Measuring postural control in an upright standing position is the standard method. However, this diagnostic method has floor or ceiling effects and its implementation is only possible to a limited extent. Assessing postural control directly on the trunk in a sitting position and consideration of the results in the spectrum in conjunction with an AI-supported evaluation could represent an alternative diagnostic method quantifying neuromuscular control. In a prospective cross-sectional study, 188 subjects aged between 18 and 60 years were recruited and divided into two groups: “LowBackPain” vs. “Healthy”. Subsequently, measurements of postural control in a seated position were carried out for 60 s using a modified balance board. A spectrum per trail was calculated using the measured CoP tracks in the range from 0.01 to 10 Hz. Various algorithms for data classification and prediction of these classes were tested for the parameter combination with the highest proven static influence on the parameter pain. The best results were found in a frequency spectrum of 0.001 Hz and greater than 1 Hz. After transforming the track from the time domain to the image domain for representation as power density, the influence of pain was highly significant (effect size 0.9). The link between pain and gender (p = 0.015) and pain and height (p = 0.012) also demonstrated significant results. The assessment of postural control in a seated position allows differentiation between “LowBackPain” and “Healthy” subjects. Using the AI algorithm of neural networks, the data set can be correctly differentiated into “LowBackPain” and “Healthy” with a probability of 81%.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Effective treatment in physiotherapy requires hands-on therapy with therapists as well as hands-off treatment like home exercises. To compensate the lack of feedback for home exercising, various technical approaches are studied and developed. Well studied feedback strategies for this use case are missing, especially for tactile feedback. Objective: This paper combines principles of user-centered design and psychology of learning and aims to derive requirements for designing a vibrotactile feedback strategy for a wearable device for physiotherapy home exercises. Methods: The feedback behavior of nine physical therapists was observed in a simulated training session and recommendations for a technical feedback system were observed and collected in a guided interview. Data were analyzed along the categories of a deductively and inductively created category system. Frequency distributions of the quantified observation data were created, and qualitative interview data were evaluated using content structuring content analysis. Results: The present work highlights that reduced feedback frequency, differentiated feedback content, multimodal feedback, and trunk-proximal tactile feedback were recommended by physical therapists for a technical feedback system for the correct performance of physiotherapeutic home exercises in the treatment of unspecific low back pain Conclusions: This paper offers approaches for the design of a vibrotactile feedback strategy. These approaches should be tested in hypotheses driven research. Further patient studies should be conducted.

Low back pain patients often have deficits in trunk stability. For this reason, many patients receive physiotherapy treatment, which represents an enormous socio-economic burden. Training at home could reduce these costs. The problem here is the lack of correction of the exercise execution. Therefore, this feasibility study investigates the applicability of a vibrotactile-controlled feedback system for trunk stabilisation exercises. A sample of 13 healthy adults performed three trunk stabilisation exercises. Exercise performance was corrected by physiotherapists using vibrotactile feedback. The NASA TLX questionnaire was used to assess the practicability of the vibrotactile feedback. The NASA TLX questionnaire shows a very low global workload 40.2 [29.3; 46.5]. The quality of feedback perception was perceived as good by the subjects, varying between 69.2% (anterior hip) and 92.3% (lower back). 80.8% rated the feedback as helpful for their training. On the expert side, the results show a high rating of movement quality. The positive evaluations of the physiotherapists and the participants on using the vibrotactile feedback system indicate that such a system can reduce the trainees fear of independent training and support the users in their training. This could increase training adherence and long-term success.

Background: A standard method of assessing postural control is to measure while standing. However, its implementation is usually limited. Recording postural control directly on the trunk in a seated position could provide an alternative diagnostic method for quantifying neuromuscular control. Methods: A comparison of center of pressure (CoP) measurements in the standing and sitting positions was performed on 66 healthy adult subjects. The reliability of the measurements in the sitting position was tested in 23 subjects. In addition, the extension force of all test subjects was recorded. Results: The assessments of CoP fluctuations in standing and seated positions showed adequate agreement (deviation 9.1%). Furthermore, good internal consistencies with a sufficient test–retest reliability could be demonstrated for the measurements in seated position. Both CoP measurement methods showed a comparable Spearman correlation to obtained extension force measurements (standing: 0.24, seated: 0.23). Conclusions: Our results show that recording CoP fluctuations in the sitting position is a reliable and valid adjunct to single-leg stance measurements. It could serve as an additional alternative to quantify neuromuscular control in impaired patients who cannot adequately perform the single-leg stance. In addition, measurement in the seated position allows direct recording of neuromuscular control at the trunk.

A standard method assessing postural control is the measurement in standing position. However, the implementation is usually only possible to a limited extent. Recording of postural control directly on the trunk, in seated position, could provide an alternative diagnostic method for quantifying neuromuscular control. Comparison of the measurements of Center of Pressure (CoP) in standing and seated position was performed on 66 healthy adult subjects. Reliability of measurements in seated position was tested on 23 subjects. In addition, the extension force of all test subjects was recorded. The assessments of CoP fluctuations in standing and seated position showed adequate agreement (deviation 9.1%). Furthermore, good internal consistencies with a sufficient test re test reliability could be demonstrated for the measurements in seated position. Both CoP measurement methods showed a comparable Spearman correlation to obtained extension force measurements (standing: 0.24, seated: 0.23). Our results show that recording CoP flucutations in the seated position is a reliable and valid additional method to measurements in the single legged stance. It could serve as an additional alternative to quantify neuromuscular control in impaired patients in whom single-leg stance cannot be performed adequately. In addition, the measurement in sitting position enables the direct recording of neuromuscular control on the trunk.