Limits...
Trunk isometric force production parameters during erector spinae muscle vibration at different frequencies.

Boucher JA, Normand MC, Descarreaux M - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Bottom Line: The control of force and its variability are often considered determinants of motor performance and neuromuscular control.The main finding suggests that erector spinae muscle vibration significantly decreases the accuracy in a trunk extension isometric force reproduction task.The results suggest that acute erector spinae muscle vibration interferes with torque generation sequence of the trunk by distorting proprioceptive information in healthy participants.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Vibration is known to alter proprioceptive afferents and create a tonic vibration reflex. The control of force and its variability are often considered determinants of motor performance and neuromuscular control. However, the effect of vibration on paraspinal muscle control and force production remains to be determined.

Methods: Twenty-one healthy adults were asked to perform isometric trunk flexion and extension torque at 60% of their maximal voluntary isometric contraction, under three different vibration conditions: no vibration, vibration frequencies of 30 Hz and 80 Hz. Eighteen isometric contractions were performed under each condition without any feedback. Mechanical vibrations were applied bilaterally over the lumbar erector spinae muscles while participants were in neutral standing position. Time to peak torque (TPT), variable error (VE) as well as constant error (CE) and absolute error (AE) in peak torque were calculated and compared between conditions.

Results: The main finding suggests that erector spinae muscle vibration significantly decreases the accuracy in a trunk extension isometric force reproduction task. There was no difference between both vibration frequencies with regard to force production parameters. Antagonist muscles do not seem to be directly affected by vibration stimulation when performing a trunk isometric task.

Conclusions: The results suggest that acute erector spinae muscle vibration interferes with torque generation sequence of the trunk by distorting proprioceptive information in healthy participants.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Example of one participant’s peak torque tracings in trunk extension representing one block.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3750832&req=5

Figure 4: Example of one participant’s peak torque tracings in trunk extension representing one block.

Mentions: Flexion condition was tested first, and no visual or verbal feedbacks were provided during experimental trials. Participants were asked to perform a set of three trials following an auditory signal which was heard every thirty seconds, for each of the vibration conditions (no vibration, 30 Hz and 80 Hz). That sequence represented one block of trials (see Figure 3). A total of three blocks were completed for each flexion and extension condition for a total of nine trials for each of the vibration condition. A 5-minute rest period between each block was allowed to limit possible sequence or fatigue effects. Vibrations were applied thirty seconds before each auditory signal, with the onset order being predetermined for each block, and lasted during the torque generation trials. The vibration, therefore, was applied without interruption throughout every vibration conditions without any rest or delay. The sequence in which each block of trials was presented was counterbalanced across participants. Figure 4 shows a representative example of peak torque tracings in trunk extension for the three vibration conditions, including the target torque.


Trunk isometric force production parameters during erector spinae muscle vibration at different frequencies.

Boucher JA, Normand MC, Descarreaux M - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Example of one participant’s peak torque tracings in trunk extension representing one block.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3750832&req=5

Figure 4: Example of one participant’s peak torque tracings in trunk extension representing one block.
Mentions: Flexion condition was tested first, and no visual or verbal feedbacks were provided during experimental trials. Participants were asked to perform a set of three trials following an auditory signal which was heard every thirty seconds, for each of the vibration conditions (no vibration, 30 Hz and 80 Hz). That sequence represented one block of trials (see Figure 3). A total of three blocks were completed for each flexion and extension condition for a total of nine trials for each of the vibration condition. A 5-minute rest period between each block was allowed to limit possible sequence or fatigue effects. Vibrations were applied thirty seconds before each auditory signal, with the onset order being predetermined for each block, and lasted during the torque generation trials. The vibration, therefore, was applied without interruption throughout every vibration conditions without any rest or delay. The sequence in which each block of trials was presented was counterbalanced across participants. Figure 4 shows a representative example of peak torque tracings in trunk extension for the three vibration conditions, including the target torque.

Bottom Line: The control of force and its variability are often considered determinants of motor performance and neuromuscular control.The main finding suggests that erector spinae muscle vibration significantly decreases the accuracy in a trunk extension isometric force reproduction task.The results suggest that acute erector spinae muscle vibration interferes with torque generation sequence of the trunk by distorting proprioceptive information in healthy participants.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Vibration is known to alter proprioceptive afferents and create a tonic vibration reflex. The control of force and its variability are often considered determinants of motor performance and neuromuscular control. However, the effect of vibration on paraspinal muscle control and force production remains to be determined.

Methods: Twenty-one healthy adults were asked to perform isometric trunk flexion and extension torque at 60% of their maximal voluntary isometric contraction, under three different vibration conditions: no vibration, vibration frequencies of 30 Hz and 80 Hz. Eighteen isometric contractions were performed under each condition without any feedback. Mechanical vibrations were applied bilaterally over the lumbar erector spinae muscles while participants were in neutral standing position. Time to peak torque (TPT), variable error (VE) as well as constant error (CE) and absolute error (AE) in peak torque were calculated and compared between conditions.

Results: The main finding suggests that erector spinae muscle vibration significantly decreases the accuracy in a trunk extension isometric force reproduction task. There was no difference between both vibration frequencies with regard to force production parameters. Antagonist muscles do not seem to be directly affected by vibration stimulation when performing a trunk isometric task.

Conclusions: The results suggest that acute erector spinae muscle vibration interferes with torque generation sequence of the trunk by distorting proprioceptive information in healthy participants.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus