Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T22:41:03.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Mechanics of Cervical Muscle Recruitment on Cervical Spine Stability —A Biomechanical in Vitro Study using Porcine Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2011

C.-H. Cheng ,
T.-Y. Chen ,
Y.-W. Kuo  and
J.-L. Wang
C.-H. Cheng*
Affiliation:
Institute Of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617, R.O.C.
T.-Y. Chen*
Affiliation:
Institute Of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617, R.O.C.
Y.-W. Kuo*
Affiliation:
Institute Of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617, R.O.C.
J.-L. Wang*
Affiliation:
Institute Of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 10617, R.O.C.
*
*Physiotherapist
**M.S.
*Physiotherapist
***Ph.D.
Get access

Abstract

Cervical muscles are crucial in providing the stability of the cervical spine. Many in vitro studies have investigated the relationship between muscle force and stability directly. However, the effects of different muscle dysfunctions or muscle recruitments on cervical spine stability are not yet clear and therefore, worthy of study. A spine testing apparatus with muscle force replication activated by pneumatic cylinders was developed to find the effect of muscles on spinal stability. Seven porcine cervical spines (C2-T1) were used. Three pairs of cervical muscles, including neck flexors (sternocleidomastoid, SCM) and neck extensors (splenius capitis, SPL; semispinalis capitis, SSC), were simulated. The experimental tests included: 1. no muscle recruitment, 2. full muscle recruitments, 3. SCM dysfunction, 4. SPL dysfunction, and 5. SSC dysfunction. The external pure moment in sagittal plane was applied from 0 Nm to 2 Nm to examine the stability/flexibility of specimens. The spinal stability was evaluated by the neutral zone (NZ), the range of motion (ROM), the reduced NZ (R_NZ), and the reduced ROM (R_ROM). Loading responses of C7-T1 disc were also measured. The results of this study showed: The activation of cervical muscles decreased the NZ and ROM. The degree of decrease among different muscle dysfunctions, however, was not significantly different. The SPL dysfunction induced larger anterior shear force, while the SCM dysfunction exclusively induced extension moment. In conclusion, the muscle forces could stabilize the cervical spine, but significant decrease in spinal stability was not found among dysfunctions of different muscles. The SCM and SPL dysfunction may result in abnormal stress at the C7-T1 disc.

Keywords

Cervical spineStabilityMuscle forceMuscle replication.
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Mechanics , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 63 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C. 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Granata, K. P. and Marras, W. S., “Cost-Benefit of Muscle Cocontraction in Protecting Against Spinal Instability,” Spine, 25, pp. 1398–1404 (2000).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gardner-Morse, M. G., and Stokes, I. A., “Effects of Abdominal Muscle Coactivation on Lumbar Spine Stability,” Spine, 23, pp. 86–91; discussion 91-82 (1998).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Granata, K. P. and Orishimo, K. F., “Response of Trunk Muscle Coactivation to Changes in Spinal Stability,” J. Biomech., 34, pp. 1117–1123 (2001).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Lee, P. J., Rogers, E. L. and Granata, K. P., “Active Trunk Stiffness Increases with Co-Contraction,” J. Electromyogr Kinesiol, 16, pp. 51–57 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Gardner-Morse, M. G. and Stokes, I. A., “Trunk Stiffness Increases with Steady-State Effort,” J. Biomech., 34, pp. 457–463(2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Essendrop, M., Andersen, T. B. and Schibye, B., “Increase in Spinal Stability Obtained at Levels of Intra-Abdominal Pressure and Back Muscle Activity Realistic to Work Situations,” Appl. Ergon., 33, pp. 471–476 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Barton, P. M. and Hayes, K. C., “Neck Flexor Muscle Strength, Efficiency, and Relaxation Times in Normal Subjects and Subjects with Unilateral Neck Pain and Headache,” Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 77, pp. 680–687 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Chiu, T. T., Lam, T. H. and Hedley, A. J., “Maximal Isometric Muscle Strength of the Cervical Spine in Healthy Volunteers,” Clin. Rehabil., 16, pp. 772–779 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Ylinen, J., Salo, P., Nykanen, M., Kautiainen, H. and Hakkinen, A., “Decreased Isometric Neck Strength in Women with Chronic Neck Pain and the Repeatability of Neck Strength Measurements,” Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 85, pp. 1303–1308 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Jordan, A., Mehlsen, J. and Ostergaard, K., “A Comparison of Physical Characteristics Between Patients Seeking Treatment for Neck Pain and Age-Matched Healthy People,” J. Manipulative Physiol. Ther., 20, pp. 468–475 (1997).Google Scholar
11.Falla, D., Rainoldi, A., Merletti, R. and Jull, G., “Myoelectric Manifestations of Sternocleidomastoid and Anterior Scalene Muscle Fatigue in Chronic Neck Pain Patients,” Clin. Neurophysiol., 114, pp. 488–495 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Panjabi, M. M., Abumi, K., Duranceau, J. and Oxland, T., “Spinal Stability and Intersegmental Muscle Forces—A Biomechanical Model,” Spine, 14, pp. 194–200(1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Wilke, H. J., Claes, L., Schmitt, H. and Wolf, S., “A Universal Spine Tester for in Vitro Experiments with Muscle Force Simulation,” Eur. Spine J., 3, pp. 91–97 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Wilke, H. J., Wolf, S., Claes, L. E., Arand, M. and Wiesend, A., “Stability Increase of the Lumbar Spine with Different Muscle Groups—A Biomechanical in Vitro Study,” Spine, 20, pp. 192–198 (1995).Google Scholar
15.Kettler, A., Hartwig, E., Schultheiss, M., Claes, L. and Wilke, H. J., “Mechanically Simulated Muscle Forces Strongly Stabilize Intact and Injured Upper Cervical Spine Specimens,” J. Biomech., 35, pp 339–346 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Vasavada, A. N., Li, S.and Delp, S. L., “Influence of Muscle Morphometry and Moment Arms on the Moment-Generating Capacity of Human Neck Muscles,” Spine, 23, pp. 412–422 (1998).Google Scholar
17.Panjabi, M. M., Dvorak, J., Duranceau, J., Yamamoto, I., Gerber, M., Rauschning, W. and Bueff, H. U., “Three-Dimensional Movements of the Upper Cervical Spine,” Spine, 13, pp. 726–730 (1988).Google Scholar
18.Panjabi, M. M., “Clinical Spinal Instability and Low Back Pain,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., 13, pp. 371–379 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Panjabi, M. M., Crisco, J. J., Vasavada, A., Oda, T., Cholewicki, J., Nibu, K. and Shin, E., “Mechanical Properties of the Human Cervical Spine as Shown by Three-Dimensional Load-Displacement Curves,” Spine, 26, pp. 2692–2700(2001).Google Scholar
20.Pitzen, T., Kettler, A., Drumm, J., Nabhan, A., Steudel, W. I., Claes, L. and Wilke, H. J., “Cervical Spine Disc Prosthesis: Radiographic, Biomechanical and Morphological Post Mortal Findings 12 Weeks After Implantation— A Retrieval Example,” Eur. Spine J. (2007).Google Scholar
21.Wilke, H. J., Kettler, A. and Claes, L. E., “Are Sheep Spines a Valid Biomechanical Model for Human Spines?” Spine, 22, pp. 2365–2374 (1997).Google Scholar
22.Yoganandan, N., Pintar, F. A., Stemper, B. D., Wolfla, C. E., Shender, B. S. and Paskoff, G., “Level-Dependent Coronal and Axial Moment-Rotation Corridors of Degeneration-Free Cervical Spines in Lateral Flexion,” J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., 89, pp. 1066–1074 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Pope, M. H., Ogon, M. and Okawa, A., “Biomechanical Measurements,” Lumbar Segmental Instability, Szpalski, M., Gunzburg, R., and Pope, M. H., Eds., Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia (1999).Google Scholar
24.White, A. A. III, Bernhardt, M. and Panjabi, M. M., “Clinical Biomechanics and Lumbar Spinal Instability,” Lumbar Segmental Instability, Szpalski, M., Gunzburg, R., and Pope, M. H., Eds., Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia (1999).Google Scholar
25.Lu, T. W. and Lu, C. H., “Forces Transmitted in the Knee Joint During Stair Ascent and Descent,” Journal of Mechanics, 22, pp. 289–297 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Lin, H. C., Lu, T. W. and Hsu, H. C., “Comparisons of Joint Kinetics in the Lower Extremity Between Stair Ascent and Descent,” Journal of Mechanics, 21, pp. 41–50 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Snijders, C. J., Hoek van Dijke, G. A. and Roosch, E. R., “A Biomechanical Model for the Analysis of the Cervical Spine in Static Postures,” J. Biomech., 24, pp. 783–792(1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Edgerton, V. R., Wolf, S. L., Levendowski, D. J. and Roy, R. R., “Theoretical Basis for Patterning EMG Amplitudes to Assess Muscle Dysfunction,” Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., 28, pp. 744–751 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Panjabi, M. M., Summers, D. J., Pelker, R. R., Videman, T., Friedlaender, G. E. and Southwick, W. O., “Three-Dimensional Load-Displacement Curves Due to Forces on the Cervical Spine,” J. Orthop. Res., 4, pp. 152–161 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Moroney, S. P., Schultz, A. B., Miller, J. A. and Andersson, G. B., “Load-Displacement Properties of Lower Cervical Spine Motion Segments,” J. Biomech., 21, pp. 769–779(1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar