European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineEDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
ARTICLE ONLINE FIRST
This provisional PDF corresponds to the article as it appeared upon acceptance.
A copyedited and fully formatted version will be made available soon.
The final version may contain major or minor changes.
Subscription: Information about subscribing to Minerva Medica journals is online at:
http://www.minervamedica.it/en/how-to-order-journals.php
Reprints and permissions: For information about reprints and permissions send an email to:
[email protected] - [email protected] - [email protected]
EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
Women with late whiplash syndrome have greatly reduced
load-bearing of the cervical spine. In vivo biomechanical,
cross-sectional, lateral radiographic study.
Eythor KRISTJANSSON, Magnus Kjartan GISLASON
European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2017 Jul 17DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.17.04605-6
Article type: Original Article
2017 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
Article first published online: July 17, 2017
Manuscript accepted: July 14, 2017
Manuscript revised: June 15, 2017
Manuscript received: December 11, 2016
http://www.minervamedica.it/en/how-to-order-journals.phpmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
1
Women with late whiplash syndrome have greatly reduced load-
bearing of the cervical spine. In vivo biomechanical, cross-sectional,
lateral radiographic study A short title: The cervical column is greatly weakened in late whiplash
Eythor Kristjansson,1 Magnus K. Gislason2
1 Faculty of Medicine, The University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland
2 School of Science and Engineering, Reykjavik, Iceland
*Corresponding author: Eythor Kristjansson, Faculty of Medicine,
The University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
E-mail: [email protected]
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
2
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: No study has been conducted to ascertain whether the load-bearing
capacity of the cervical spine is reduced in vivo in late whiplash syndrome (LWS).
AIM: To compare the segmental cervical angular values across C0C6, between two
conditions: without versus with external axial load upon the head in three groups of women.
DESIGN: A single-blind, age-Body Mass Index (BMI) matched, radiographic, cross-sectional
study.
SETTING: Radiographic Department at a University Hospital.
POPULATION: One hundred eighty-two women, aged between 1850 years were enrolled.
METHODS: Participants were divided into 3 groups: a group with LWS (N=62) and two
control groups: a chronic insidious neck pain (IONP) group (N=60) and an asymptomatic
group (N=60). Prior to and on the same day as the radiographic examination took place, BMI
in kg/m2 was recorded and all participants answered the Neck Disability Index (NDI). The
two symptomatic groups answered also three other pain and disability questionnaires.
RESULTS: Analysis of variance (mixed-model ANOVA) for repeated measures was used for
comparison. Significant differences between groups, and the two conditions tested
was revealed, but only within the asymptomatic and the IONP groups (p
3
The mobile cervical spine is primarily responsible for the location of the head over the body,
maintaining a horizontal gaze for maximal utilization of the vital organs in the head which
connect us to our environment.1 The center of gravity (COG) of the head is located at the
posterior inferior sella turcica approximately 1cm superior and anterior to the external
auditory meatus.2,3 This location is anterior to the instantaneous axis of rotations (IARs) of
the cervical vertebra which requires contractions of the posterior neck muscles to maintain
upright head posture with the eyes level with the earth-horizontal.4
The load on the cervical spine is primarily compressive, with the shear component at
approximately 10% of compression.5 The cervical spine can withstand substantial
compressive axial loads in vivo, which are approximately thrice the weight of the head
because of muscle co-activation forces functioning to balance the head in the neutral, relaxed
posture.6 The skull is approximately 7.55% of the total body mass, which means that if a
person weighs 95.3 kg, the skull weighs around 7.2 kg.3
Compressive load increases further during flexion and extension, contact sports, and other
activities of daily living, and is estimated to range from 120N to 1200N in activities involving
minimal and maximal exertions, respectively.5-7 In normal individuals, the cervical spine
sustains these loads without damage or instability. However, ex vivo experiments show that
the osseoligametous cervical spine buckles in the frontal plane under a small vertical load of
10N.8 Using a 10-muscle, 3-joint model of the head and neck, Winters & Peles found that the
head and neck were inherently unstable, especially around the neighborhood of an upright
posture and suggested that maintenance of head stability requires considerable co-contraction
of antagonists,9 which supports the aforementioned statement of Patwardhan et al.6
Cervical spine stability has been described by dividing the bone anatomy of the cervical spine
into 3 primary columns (1 anterior and 2 posterior), which was first proposed by Louis10 and
validated by Pal and Sherk.11 The anterior column consists of the vertebral bodies and discs,
while the 2 posterior columns consist of the articulating facet joints.10,11 In the cervical spine,
the weight of the head is born through the condyles to the lateral masses of C1 and then to the
C1C2 joint. This load is then divided via the C2 articular pillars to the anterior column,
which includes the C2C3 disc, and the posterior column, which includes the C23 facets.11
The load distribution of the cervical spine is primarily in the posterior columns, with 36% in
the anterior column and 64% in the 2 posterior columns.11 This is in contrast to the lumbar
spine, in which the anterior loads (67%82%) have been reported as higher than the posterior
loads (18%33%).12
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
4
Cervical lordosis is considered to decrease the internal compressive load and is essential for
normal physiological flexion-extension as well as appropriate spinal coupling
movements.5,13,14 As examples: a straight lower cervical spine causes the articular facets to
become more vertical, obstructing rotation in the transverse plane as does increased lordosis
in the upper cervical spine.15,16 Normal range of motion is therefore confounded by altered
cervical sagittal alignments, which clinicians should be aware of when considering high
thrust-short amplitude techniques (cervical manipulation).
In the sagittal plane, when an external compressive load is applied along a vertical path,
which center lays just anterior to the origin of COG of the head it, it will create an increased
anterior moment of the head and the cervical spine (Figure 1.). Therefore, the expected natural
response would be increased lordosis of the whole cervical spine.
Insert Figure 1. A vertical line from the center of weight upon the head is anterior to the center
of gravity of the head, creating greater anterior moment, which the neck extensor muscles
must counteract.
The following hypothesis was tested: women with LWS will exhibit lesser changes in
segmental angular values between the two conditions tested (without and with axial load) due
to increased neck muscle stiffness to stabilize/protect the injured cervical spine. The
association between the test results and the self-reported pain and disability on the Neck
Disability Index (NDI) 17 and Borg-CR 10 Exertion Scale18, was also ascertained.
Materials and methods
Design
A single-blind, age-BMI matched, cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate
differences in cervical spine segmental angular values in the sagittal plane, without versus
with external load upon the head, measured on standardized lateral radiographs.
Setting
Radiographic Department at the National University Hospital in Reykjavik, Iceland. The
recruitment period was from AprilJuly 2016. The National Bioethics Committee in
Reykjavik, Iceland, approved the study protocol and the written consent form, which all
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
5
participants read and signed before the study took place. Approval was also obtained from the
Icelandic Radiation Protection Institute. (Approval number VSN-14-108).
Participants
Altogether, 182 women participated, aged 1850 years for all groups who met the inclusion
criteria. Altogether 214 potential participants were contacted but 32 were not eligible. This
age range was used so that altered upper neck posture associated with different age groups19
and pronounced spondylosis with increasing age 20,21 were not confounding factors. Only
women were recruited because vertebral geometry and neck strength is different in height-
matched men and women.22 The two patients groups were recruited through specialists in
manual therapy in Reykjavik, Iceland, and the asymptomatic group was recruited from
University Hospital staff, students and relatives of the therapists. All subjects were screened
by telephone interview for inclusion. The asymptomatic control group (N=60) consisted of
women with a score < 4 on the NDI (on a scale 0100).17 The chronic insidious neck pain
(IONP) group (N=60) consisted of women with chronic recurrent neck pain of at least 1-year
duration who had not been exposed to accident(s) of any kind. The women in both
symptomatic groups had to have minimal pain 3 on the visual analogue scale (VAS)23 and
an NDI score 8. The women in the LWS could have been involved in more than 1 motor
vehicle collision (MVC) from 19982015. Chronic complaints are defined as being of 6-
month duration by the Task Force on Taxonomy of the International Association for the Study
of Pain (IASP), revised edition.24 Exclusion criteria for all groups were systemic diseases or
prior psychiatric diagnoses of any kind as well as pregnancy. Psychiatric diagnoses were
double checked by contacting the womens general practitioners (GPs) and in the written
consent form, it was specifically outlined that this was a radiographic study with a radiant
exposure (albeit low). When the women were not sure if they were pregnant, they were asked
to contact their GPs.
Prior to the radiographic examination, Body Mass Index (BMI) in kg/m2 was recorded, all
participants answered the NDI17 and the two symptomatic groups also answered the VAS,23
the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TAMPA)25 and the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic
Symptoms and Signs (LANSS)26 on the same day as the radiographic examination took place.
All participants answered the Borg-CR 1018 immediately after the radiographic examination
with the external load. A follow-up telephone interview was performed to reveal pain
intensityduration of the symptomatic women after carrying the external load. All
questionnaires had been used before in Icelandic language, translated into Icelandic and back
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
6
to English. All questionnaires were answered on paper. Two independent physical therapy
students on their last year of education, filled in the answers in Excel documents, which was
then double checked by the authors, as no missing data was found by the students. That was
confirmed by the authors.
Radiographic Examination
Radiographic Fluoroscopy (RF modality), (Prestige II, X-ray room with remote control table,
(General Electrics, Milwaukee VI, 2000) was used. All radiographs were taken in lateral
position in standardized standing position with fluoroscopic control for alignment. The left
side was closer to the film and the film-tube distance was 1.5m. The central beam was
centered at the C4 vertebral body. Two radiologists conducted the measurements within 1
month after the radiographic examination for each subject. The same research assistant putted
the custommade weight helmet on all participants. The radiographers and the research
assistant were blind to the participants group allocation. The examination procedure was as
follows: The participant gave her research number to the radiographers who explained the
examination procedure for the participants. Two radiographic examinations were performed.
The former was without weight and the latter with weight. The participant was instructed to
find her natural head posture looking straight ahead. The feet were the same distance apart
with a 12cm wide box between the feet and a tape marked the front line for the feet. The
participant rested the hands on a horizontal bar with circa 70 of flexion in the elbows, and
was instructed to relax the shoulder girdle muscles. In the second examination; the research
assistant placed the weight, 1.890 kg (4.16 lbs.) on the top of the head. The weight was
moveable in the sagittal plane and was secured fast when the center of the weight upon the
head was in a vertical line just anterior to the tragus of the right ear, which corresponded to 2
cm anterior to the external auditory canal. The center of weight upon the head corresponded
to the posterior part of sella turcica, at approximately 1cm in front of the COG of the head,
which is well in front of IARs of the cervical spine,2 (Figure 1.). Both radiographs were taken
in this position (Figure 2.).
Insert Figure 2. Experimental set-up.
A stop clock was used and the participant had to carry the weight for 5 minutes, but at least
for 90 seconds to pass the second examination. The participants were in the same footsteps
during the 5minute period but were allowed to walk on the place by alternately bending and
straighten the hips and knees without lifting the heels from the ground. When 20 seconds
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
7
were left, the participant was instructed to find her natural head posture looking straight ahead
and the radiographers prepared and finished the second examination.
Measurement Techniques
All radiographs were paired for each individual and marked without load and with load
and stored in DICOM format in the central imaging database in the picture archiving and
communication system (PACS) (Agfa; Impax, Version 6.5.3.1005) at the National University
Hospital in Reykjavik, Iceland. The radiographs were imported in DICOM format into
Matlab, as the measurements of the radiographs were made outside the University Hospital by
a radiologist with 34 years of experience. To evaluate inter-and intra-tester errors in the
measurements, 60 radiographs were randomly selected and measured twice on different
occasions by another radiologist with 28 years of experience. According to Rankin and
Stokes, at least 50 subjects are needed in reliability studies.27 Both radiologists were blind to
the womens group allocation.
Figure 3A and Figure 3B show the fiducials and lines used to form the measured angles for
the upper versus lower cervical spine, respectively. A negative value indicated lordosis, and a
positive value indicated kyphosis.
Insert Figure 3A. For the upper cervical spine, the angle a (C0C1) was formed by a line
connecting the most caudal point on the occipital bone posteriorly, aligning with the posterior
surface of the spinal canal at the C1 level, and the deepest point in the groove formed by the
occipital condyle and the occipital bone anteriorly versus the line tangential to the inferior
aspect of the atlas; angle b (C1C2) by the lines tangential to the inferior aspects of the atlas
and axis, respectively.
Insert Figure 3B. Radiographic measurements for the lower cervical spine. The Harrison
posterior tangent method was used which involves drawing lines parallel to the posterior
surfaces of all cervical vertebral bodies from C2 to C7 and then summing the segmental
angles for an overall cervical curvature angle.28
Measurements of the Rotation of the Vertebrae using Matlab
A custum build program was written in Matlab which allowed the user to identify two points
defining a straight line on multiple locations in the cervical spine. This was implemented by
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
8
creating an interactive tool, where the X-ray image was read in as an image, thus allowing the
radiologists to click on the screen where the corresponding lines should be drawn. The image
size of each scan was 1920x1080 pixels and with each click from the user, the pair of pixles
coordinates representing each line were contverted into unit vectors in two dimensional space.
The angle, , between each the lines r1 and r2, was calculated using the formula
The program allowed the user to zoom into each region of interest for each line created,
therefore allowing the radiologists to locate anatomical landmarks with sufficient accuracy on
a 2 mega pixel screen, which size wae 21.5. The lines were created separetely for the upper
versus the lower cervical spine, respectively. For the Harrison posterior tangent method28 the
program deleted all previous lines on the screen to ensure that none of the prior lines would
block anatomical landmarks. The radiologists carried out the routine both for the subjects with
and without external load. All angular values were written as a text files which were read into
another post processing routine summarizing and analyzing all corresponding angles for all
of the participants. All the images with the lines superimposed onto the xray image were
saved, separetely for the upper and the lower cervical spine, with and without the load,
respectively. This was done to allow verification of the accuracy of the location of each
drawn line.
Statistical analyses
A pilot study was conducted with different weights upon the head on asymptomatic and
symptomatic women. The responses varied considerably between groups and it was therefore
unknown how many participants would be required to test the hypothesis as no comparative
studies have been conducted to reveal changes in cervical segmental values of the cervical
spine without versus with anterior axial load upon the head between different patients
groups. It was estimated that at least 60 women would be required in each of the 3 groups
tested.
The mean absolute difference of raters measurements was used to calculate the reliability
between radiologists and within the second radiologist.29 The intraclass correlation
coefficients (ICCs) using an absolute agreement definition, the 2-way random effects model,
single measures ICC and standard error of measurement (SEM) as well as systematic error
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
9
between/within raters (SER) (ICC 2,1)30 was used for assessing interrater and intrarater
reliability.
To test the hypothesis across all segments (C0C6), analysis of variance (mixed-model
ANOVA) for repeated measures (SAS Statistical Software 9.4) was used for comparison
between the 2 independent variables, conditions, and groups, using segments, NDI and Borg-
CR 10 as covariates. Angular values and subjects were the random effects. Also included are
the 2way group-condition, condition-angle, and group-angle interaction. Number, subjects,
means, and SDs were used for description of data. Tukey-Kramer adjustments were used for
post hoc analysis. The significant level was set at p < 0.05 for all tests.
Results There was no missing data in this study. The inter-and intra-radiologists reliability is shown
in Table I. The changes in segmental angular values (across all segments) within the two
conditions tested and between the 3 participating groups are shown in Figure 4.
Insert Figure 4. Angular rotation in the sagittal plane in upright standing position measured in
degrees (mean, standard error), without and with axial load upon the head. Significant
differences were revealed within the asymptomatic and the IONP groups but not within the
LWS group. Abbreviations: IONP=insidious onset neck pain; LWS= late whiplash syndrome
The statistical analysis revealed significant differences between groups, and the two
conditions tested (F2,178 =21.78, p< 0.0001). The Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test revealed
significant differences within the asymptomatic and the IONP groups (p
10
score for neuropathic pain).26 Increase in pain duration and pain intensity in the days after
carrying the external load is shown in Table III. The comorbid disorders in the two
symptomatic groups with odds ratio and 95% (CI) and p-values are shown in Table IV. The
most important descriptive variables for the LWS group are shown in Table V.
Several animations are displayed in Appendix I, each showing the changes of the cervical
spine lordosis without load versus with load for a typical woman in the asymptomatic group,
the IONP group, and within four subgroups of the LWS group, respectively. The rigid neck
strategy observed in the LWS group when loaded was an unexpected finding, most often
accompanied by horizontal translation of the head and the cervical spine as a whole, with
slight or no changes in segmental angular values, which was not a common feature in the two
control groups. When this rigid horizontal translational strategy was detected, radiographs
of the whole spine were taken of 6 women with LWS. No compensations for the horizontal
headneck translation was observed in the thoracic, lumbar, or hip joints.
Discussion
Key Findings
The results of this study strongly indicate that the cervical spine in most women with LWS
functions such as a rigid cylinder when external load is applied upon the head instead of
creating normal cervical lordosis as in the 2 control groups. This means that the load-bearing
capacity of the cervical spine is more greatly reduced in women with LWS than previously
anticipated (Figure 4.).
The results of the inter-and intra-radiologist reliability indicate that the measurements are
highly reliable (Table I). When the curvature approaches a completely straight alignment,
measurement values will approach zero and the difference between and within raters will
inevitable become larger due to small value. This explains the significant differences in Table
I.
Women with LWS were in significantly more pain and disabled and tolerated the external
load on the head significantly less at the moment of the examination according to Borg-Scale
(Table I). The women with LWS were also more affected in the days after the radiographic
examination (Table III). Table IV shows that women with LWS had significantly more
comorbid disorders and complained significantly more about feeling the head is too heavy.
Thirty-seven women with LWS (68.5%) rated themselves to be worse compared to when the
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
11
insurance claim was closed (Table V). This means that the subjective stability point of
symptoms commonly used by the insurance companies to close a claim has not been
reached. Characterization of most people with common whiplash is a few early symptoms and
many late symptoms, which emphasizes tailored early management.
Findings in Relation to other Studies
Only one radiographic experimental study has been conducted before where weight was put
on the head and the sagittal alignment of the cervical spine observed on lateral radiographs.31
This was done on 100 asymptomatic medical students in Sweden in 1942. The results
demonstrated an increased lordosis in the upper cervical spine and decreased lordosis in the
lower cervical spine in all participating subjects when load was applied to the region. The
subjects had to bear 12 kilos on their head in one part of the study and 18 kilos (12 kilos for
women) in their arms on either side in another part of the study. Prior research ascertained
that the ratio of lower/upper cervical spine lordosis was lowest in women in the LWS
compared to an IONP group and an asymptomatic control group without external load, i.e.
reduced cervical lordosis in the lower cervical spine and increased lordosis in the upper
cervical spine.32
Several studies have been conducted in Africa on people carrying heavy weights on their
head. These studies conclude that the axial strain of load carrying on the head exacerbates
degenerative change in the cervical spine which, becomes straight or kyphotic in the lower
cervical spine. 3335 It can be reasoned that these greater load conditions in all the above-
mentioned studies increased the activity in the torque-producing superficial neck muscles and
that the deep pre-and paravertebral neck muscles could not maintain the normal alignment of
cervical lordosis under such high load conditions.
This in accordance with the findings of the women with LWS in this study, where a rigid neck
muscle strategy was revealed, obstructing segmental cervical movements, when extra load
was applied to the top of the head, in most women in the LWS. This may reflect long-term
consequences of short-term benefits.36 The rigid neck muscle strategy may be protective in
nature in the shortterm to decrease the mechanical load on injured lower and/or upper
cervical spine structures. The weight-bearing zygapophysial joints have been found to be the
single most common source of neck pain in WAD.37 In the long term, overactive superficial
neck muscles together with delayed activity and/or atrophy with fatty infiltrations in the deep
local cervical muscles have been manifested as the most prominent physical features in LWS.
38,39
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
12
Clinical Significance
Many symptoms in the late whiplash syndrome remain obscure. The unrelenting neck muscle
stiffness in chronic cases generates multiply joint reaction forces through the cervical spine,
especially on the intervertebral disc in straight or kyphotic sagittal cervical alignments. 40 Ex
vivo experiment has verified that axial distraction reduces intradiscal pressure, 41 which may
parallel the clinical observation that many patients with LWS feel temporarily relief when
slight manual traction is applied to the cervical spine in its axial direction. Patwardhan et al. 6
have shown ex vivo that the load-carrying capacity of the ligamentous cervical spine sharply
increased under a compressive follower load in contrast to compressive vertical loads (Figure
5), which emphasizes the importance of training the deep pre- and paravertebral cervical
muscles in patients with LWS to maintain physiological lordosis.38
Insert Figure 5. Depiction of compressive vertical load path (A) And compressive follower
load path (B). A compressive vertical load induces bending moments (due to the moment arm
illustrated by an arrow labeled MA) and causes large angular changes at small load levels.
Under the compressive follower load path, the resultant internal load on the spine remains
tangential to the spinal curve, passing through the instantaneous center of rotation of each
segment. This minimizes bending moments and shear, and allows the cervical spine to support
the large compressive loads seen in vivo. From Patwardhan et al. (2000) (6). With kind
permission from Wolters Kluwer Health.
In terms of clinical practice, this means that a lordotic alignment of the cervical spine is a
desirable clinical outcome,42 as unphysilogic alignment of the cervical spine results in an
increase in cantilever loads,6 which subsequently induces an increase in muscular energy
expenditure43 and flexural stresses on the vertebrae with formation of osteophytes (Wolffs
Law),40 which are signs of dramatic decreases in load-bearing capacity of the cervical spine.6
Translating this evidence into clinical practice means that if the skull weighs 4,5 kg (10
pounds), then for every inch the skull displaces forward, there is a tenfold increase in the
effort needed from the posterior neck muscles to support the weight of the head, which
induces great compressive forces on the inert structures of the cervical spine.44 This is the
case during daily work, for example, at a computer and to-day the terms text-neck or tech-
neck are used to reflect increased load on the neck by sustained forward-bended head-neck
posture. These increased compressive loads inserted from the patients muscles may be one of
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
13
the most important clinical significant effects on late neck-related symptoms after a whiplash
trauma.
Insert Figure 6. Some common physical features in women with LWS.
Notwithstanding the above-mentioned biomechanical results, it is clear that the women in the
LWS are more affected by kinesiophobia and pain after innocuous stimuli or central
sensitization (Table II). Research has shown that addition of posttraumatic stress and sensory
hypersensitivity more accurately estimates disability and pain than fear avoidance measures
alone early after whiplash injury.45 It has been shown in LWS that central sensitization was
not maintained by a nociceptive input from the painful body areas because local anesthesia
did not affect the pain thresholds. 46 However, nociceptive stimulation associated with the
injury may produce excitation of the central nervous system, which in turn is responsible for
reduced pain thresholds in uninjured tissues. 46 Central sensitization may not require an
ongoing nociceptive input, but an initial peripheral event is required to induce central
sensitization.46 Once established, central sensitization may therefore be independent of the
peripheral input.46 The psychological distress found in women with LWS in this study (Table
II and Table IV) is similar to the profile of patients with chronic pain resulting from other
musculoskeletal injuries46. If psychological factors were the primary determinant of altered
pain perception, it would affect all the pain thresholds and not spare heat pain.46 Central
sensitization and psychological factors, which were only detected in part of the women with
LWS, are not responsible for the biomechanical results in this biomechanical study, rather
these factors are contributing to maintaining the pain and disability in the LWS.
Limitations
The whole spine was not imaged. The entire spine functions as 1 global unit whose individual
regions can have a significant effect on each other.47 This study is not representative for all
women in the chronic state, as the women in this study were recruited by sample of
convenience from specialists in manual therapy, who often get the worst cases. The reliability
and validity of the questionnaires used have not yet been ascertained in Icelandic language.
Sample size calculation prior to the study could not be performed because it took too long to
test different weights born upon the head and the variable responses obtained with different
weights between groups. No cause effect relationship can be established. This cross-
sectional study is a snap-shot in time, as the radiographic test results and the pain and
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
14
disability measures of the women in the 2 symptomatic groups were obtained at the same
time. A longitudinal study is required which includes both the biomechanical and pain
processing mechanisms as well as diverse psychological factors to ascertain the causeeffect
relationship.
Future Directions
To understand the peculiar biological consequences of soft tissue injuries to the cervical
spine, clear questions such as: "why is the cervical spine not able to tolerate the normal loads
of activities of daily living?" must be asked. It is important in current psychosocial research
trend that the biomechanical behavior of the cervical spine is not underrepresented, as
whiplash-type distortion injuries are biomechanical events with diverse biomechanical
consequences.48 For example, evidence from a few recent studies suggests correlations
between radiographic parameters in the cervical spine and health-related quality of life
(HRQL).49 It seems that women with LWS in this study were using the ankle strategy to
maintain postural balance when the weight was born upon the head, which requires a force
plate to measure alternation in the center of pressure from their feet.
One clinical option to produce normal lordosis might be to put a weight upon the head in front
of the COG. For visualization of how normal lordosis can be created by anterior load on the
head, see animation 7 in Appendix 1. A prerequisite for this treatment option, which merits
clinical investigations, is that the cervical spine is not a rigid cylinder due to unrelenting
hyperactivity in the torque-producing superficial neck muscles.
Conclusion
The study implies that the load-bearing capacity of the cervical spine is greatly reduced in
vivo in most women with LWS. The rigid horizontal translation strategy of the head and the
cervical spine as a whole implies that the cervical spine predominately functions such as a
rigid cylinder when loaded in the LWS. This merit further investigation. This is the case
despite numerous research, which emphazises the muscular imbalance between the the deep
and superficial neck muscles, has been published. There is therefore ugent need to better
translate research findings into everyday practice by easy-to-use technology (tools) to address
the loss of load-bearing capacity of the cervical spine in symptomatic people after a whiplash
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
15
injury. The altered pain processing mechanisms and diverse psychological factors contribute
to maintain the pain and disability in many women in the LWS.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all participants in this study, manual therapists, and staff
involved at any stage of the study. Special thanks to Professor Thorarinn Sveinsson at the
Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Iceland, for critical suggestions during
the statistical analyses.
Financial disclosure: No funds were received for this study.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
16
References
1. Dutia MB. The muscles and joints of the neck: their specialization and role in head
movement. Prog Neurobiol 1991; 37:16578.
2. Beier G, Schuck M, Schuller E, Spann W. Determination of physical data of the Head
I. Center of gravity and moments of inertia of human heads. Munich: Institute of
Forensic Medicine, University of Munich,1979; p.44
3. Clauser CE, Mc Conville JT, Young JW. Weight, volume and the center of mass of
segments of the human body. AMRL-TR-69-70, Aerospace Medical Research
Library, Aerospace Medical Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, Ohio, 1969. p.3
4. Knight JF, Baber C. Neck muscle activity and perceived pain and discomfort due to
variations of head load and posture. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2004;75: 12331.
5. Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JA. Analysis and measurement of neck loads. J
Orthop Res.1988; 6:71320.
6. Patwardhan AG, Havey RM, Ghanayem AJ, Diener H, Meade KP, Dunlap B, et al.
Load-carrying capacity of the human cervical spine in compression is increased under
a follower load. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25:154854.
7. Choi H, Vanderby R. Electromyographic measurement and analysis of neck loads.
Presented at the 43rd Annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society, San
Francisco, California, February, 913, 1997.
8. Panjabi MM, Cholewicki J, Nibu K, Grauer J, Babat LB, Dvorak J. Critical load of
the human cervical spine: an in vitro experimental study. Clinical Biomech 1988;
13:117.
9. Winters JM, Peles JD. Neck muscle activity and 3-D head kinematics during quasi-
static and dynamic tracking movements. In: Winters JM, Woo SL-Y, eds. Multiple
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Diener%20H%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10851105https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Meade%20KP%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10851105https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Dunlap%20B%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10851105
17
muscle systems: Biomechanics and movement organization. New York: Springer-
Verlag 1990. pp. 46180.
10. Louis R. Spinal stability as defined by the three-column spine concept. Anat Clin
1985; 7:3342.
11. Pal GP, Sherk HH. The vertical stability of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
1988;13: 44749.
12. Lorenz M, Patwardhan A, Vanderby R, Jr. Load-bearing characteristics of lumbar
facets in normal and surgically altered spinal segments. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983;
8:12230.
13. Panjabi MM, Oda T, Crisco JJ 3rd, Dvorak J, Grob D. Posture affects motion
coupling patterns of the upper cervical spine. J Orthop Res.1993; 11:52536.
14. Penning L, Wilmink JT. Rotation of the cervical spine. A CT study in normal subjects.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987; 12:73238.
15. Ishii T, Muaki Y, Hosono N, Sakaura H, Nakajima Y, Sato Y, et al. Kinematics of the
upper cervical spine in rotation: in vivo three-dimensional analysis. Spine (Phila Pa
1976) 2004; E13944.
16. Lin CC, Lu TW, Wang TM, Hsu CY, Hsu SJ, Shih TF. In vivo three-dimensional
intervertebral kinematics of the subaxial cervical spine during seated axial rotation and
lateral bending via a fluoroscopy-to-CT registration approach. J Biomech 2014; 14:
3310317.
17. Vernon H, Mior S. The neck disability index: a study of reliability and validity. J
Manipul Physiol Ther 1991; 14:40915.
18. Borg G. Borgs Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Champaign: Human Kinetics
1998.
19. Park MS, Moon SH, Lee HM, Kim SW, Kim TH, Lee SY et al. The effect of age on
cervical sagittal alignment: normative data on 100 asymptomatic subjects. Spine (Phila
Pa 1976) 2013; 38: E45863.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Oda%20T%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=8340825https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Crisco%20JJ%203rd%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=8340825https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Dvorak%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=8340825https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Grob%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=8340825https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lu%20TW%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25218506https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Wang%20TM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25218506https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hsu%20CY%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25218506https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hsu%20SJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25218506https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Shih%20TF%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25218506https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kim%20SW%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23354112https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kim%20TH%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23354112https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lee%20SY%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23354112
18
20. Machino M, Yukawa Y, Imagama S, Ito K, Katayama Y, Matsumoto T et al. Age-
related and degenerative changes in the osseous anatomy, alignment, and range of
motion of the cervical spine: A comparative study of radiographic data from 1016
patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy and 1230 asymptomatic subjects. Spine
(Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41: 47682.
21. Yukawa Y, Kato F, Suda K, Yamagata M, Ueta T. Age-related changes in osseous
anatomy, alignment, and range of motion of the cervical spine. Part I: Radiographic
data from over 1,200 asymptomatic subjects. Eur Spine J 2012; 21:1492498.
22. Vasavada AN, Danara J, Siegmund GP. Head and neck anthropometry, vertebral
geometry and neck strength in height-matched men and women. J Biomech 2008; 41;
11421.
23. Sally L, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is
moderate pain in millimeters? Pain 1997; 72:957.
24. IASP: Task Force on Taxonomy of the International Association for the Study of Pain
[Internet]. Washington, D.C: International Association for the Study of Pain; 2017
[cited 2017 June 10]. Available from the Introduction Section, p.4: https://www.iasp-
pain.org/PublicationsNews/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1673
25. Vlaeyen J, Linton S. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal
pain: a state of the art. Pain. 2000; 85:31722.
26. Bennett MI, Smith BH, Torrance N, Potter J. The S-LANSS score for identifying pain
of predominantly neuropathic origin: Validation for use in clinical and postal research.
Journal of Pain 2005; 6:14958.
27. Rankin G, Stokes M. Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: illustration of
appropriate statistical analysis. Clin Rehabil 1998; 12:18799.
28. Harrison DE, Harrison DD, Cailliet R, Troyanovich SJ, Janik TJ, Holland B. Cobb
method or Harrison posterior tangent method: Which to choose for lateral cervical
radiographic analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25: 207278.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ito%20K%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=26571180https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Katayama%20Y%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=26571180https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Matsumoto%20T%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=26571180https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Moore%20RA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9272792https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=McQuay%20HJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9272792https://www.iasp-pain.org/PublicationsNews/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1673https://www.iasp-pain.org/PublicationsNews/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1673https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Smith%20BH%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=15772908https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Torrance%20N%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=15772908https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Potter%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=15772908https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Harrison%20DD%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10954638https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Cailliet%20R%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10954638https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Troyanovich%20SJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10954638https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Janik%20TJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10954638https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Holland%20B%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=10954638
19
29. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two
methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1:30710.
30. Shrout P, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations. Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol
Bull.1979; 86:42028.
31. Ingelmark BE. ber schmertzhafte Insuffizienzzustande im Halse. Acta Medica Scand
1942; 111:17289.
32. Kristjansson E, Jnsson H Jr. Is the sagittal configuration of the cervical spine
changed in women with chronic whiplash syndrome? A comparative computer-
assisted radiographic assessment. J Manip Physiol Ther 2002; 25:55055.
33. Levy L. Porters neck. BMJ 1968; 2:169.
34. Jumah KB, Nyame PK. Relationship between load carrying on the head and cervical
spondylosis in Ghanaians. West Afr J Med 1994;13: 18182.
35. Jger HJ, Gordon-Harris L, Mehring UM, Goetz GF, Mathias KD. Degenerative
change in the cervical spine and load-carrying on the head. Skeletal Radiol 1997; 26:
47581.
36. Hodges PW, Smeets RJ. Interaction between pain, movement, and physical activity:
short-term benefits, long-term consequences, and targets for treatment. Clin J Pain
2015; 31:97107.
37. Lord SM, Barnsley L, Wallis BJ, Bogduk N. Chronic cervical zygapophysial joint pain
after whiplash. A placebo-controlled prevalence study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996:
21:173745.
38. Neuromuscular dysfunction in whiplash associated disorders: In Sterling M, Kenardy
J, eds. Whiplash: Evidence Base for Clinical Practice: Sidney, Edinburgh, London,
Churchill Livingstone 2011. ISSBN 10 0729539466, pp. 5263.
39. Karlson A, Lenhard OD, slund U, West J, Romu T, Smedy et al. An investigation
of fat infiltration of the multifidus muscle in patients with severe neck symptoms
associated with chronic whiplash-associated disorder. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
2016;46:88693.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Gordon-Harris%20L%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9297752https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mehring%20UM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9297752https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Goetz%20GF%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9297752https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mathias%20KD%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9297752
20
40. Harrison DE, Harrison DD, Janik TJ, William Jones E, Cailliet R, Normand M.
Comparison of axial and flexural stresses in lordosis and three buckled configurations
of the cervical spine. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2001;16:27684.
41. Guehring T, Unglaub F, Lorenz H, Omlor G, Wilke HJ, Kroeber MW. Intradiscal
pressure measurements in normal discs, compressed discs and compressed discs
treated with axial posterior disc distraction: an experimental study on the rabbit
lumbar spine model. Eur Spine J 2006; 15:597604.
42. Harrison DD, Troyanovich SJ, Harrison DE, Janik TJ, Murphy DJ. A normal sagittal
spinal configuration: a desirable clinical outcome. J Manip Physiol Ther 1996;
19:398405.
43. Scheer JK, Tang JA, Smith JS, Acosta FL Jr, Protopsaltis TS, Blondel B, et al.
Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implicationsa review. J
Neurosurg Spine 2013; 19:14159
44. Kapandji IA. Physiology of Joints, Vol. 3 Churchill Livingston, London, 2008.
45. Pedler A, Kamper SJ, Sterling M. Addition of posttraumatic stress and sensory
hypersensitivity more accurately estimates disability and pain than fear avoidance
measures alone after whiplash injury. Pain 2016; 157: 164554.
46. Curatolo M, Petersen-Felix S, Arendt-Nielsen L,Giani C, Zbinden AM, Radanov BP.
Central hypersensitivity in chronic pain after whiplash injury. Clin J Pain 2001;
17:30615
47. Lee SH, Son ES, Seo EM, Suk KS, Kim KT. Factors determining cervical spine
sagittal balance in asymptomatic adults: correlation with spinopelvic balance and
thoracic inlet alignment. Spine J 2015; 15:70512.
48. Stemper BD, Corner BD. Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Occupant kinematics and
neck morphology. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016; 46: 83444.
49. Protopsaltis TS, Scheer JK, Terran JS, Smith JS, Hamilton DK, Kim HJ et al. How the
neck affects the back: changes in regional cervical sagittal alignment correlate to
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Harrison%20DD%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11358614https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Janik%20TJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11358614https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=William%20Jones%20E%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11358614https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Cailliet%20R%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11358614https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Normand%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11358614https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Unglaub%20F%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16133080https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lorenz%20H%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16133080https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Omlor%20G%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16133080https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Wilke%20HJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16133080https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kroeber%20MW%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16133080https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Acosta%20FL%20Jr%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23768023https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Protopsaltis%20TS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23768023https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Blondel%20B%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23768023https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Curatolo%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Petersen-Felix%20S%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Arendt-Nielsen%20L%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Giani%20C%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Zbinden%20AM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Radanov%20BP%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=11783810https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Son%20ES%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24021619https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Seo%20EM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24021619https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Suk%20KS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24021619https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kim%20KT%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24021619https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Smith%20JS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25978077https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hamilton%20DK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25978077https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kim%20HJ%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25978077
21
HRQOL improvement in adult thoracolumbar deformity patients at 2-year follow-up. J
Neurosurg Spine 2015; 23:15358.
Figure captions
Figure 1. A vertical line from the center of weight upon the head is anterior to the center of
gravity of the head, creating greater anterior moment, which the neck extensor muscles must
counteract.
Figure 2. Experimental set-up.
Figure 3A. For the upper cervical spine, the angle a (C0C1) was formed by a line connecting
the most caudal point on the occipital bone posteriorly, aligning with the posterior surface of
the spinal canal at the C1 level, and the deepest point in the groove formed by the occipital
condyle and the occipital bone anteriorly versus the line tangential to the inferior aspect of the
atlas; angle b (C1C2) by the lines tangential to the inferior aspects of the atlas and axis,
respectively.
Figure 3B. Radiographic measurements for the lower cervical spine. The Harrison posterior
tangent method was used which involves drawing lines parallel to the posterior surfaces of all
cervical vertebral bodies from C2 to C7 and then summing the segmental angles for an overall
cervical curvature angle.28
Figure 4. Angular rotation in the sagittal plane in upright standing position measured in
degrees (mean, standard error), without and with axial load upon the head. Significant
differences were revealed within the asymptomatic and the IONP groups but not within the
LWS group. Abbreviations: IONP=insidious onset neck pain; LWS= late whiplash syndrome
Figure 5. Depiction of compressive vertical load path (A) And compressive follower load path
(B). A compressive vertical load induces bending moments (due to the moment arm
illustrated by an arrow labeled MA) and causes large angular changes at small load levels.
Under the compressive follower load path, the resultant internal load on the spine remains
tangential to the spinal curve, passing through the instantaneous center of rotation of each
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
22
segment. This minimizes bending moments and shear, and allows the cervical spine to support
the large compressive loads seen in vivo. From Patwardhan et al. (2000)6. With kind
permission from Wolters Kluwer Health.
Figure 6. Some common physical features of women in late whiplash
TABLE captions
TABLE I. Inter and intra-rater reliability.
TABLE II. Comparison of Age, Body Mass Index and Questionnaires.
TABLE III. Increase in symptoms after carrying the external load on the head.
TABLE IV. Comorbid Disorders.
TABLE V. LWS* Group Descriptive Variables.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
Table I. Reliability Inter-rater (R2a vs R1)
Systematic error
Segments ICC (2,1) SEM SER Diff (2a - 1) p-value C0-C1 0.78 0.62 0,08 -0.19 0,08 C1-C2 0.93 0,35 0,00 -0.15 0,61 C2-C3 0,88 0.45 0,00 -0.04 0,72 C3-C4 0,90 0.23 0,26 -0.39
Table II. Comparison of Age, Body Mass Index and Questionnaires
LWS* N=62
IONP N = 60
Asymptomatic N =60
Mean age in years (SD) 39.13 (8.64) 38.45 (8.76) 35.93 (9.75)
Mean Body Mass Index (kg/m2)(SD) 25.0 (4.8) 25.9 (3.8) 24.3 (5.2)
Mean VAS 0 -10 (SD) 6.71 (1.38) 5.13 (1.61) N/A
Medication use in number of patients and percentage 34 (55) 6 (10) N/A
Mean Borg-CR 10 Exertion Scale 0-10 (SD) 5.06 (2.23) 2.63 (1.48) 1.46 (1.34)
Mean Neck Disability Index 0-100 (SD) 40.82 (15.38) 21.8 (11.33) 1.07 (1.62)
Mean Leeds Assessment of Neuriopathic Symptoms and Signs 0-24 (SD)
12.66 (6.27) 8.65 (5.61) N/A
Mean Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TAMPA) 17-68 (SD) 33.88 (8.18) 28.1 (8.18) N/A
* LWS (Late Whiplash Syndrome)
IONP (Insidious Onset Neck Pain)
No significant differences by One-Way Anova and Independent tTest
Significant differences by One-Way Anova and/or Independent tTest
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
Table III. Increase in symptoms after carrying the external load on the head
WAD IONP
No symptoms 7 24
*Mild symptoms (same day) 11 19
Moderate symptoms (1-3 days) 25 13
Severe symptoms (3 -14 days) 19 4
Total 62 60 *
Table IV. Comorbid Disorders
LWS N =62 IONP=60 OR (95% CI) p
General symptoms Yes/No Yes/No Headache 49/13 39/21 2,0 (0,9 to 4.5) 0.08
Pain and stiffness in the neck 52/10 50/10 1.0 (0.4 to 2.7) 0.93
Pain and stiffness in the shoulder girdle 54/8 39/21 3.6 (1.5 to 9.1) 0.01*
Pain and stiffness berween the shoulder plates 54/8 34/26 5.2 (2.1 to 12.7)
Table V. LWS* Group Descriptive Variables
Number of collisions (%)
One collision 36 (58%) /36
Two collisions 17 (27,4%) /34
Three collisions 4 (6,5%) /12
Four collisions 4 (6,5%) /16
Five collisions 1 (1,6%) /5
Total 62 (100%); Total 103
Type of collision Number (%)
Rear-end 56 (54,4%)
Front 16 (15,5%)
Side 15 (14,6%)
Combined 13 (12,6%)
Roll-over 3 (2,9%)
Total 103 (100%)
Dominate side of symptoms Number (%)
Right 27 (43,5%)
Left 18 (29%)
Bilateral 9 (14,5%)
Changing sides 8 (13%)
Total 62 (100%)
Claim closed Number (%)
Yes 54 (87,1%)
No 5 (8,1%)
NA 3 (4,8%)
Total 62 (100%)
After the claim was closed Number (%)
Worse 37 (68,5%)
Same 12 (22,2%)
Better 5 (9,3%)
NA 8
Total 62 (100%)
*LWS = Late whiplash syndrome
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo, or other proprietary information of the Publisher.
COPYRIGHT EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies (either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other means which may allow access to the Article. The use
Top Related