Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This is a descriptive, observational, longitudinal, prospective study consecutively enrolling patients with non-specific neck pain and age-matched asymptomatic participants.
The investigators will register sensorimotor control variables, including active range of motion, movement speed, acceleration, smoothness of motion, head repositioning accuracy and motion coupling patterns. These variables will be recorded by means of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors during the following tests consecutively performed in two measuring sessions separated by 12 months: (a) kinematics of planar movements, (b) kinematics of the craniocervical flexion movement, (c) kinematics during functional tasks and (d) kinematics of task-oriented neck movements in response to visual targets.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asymptomatic participants | Asymptomatic subjects should not present any pain in the cervical region during the last 3 months and no previous treatment for neck pain in order to be included in the study. |
| |
| Neck pain patients | Patients with neck pain should have an intensity of pain of at least 3 points out of 10 on a Visual Analog Scale and a neck pain duration of at least 3 months of evolution. Neck pain could be from nonspecific mechanical origin, associated with whiplash or with a previous medical diagnosis of degenerative or inflammatory alterations of the cervical spine, associated or not with headache and pain in the shoulder region or the upper limb. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| sensorimotor control analysis using inertial sensor technology | Diagnostic Test | Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors will measure sensorimotor control variables including active range of motion, movement speed, acceleration, smoothness of motion, head repositioning accuracy and motion coupling patterns |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Active range of motion | Expressed as an angular displacement (°) in 3 full-movements (flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation) | 1 year |
| Movement speed | Expressed as angular velocity (°/sec) in 3 full-movements (flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation) | 1 year |
| Smoothness of motion | expressed as movement jerk (º/sec3) | 1 year |
| Head repositioning accuracy | Calculated as the repositioning error considering the difference between the neutral starting position and the following positions reached after the performance of any of the movements | 1 year |
| Motion coupling patterns | Calculated as the angular displacement occurring in a different anatomical plane to the one that is being tested for each of the planar movements | 1 year |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Physical activity level | Measured using the short version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). The score of the scale is expressed in MET level x minutes of activity/day x days per week. Levels of 3.3 METs are considered light, 4.0 METs are moderate and 8.0 METs are vigorous. | 1 year |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Patients will be recruited from a community sample in Madrid, Spain
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aitor Martin Pintado Zugasti, PhD | Contact | 91 3724700 | 14691 | martinpintado@ceu.es |
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35168985 | Derived | Moggioli F, Perez-Fernandez T, Liebana S, Corredor EB, Armijo-Olivo S, Fernandez-Carnero J, Raya R, Conde P, Rodriguez-Lopez O, Sanchez C, Martin-Pintado-Zugasti A. Analysis of sensorimotor control in people with and without neck pain using inertial sensor technology: study protocol for a 1-year longitudinal prospective observational study. BMJ Open. 2022 Feb 15;12(2):e058190. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058190. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009069 | Movement Disorders |
| D019547 | Neck Pain |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D002493 | Central Nervous System Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D010146 | Pain |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Fear of movement and injury |
Measured using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11). It consists of 11 questions scored from 1 to 4. Therefore, a score of 11 is the lowest possible level of kinesiphobia, while 44 is the highest. |
| 1 year |
| Pain-related fear-avoidance | Measured using the Fear Avoidance Components Scale (FACS). It has 20 itemsmeasured on a 6-point Likert scale for total possible score of 100 and the lowest possible score of 0. Higher scores indicate higher levels of fear avoidance. | 1 year |
| D012816 |
| Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |