/kg) was 46% of controls ((x) over bar = 0.7 +/- 0.2 N/kg) (p = .001), and average force in the neck pain subjects ((x) over bar = 12.1 +/- 7.5 N) was 43% of controls ((x) over bar = 28.5 +/- 11.0 N) (p = .001). In two neck pain subjects, SCM EMG and force relaxation times were abnormally long in both the affected and the unaffected SCM muscles, exceeding the control values by greater than 3 standard deviations. The difference between rile right SCM efficiency of the control subjects ((x) over bar = 0.3 +/- 0.2 N/mu V) and the affected SCM efficiency of the neck pain subjects ((x) over bar = 0.1 +/- 0.1 N/mu V) approached the p < .05 criterion for significance (p = .055).Conclusion: The technique was found to be highly reliable for the measurement of neck flexor peak force, peak force/body weight, average force, and force relaxation time, and moderately reliable for the quantitation of SCM EMG relaxation times and SCM efficiency. All force values were significantly lower in the neck pain population compared with the controls. Ln the neck pain population, force and SCM EMG relaxation times, as well as efficiencies, suggested abnormalities. Neck pain subjects showed no significant differences in SCM EMG relaxation time or SCM efficiency between affected and unaffected SCM muscles. (C) 1996 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation