0
Research Papers

Local Dynamic Stability of Spine Muscle Activation and Stiffness Patterns During Repetitive Lifting

[+] Author and Article Information
Ryan B. Graham

School of Physical and Health Education,
Nipissing University,
100 College Drive, Box 5002,
North Bay, ON P1B 8L7, Canada
e-mail: ryang@nipissingu.ca

Stephen H. M. Brown

Department of Human Health
and Nutritional Sciences,
University of Guelph,
50 Stone Road East,
Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
e-mail: shmbrown@uoguelph.ca

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received February 6, 2014; final manuscript received September 30, 2014; accepted manuscript posted October 16, 2014; published online October 30, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Kenneth Fischer.

J Biomech Eng 136(12), 121006 (Oct 30, 2014) (9 pages) Paper No: BIO-14-1070; doi: 10.1115/1.4028818 History: Received February 06, 2014; Revised September 30, 2014; Accepted October 16, 2014

To facilitate stable trunk kinematics, humans must generate appropriate motor patterns to effectively control muscle force and stiffness and respond to biomechanical perturbations and/or neuromuscular control errors. Thus, it is important to understand physiological variables such as muscle force and stiffness, and how these relate to the downstream production of stable spine and trunk movements. This study was designed to assess the local dynamic stability of spine muscle activation and rotational stiffness patterns using Lyapunov analyses, and relationships to the local dynamic stability of resulting spine kinematics, during repetitive lifting and lowering at varying combinations of lifting load and rate. With an increase in the load lifted at a constant rate there was a trend for decreased local dynamic stability of spine muscle activations and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness; although the only significant change was for the full state space muscle activation stability (p < 0.05). With an increase in lifting rate with a constant load there was a significant decrease in the local dynamic stability of spine muscle activations and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (p ≤ 0.001 for all measures). These novel findings suggest that the stability of motor inputs and the muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness can be altered by external task demands (load and lifting rate), and therefore are important variables to consider when assessing the stability of the resulting kinematics.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Panjabi, M. M., 1992, “The Stabilizing System of the Spine. Part I. Function, Dysfunction, Adaptation, and Enhancement,” J. Spinal Disord., 5(4), pp. 383–389. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Reeves, N. P., Narendra, K. S., and Cholewicki, J., 2007, “Spine Stability: The Six Blind Men and the Elephant,” Clin. Biomech., 22(3), pp. 266–274. [CrossRef]
Kang, H. G., and Dingwell, J. B., 2009, “Dynamics and Stability of Muscle Activations During Walking in Healthy Young and Older Adults,” J. Biomech., 42(14), pp. 2231–2237. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
McGill, S. M., Grenier, S., Kavcic, N., and Cholewicki, J., 2003, “Coordination of Muscle Activity to Assure Stability of the Lumbar Spine,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., 13(4), pp. 353–359. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cholewicki, J., and McGill, S. M., 1996, “Mechanical Stability of the In Vivo Lumbar Spine: Implications for Injury and Chronic Low Back Pain,” Clin. Biomech., 11(1), pp. 1–15. [CrossRef]
Granata, K. P., and Gottipati, P., 2008, “Fatigue Influences the Dynamic Stability of the Torso,” Ergonomics, 51(8), pp. 1258–1271. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Potvin, J. R., and Brown, S. H. M., 2005, “An Equation to Calculate Individual Muscle Contributions to Joint Stability,” J. Biomech., 38(5), pp. 973–980. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Brown, S. H. M., and McGill, S. M., 2005, “Muscle Force-Stiffness Characteristics Influence Joint Stability: A Spine Example,” Clin. Biomech., 20(9), pp. 917–922. [CrossRef]
Granata, K. P., and England, S. A., 2006, “Stability of Dynamic Trunk Movement,” Spine, 31(10), pp. E271–E276. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Graham, R. B., Sadler, E. M., and Stevenson, J. M., 2012, “Local Dynamic Stability of Trunk Movements During the Repetitive Lifting of Loads,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 31(3), pp. 592–603. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Graham, R. B., and Brown, S. H. M., 2012, “A Direct Comparison of Spine Rotational Stiffness and Dynamic Spine Stability During Repetitive Lifting Tasks,” J. Biomech., 45(9), pp. 1593–1600. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bergmark, A., 1989, “Stability of the Lumbar Spine. A Study in Mechanical Engineering,” Acta Orthop. Scand. Suppl., 230(230), pp. 1–54. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rodrick, D., and Quesada, P. M., 2013, “Non-Linear Dynamics of Lower Leg Muscle Surface Electromyogram During Repeated Plantar Flexion,” Theor. Issues Ergonomics Sci., 14(2), pp. 37–41. [CrossRef]
Graham, R. B., Oikawa, L. Y., and Ross, G. B., 2014, “Comparing the Local Dynamic Stability of Trunk Movements Between Varsity Athletes With and Without Non-Specific Low Back Pain,” J. Biomech., 47(6), pp. 1459–1464. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
McGill, S. M., 1991, “Electromyographic Activity of the Abdominal and Low Back Musculature During the Generation of Isometric and Dynamic Axial Trunk Torque: Implications for Lumbar Mechanics,” J. Orthop. Res., 9(1), pp. 91–103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
McGill, S. M., 1992, “A Myoelectrically Based Dynamic Three-Dimensional Model to Predict Loads on Lumbar Spine Tissues During Lateral Bending,” J. Biomech., 25(4), pp. 395–414. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kingma, I., Staudenmann, D., and van Dieën, J. H., 2007, “Trunk Muscle Activation and Associated Lumbar Spine Joint Shear Forces Under Different Levels of External Forward Force Applied to the Trunk,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., 17(1), pp. 14–24. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Brown, S. H. M., and McGill, S. M., 2010, “The Relationship Between Trunk Muscle Activation and Trunk Stiffness: Examining a Non-Constant Stiffness Gain,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 13(6), pp. 829–835. [CrossRef]
McGill, S. M., and Norman, R. W., 1986, “Partitioning the L4–L5 Dynamic Moment Into Disc, Ligamentous, and Muscular Components,” Spine, 11(7), pp. 666–678. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cholewicki, J., and McGill, S. M., 1995, “Relationship Between Muscle Force and Stiffness in the Whole Mamallian Muscle: A Simulation Study,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 117(3), pp. 339–342. [CrossRef]
Crisco, J. J., and Panjabi, M. M., 1991. “The Intersegmental and Multisegmental Muscles of the Lumbar Spine: A Biomechanical Model Comparing Lateral Stabilizing Potential,” Spine, 16(7), pp. 793–799. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bruijn, S. M., van Dieën, J. H., Meijer, O. G., and Beek, P. J., 2009, “Statistical Precision and Sensitivity of Measures of Dynamic Gait Stability,” J. Neurosci. Methods, 178(2), pp. 327–333. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Abarbanel, H. D. I., Brown, R., Sidorowich, J. J., and Tsimring, L. S., 1993, “The Analysis of Observed Chaotic Data in Physical Systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys., 65(4), pp. 1331–1392. [CrossRef]
Kennel, M. B., Brown, R., and Abarbanel, H. D. I., 1992, “Determining Embedding Dimension for Phase-Space Reconstruction Using a Geometrical Construction,” Phys. Rev. A, 45(6), pp. 3403–3411. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rosenstein, M. T., Collins, J. J., and De Luca, C. J., 1993, “A Practical Method for Calculating Largest Lyapunov Exponents From Small Data Sets,” Phys. D, 65(1–2), pp. 117–134. [CrossRef]
Bruijn, S. M., van Dieën, J. H., Meijer, O. G., and Beek, P. J., 2009, “Is Slow Walking More Stable?,” J. Biomech., 42(10), pp. 1506–1512. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Marras, W. S., Lavender, S. A., Ferguson, S. A., Splittstoesser, R. E., and Yang, G., 2010, “Quantitative Dynamic Measures of Physical Exposure Predict Low Back Functional Impairment,” Spine, 35(8), pp. 914–923. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gardner-Morse, M. G., and Stokes, I. A., 2001, “Trunk Stiffness Increases With Steady-State Effort,” J. Biomech., 34(4), pp. 457–463. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Granata, K. P., and Marras, W. S., 1995, “The Influence of Trunk Muscle Coactivity on Dynamic Spinal Loads,” Spine, 20(8), pp. 913–919. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
van Dieën, J. H., Kingma, I., and van der Bug, J. C. E., 2003, “Evidence for a Role of Antagonistic Cocontraction in Controlling Trunk Stiffness During Lifting,” J. Biomech., 36(12), pp. 1829–1836. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Newell, K. M., and Carlton, L. G., 1988, “Force Variability in Isometric Responses,” J. Exp. Pscyhol. Hum. Percept. Perform, 14(1), pp. 37–44. [CrossRef]
Slifkin, A. B., and Newell, K. M., 2000, “Variability and Noise in Continuous Force Production.,” J. Mot. Behav., 32(2), pp. 141–150. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hamilton, A. F. D. C., Jones, K. E., and Wolpert, D. M., 2004, “The Scaling of Motor Noise With Muscle Strength and Motor Unit Number in Humans,” Exp. Brain Res., 157(4), pp. 417–430. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Reeves, N. P., and Cholewicki, J., 2010, “Expanding Our View of the Spine System,” Eur. Spine J., 19(2), pp. 331–332. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Brown, S. H. M., and Potvin, J. R., 2007, “Exploring the Geometric and Mechanical Characteristics of the Spine Musculature to Provide Rotational Stiffness to Two Spine Joints in the Neutral Posture,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 26(1), pp. 113–123. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Houk, J. C., 1979, “Regulation of Stiffness by Skeletomotor Reflexes,” Annu Rev Physiol, 41, pp. 99–114.
Axelson, H. W., and Hagbarth, K. E., 2001, “Human Motor Control Consequences of Thixotropic Changes in Muscular Short-Range Stiffness,” J. Physiol., 535(1), pp. 279–288. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Campbell, K. S., 2010, “Short-Range Mechanical Properties of Skeletal and Cardiac Muscles,” Adv. Exp. Med. Biol., 682, pp. 223–246. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Stein, R., 1982, “What Muscle Variable(s) Does the Nervous System Control in Limb Movements?,” Behav. Brain Sci., 5(4), pp. 535–541. [CrossRef]
Karayannis, N. V., Smeets, R. J. E. M., van den Hoorn, W., and Hodges, P. W., 2013, “Fear of Movement is Related to Trunk Stiffness in Low Back Pain,” PLoS One, 8(6), p. e67779. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cacciatore, T., Gurfinkel, V., Horak, F., Cordo, P., and Ames, K., 2011, “Increased Dynamic Regulation of Postural Tone Through Alexander Technique Training,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 30(1), pp. 74–89. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Experimental setup used for repetitive lifting and lowering between SH (1) and knee height (2). (b) Each of the 30 lift/lowers consisted of moving from a target at position (1) to a target at position (2) and back, to the beat of a metronome.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Exemplar EMG linear envelopes, 3D angular and 2D positional data from one participant during each of the five repetitive lifting scenarios. EMG: TES, LES, MF, LD, IO, EO, RA. Angles: F/E, LB = lateral bending, RT = axial rotation. Positions: SH, HA, A/P, I/S = inferior/superior.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The process of state space reconstruction and local dynamic stability analysis using the spine rotational stiffness data. (a) Original 3D spine rotational stiffness data, as well as the Euclidean norm stiffness at each point in time. (b) The reconstructed dynamics in state space using a reconstruction dimension of six and a time delay of 16 samples (0.5 s). (c) Expanded view of a local region on the attractor (outlined in b), displaying the diverging Euclidean distance (dj) of nearest neighbors after an infinitesimally small perturbation. (d) Average logarithmic rate of divergence for all nearest neighbor pairs over 0.5 cycles.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

ANOVA and post hoc results between the three load conditions (0%, 5%, and 10% maximum back strength at 12 lifts per minute). (Top) Current study results for the local dynamic stability of muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (stiffness—λmax), the local dynamic stability of the full state space trunk muscle activity (full trunk EMG—λmax), and the local dynamic stability of the low back muscle activity (low back EMG—λmax). (Bottom) Results from Ref. [11] for the local dynamic stability of spine kinematics (kinematics—λmax), the mean muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (mean stiffness) (note: maximum stiffness showed the same findings), and the minimum muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (minimum stiffness). † indicates a significant main effect of load on the corresponding dependent variable (p < 0.05). ---- red lines indicate a significant post-hoc pairwise comparison between the different load conditions (p < 0.05). Error bars represent standard deviations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

ANOVA and post hoc results between the three rate conditions (6/min, 12/min, and 18/min at 5% maximum back strength load). (Top) Current study results for the local dynamic stability of muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (stiffness—λmax), the local dynamic stability of the full state space trunk muscle activity (full trunk EMG—λmax), and the local dynamic stability of the low back muscle activity (low back EMG—λmax). (Bottom) Results from Ref. [11] for the local dynamic stability of spine kinematics (kinematics—λmax), the mean muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (mean stiffness) (note: maximum stiffness showed the same findings), and the minimum muscular contributions to spine rotational stiffness (minimum stiffness). † indicates a significant main effect of rate on the corresponding dependent variable (p < 0.05). ---- red lines indicate a significant post-hoc pairwise comparison between the different rate conditions (p < 0.05). Error bars represent standard deviations.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In