Effect of glenohumeral forward flexion on upper limb myoelectric activity during simulated mills manipulation; relations to peripheral nerve biomechanics

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Olavi Airaksinen³  Markku Kankaanpää⁷  Corrado Candian⁶  Petar Bačić¹  Stanislav Peharec¹  Saara M Rissanen⁴  Michael Shacklock⁵  Marinko Rade² 

[1] Polyclinic for Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Peharec, Pula, Croatia;“Prim. dr.Martin Horvat” Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Hospital, Luigi Monti street n.2, 52210 Rovinj, Croatia;Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Kuopio University Hospital, P.O. Box 1607, 70211 Kuopio, Finland;Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland;Neurodynamic Solutions, Adelaide, Australia;Regional Institute for the Studies on Social Services (I.R.S.Se.S), Trieste, Italy;Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland

关键词: Neurodynamics;    Nociceptive flexion reflex;    Mills manipulation;    Radial nerve;    Tennis elbow;   

Others  :  1122166
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-15-288

 received in 2014-04-23, accepted in 2014-08-26,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

It is generally accepted that muscles may activate via the common nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR) in response to painful stimuli associated with tensile or compressive forces on peripheral nerves. Following the basic assumption that the radial nerve may be stressed around the elbow during the execution of the Mills manipulation, two positions considered to have different mechanical effects on the radial nerve and the brachial plexus were tested in order to i) explore whether muscles are activated in certain patterns with concomitant changes in nerve tension, ii) establish whether muscle responses can be modified with mechanical unloading of the brachial plexus.

Methods

Muscle responses were quantified bilaterally in eight subjects (N = 16) during Mills Manipulation (MM) pre-manipulative positioning and a Varied position that putatively produces less mechanical tension in the brachial plexus. End range pre-manipulative stretch was used in order to simulate the effects of Mills manipulation. Electromyographic signals were recorded with a 16 channel portable EMG unit and correlated with kinematic data from three charge-coupled device adjustable cameras which allowed for precise movement tracking.

Results

Compared with the Standard Mills manipulation position, the Varied position produced significantly reduced myoelectric activity (P ≤ .001) in all test muscles. Additional subjective data support the notion that certain muscle activity patterns were protective.

Conclusion

It seems that protective muscles are selectively activated in a specific pattern in order to protect the radial nerve from mechanical tension by shortening its pathway, suggesting integration of muscle and neural mechanisms. Furthermore, the significantly decreased myoelectric activity with reduced mechanical tension in the brachial plexus may help controlling collateral effects of the Mills manipulation itself, making it potentially safer and more specific.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Rade et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Shacklock M: Neurodynamics. Physiotherapy 1995, 81(1):9-16.
• [2]Butler D: Mobilisation of the nervous system. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1991.
• [3]Butler D, Gifford L: The concept of adverse mechanical tension in the nervous system. part 1: Testing for ‘dural tension’. Physiotherapy 1989, 75(11):622-629.
• [4]Elvey RL: Brachial plexus tension tests and the pathoanatomical origin of arm pain. In Aspects of manipulative therapy. Edited by Idczak R. Melbourne, Australia: Lincoln Institute of Health Sciences; 1979:105-110.
• [5]Shacklock M: Clinical neurodynamics, a new system of musculoskeletal treatment. Oxford: Elsevier; 2005.
• [6]Von Lanz T, Wachsmuth W: Praktische anatomie. Ein lehr und hilfsfuch der anatomischen grundlagen ärtslichen, handelns. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1959.
• [7]Kleinrensink GJ, Stoeckart R, Mulder PG, Hoek G, Broek T, Vleeming A, Snijders CJ: Upper limb tension test as tools in the diagnosis of nerve and plexus lesions. Anatomical and biomechanical aspects. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2000, 15:9-14.
• [8]Yaxley G, Jull G: A modified upper limb tension test: an investigation of responses in normal sybjects. Aust J Physiother 1991, 27(3):143-152.
• [9]Mills GP: Treatment of tennis elbow. Br Med J 1928, 1:12-13.
• [10]Atkins E, Kerr J, Goodlad E: A practical approach to orthopaedic medicine. 3rd edition. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone - Elsevier; 2010:142-145.
• [11]Cyriax J: Textbook of Orthopaedic medicine. Volume 1. 8th edition. London: Baillière Tindal; 1982::119-180.
• [12]Cyriax J: Textbook of Orthopaedic medicine. Volume 2. 11th edition. London: Baillière Tindall; 1984::112.
• [13]Kesson M, Atkins E: Orthopaedic medicine, a practical approach. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2005:207-211.
• [14]Greenfield C, Webster V: Chronic lateral epicondylitis: survey of current practice in the outpatient departments in scotland. Physiotherapy 2002, 88(10):578-594.
• [15]Coppieters MW, Van de Velde M, Stappaerts KH: Positioning in anesthesiology: toward a better understanding of stretch-induced perioperative neuropathies. Anesthesiology 2002, 97(1):75-81.
• [16]Coppieters MW: Shoulder restraints as a potential cause for stretch neuropathies: biomechanical support for the impact of shoulder girdle depression and arm abduction on nerve strain. Anesthesiology 2006, 104(6):1351-1352.
• [17]Rade M, Shacklock M, Peharec S, Bačić P, Candian C, Kankaanpää M, Airaksinen A: Effect of cervical spine position on upper limb myoelectric activity during pre-manipulative stretch for mills manipulation: a new model, relations to peripheral nerve biomechanics and specificity of mills manipulation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2012, 22(3):363-369.
• [18]Hermens HJ, Freriks B, Merletti R, Stegeman D, Block J, Rau G, Disselhorst-Klug C, Hägg G: SENIAM 8: European recommendations for surface electromyography. Enschede, the Netherlands: Roessingh research and Development b.v; 1999.
• [19]Hashimoto T, Shindo M, Morita H, Yanagisawa N, Ikeda S: On the errors in assessment of severity of involuntary movements using surface EMG. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2005, 15:316-322.
• [20]Rissanen SM, Kankaanpää M, Meigal A, Tarvainen MP, Nuutinen J, Tarkka IM, Airaksinen O, Karjalainen PA: Surface EMG and acceleration signals in Parkinson’s disease: feature extraction and cluster analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2008, 46:849-858.
• [21]Rissanen SM, Kankaanpää M, Tarvainen MP, Meigal AY, Nuutinen J, Tarkka IM, Airaksinen O, Karjalainen PA: Analysis of dynamic voluntary muscle contractions in Parkinson’s disease. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2009, 56(9):2280-2288.
• [22]Jaberzadeh S, Scutter S, Nazeran H: Mechanosensitivity of the median nerve and mechanically produced motor responses during upper limb neurodynamic test 1. Physiotherapy 2005, 91(2):94-100.
• [23]Wu G, Van Der Helm FCT, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, Nagels J, Karduna AR, McQuade K, Wang X, Werner FW, Buchholz B: ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion - part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J Biomech 2005, 38(5):981-992.
• [24]Heck CV, Hendryson IE, Rowe CR: Joint motion: Method of measuring and recording. In 14th. reprint edition. Edinburgh: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons - Churchill Livingstone; 1991:10-11.
• [25]Haninec P, Szeder V: Reconstruction of elbow flexion by transposition of pedicled long head of triceps brachii muscle. Acta Chir Plast 1999, 41(3):82-86.
• [26]Lim AYT, Pereira BP, Kumar VP: The long head of the triceps brachii as a free functioning muscle transfer. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001, 107(7):1746-1752.
• [27]Coppieters MW, Stappaerts KH, Staes FF, Everaert DG: Shoulder girdle elevation during neurodynamic testing: An assessable sign? Man Ther 2001, 6(2):88-96.
• [28]Coppieters MW, Stappaerts KH, Wouters LL, Janssens K: Aberrant protective force generation during neural provocation testing and the effect of treatment in patients with neurogenic cervicobrachial pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2003, 26(2):99-106.
• [29]Van Hoof T, Vangestel C, Forward M, Verhaeghe B, Van Thilborgh L, Plasschaert F, De Muynck M, Vanderstraeten G, D’Herde K: The impact of muscular variation on the neurodynamic test for the median nerve in a healthy population with langer’s axillary arch. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2008, 31(6):474-483.
• [30]Lakens D: Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol 2013, 26(4):863.
• [31]Günal I, Köse N, Erdogan O, Göktürk E, Seber S: Normal range of motion of the joints of the upper extremity in male subjects, with special reference to side. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996, 78:1401-1404.
• [32]Balster SM, Jull GA: Upper trapezius muscle activity during the brachial plexus tension test in asymptomatic subjects. Man Ther 1997, 2(3):144-149.
• [33]Johnson GR, Pandyan AD: The activity in the three regions of the trapezius under controlled loading conditions - an experimental and modelling study. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2005, 20(2):155-161.
• [34]Ludewig PM, Cook TM, Nawoczenski DA: Three-dimensional scapular orientation and muscle activity at selected positions of humeral elevation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1996, 24(2):57-65.
• [35]Hromada J: On the nerve supply of the connective tissue of some peripheral nervous system components. Acta Anat 1963, 55:343-351.
• [36]Bove GM, Light AR: Calcitonin gene-related peptide and peripherin immunoreaetivity in nerve sheaths. Somatosens Mot Res 1995, 12(1):49-57.