Skip to main content
Log in

Cervical kinematics estimated by finite helical axis behaviour differs in patients with neck related problems as compared to healthy controls

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose The present study analyses the kinematics of patients with neck problems and healthy controls by estimation of Finite Helical Axis behaviour. A cross sectional study design was used to investigate whether FHA behaviour differs due to neck problems.

Methods

584 subjects were recruited from private and ambulatory institutional physiotherapy practices. Among these 171 patients with neck related problems were selected based on referral diagnosis by primary care general practitioners. Cervical kinematics were compared based on minimal convex hull, path length and mean angle of the Finite Helical Axis distribution as well as on the helical angle. Three active planar motions were registered: flexion–extension, axial rotation and lateral bending.

Results

Patients demonstrated a significantly reduced and less variable behaviour of the Finite Helical Axis during active flexion–extension and axial rotation motions as compared to healthy individuals and lateral bending.

Conclusion

Patients with neck related problems demonstrate a more restricted motion behaviour with less variability in Finite Helical Axis distribution and orientation during active planar motions. At present it is not clear whether these kinematic differences are the result or the cause of dysfunction.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baeyens JP, Cattrysse E, Van Roy P, Clarys JP (2005) Measurement of three-dimensional intra-articular kinematics: methodological and interpretation problems. Ergonomics 48:1638–1644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hoy D, March L, Woolf A, Blyth F, Brooks P, Smith E, Vos T, Barendregt J, Blore J, Murray C, Burstein R, Buchbinder R (2014) The global burden of neck pain: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis 73:1309–1315. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fejer R, Kyvik KO, Hartvigsen J (2006) The prevalence of neck pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of the literature. Eur Spine J 15:834–848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-004-0864-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ohberg F (2008) The effect of anisotropic systematic errors in estimating helical angles. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 11:205–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255840701722498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kettler A, Marin F, Sattelmayer G, Mohr M, Mannel H, Durselen L, Claes L, Wilke HJ (2004) Finite helical axes of motion are a useful tool to describe the three-dimensional in vitro kinematics of the intact, injured and stabilised spine. Eur Spine J 13:553–559

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Grip H, Sundelin G, Gerdle B, Karlsson JS (2008) Cervical helical axis characteristics and its center of rotation during active head and upper arm movements-comparisons of whiplash-associated disorders, non-specific neck pain and asymptomatic individuals. J Biomech 41:2799–2805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.07.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Salem W, Lenders C, Mathieu J, Hermanus N, Klein P (2013) In vivo three-dimensional kinematics of the cervical spine during maximal axial rotation. Man Ther 18:339–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2012.12.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ellingson AM, Yelisetti V, Schulz CA, Bronfort G, Downing J, Keefe DF, Nuckley DJ (2013) Instantaneous helical axis methodology to identify aberrant neck motion. Clin Biomech 28:731–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmidt H, Heuer F, Wilke HJ (2008) Interaction between finite helical axes and facet joint forces under combined loading. Spine 33:2741–2748. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817c4319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wachowski MM, Wagner M, Weiland J, Dorner J, Raab BW, Dathe H, Gezzi R, Kubein-Meesenburg D, Nagerl H (2013) Does total disc arthroplasty in C3/C4-segments change the kinematic features of axial rotation? J Biomech 46:1739–1745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.03.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Barbero M, Falla D, Clijsen R, Ghirlanda F, Schneebeli A, Ernst MJ, Cescon C (2017) Can parameters of the helical axis be measured reliably during active cervical movements? Musculoskelet Sci Pract 27:150–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2016.10.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Woltring HJ, Long K, Osterbauer PJ, Fuhr AW (1994) Instantaneous helical axis estimation from 3-D video data in neck kinematics for whiplash diagnostics. J Biomech 27:1415–1432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Winters JM, Peles JD, Osterbauer PJ, Derickson K, Deboer KF, Fuhr AW (1993) Three-dimensional head axis of rotation during tracking movements. A tool for assessing neck neuromechanical function. Spine 18:1178–1185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Osterbauer PJ, Derickson KL, Peles JD, Deboer KF, Fuhr AW, Winters JM (1992) 3-Dimensional head kinematics and clinical outcome of patients with neck injury treated with spinal manipulative therapy—a pilot-study. J Manip Physiol Ther 15:501–511

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cescon C, Cattrysse E, Barbero M (2014) Methodological analysis of finite helical axis behavior in cervical kinematics. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 24:628–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.05.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Koerhuis CL, Winters JC, van der Helm F, Hof AL (2003) Neck mobility measurement by means of the ‘Flock of birds’ electromagnetic tracking system. Clin Biomech 18:14–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mc Quade KJ, Finley MA, Harris-Love M, McCombe-Waller S (2002) Dynamic error analysis of ascension’s Flock of birds electromagnetic tracking device using a pendulum model. J Appl Biomech 18:171–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. LaScalza S, Arico J, Hughes R (2003) Effect of metal and sampling rate on accuracy of flock of birds electromagnetic tracking system. J Biomech 36:141–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Assink N, Bergman GJD, Knoester B, Winters JC, Dijkstra PU, Postema K (2005) Interobserver reliability of neck-mobility measurement by means of the flock-of-birds electromagnetic tracking system. J Manip Physiol Ther 28:408–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Amiri M, Jull G, Bullock-Saxton J (2003) Measuring range of active cervical rotation in a position of full head flexion using the 3D Fastrak measurement system: an intra-tester reliability study. Man Ther 8:176–179

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cescon C, Ernst M, Schelldorfr S, Cattrysse E, Clijsen R, Barbero M (2014) Investigation of cervical movements in neck pain patients with the finite helical axis approach. In: XX congress of the international society of electrophysiology and kinesiology. Rome, Italy

  22. Alsultan F, Cescon C, De Nunzio AM, Barbero M, Heneghan NR, Rushton A, Falla D (2019) Variability of the helical axis during active cervical movements in people with chronic neck pain. Clin Biomech 62:50–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mannel H, Marin F, Claes L, Durselen L (2004) Anterior cruciate ligament rupture translates the axes of motion within the knee. Clin Biomech 19:130–135

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Halder AM, Itoi E, An KN (2000) Anatomy and biomechanics of the shoulder. Orthop Clin North Am 31:159. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70138-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gallo LM, Brasi M, Ernst B, Palla S (2006) Relevance of mandibular helical axis analysis in functional and dysfunctional TMJs. J Biomech 39:1716–1725

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Stenneberg MS, Busstra H, Eskes M, van Trijffel E, Cattrysse E, Scholten-Peeters GGM, de Bie RA (2018) Concurrent validity and interrater reliability of a new smartphone application to assess 3D active cervical range of motion in patients with neck pain. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 34:59–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2017.12.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik Cattrysse.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest; no financial grants were received for this study; no copyrighted materials were used in this paper.

Ethical approval

Approval for the study was gained from the ethical commission of the University Hospital Brussels (UZ-Brussel- B.U.N. 143201214958).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The MATLAB routine used in this study was developed by Cescon et al. in a joined collaboration between the Experimental Anatomy Research Group of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB – Belgium) and the Department of Health Sciences of the University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland (SUPSI - Manno, Switzerland).

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 247 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 235 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cattrysse, E., Burioli, A., Buzzatti, L. et al. Cervical kinematics estimated by finite helical axis behaviour differs in patients with neck related problems as compared to healthy controls. Eur Spine J 29, 2778–2785 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06380-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06380-0

Keywords

Navigation