The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and concurrent validity of a commercially available Xsens MVN BIOMECH inertial-sensor-based motion capture system during clinically relevant functional activities. A clinician with no prior experience of motion capture technologies and an experienced clinical movement scientist each assessed 26 healthy participants within each of two sessions using a camera-based motion capture system and the MVN BIOMECH system. Participants performed overground walking, squatting, and jumping. Sessions were separated by 4 ± 3 days. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient and standard error of measurement, and validity was evaluated using the coefficient of multiple correlation and the linear fit method. Day-to-day reliability was generally fair-to-excellent in all three planes for hip, knee, and ankle joint angles in all three tasks. Within-day (between-rater) reliability was fair-to-excellent in all three planes during walking and squatting, and poor-to-high during jumping. Validity was excellent in the sagittal plane for hip, knee, and ankle joint angles in all three tasks and acceptable in frontal and transverse planes in squat and jump activity across joints. Our results suggest that the MVN BIOMECH system can be used by a clinician to quantify lower-limb joint angles in clinically relevant movements.

Background: Trunk muscle dysfunction is often regarded as a key feature of non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) despite being poorly understood and variable with increases, decreases and no change in muscle activity reported. Differences in thoraco-lumbar kinematics have been observed in motor control impairment NSCLBP subgroups (Flexion Pattern, Active Extension Pattern) during static postures and dynamic activities. However, potential differences in muscle activity during functional tasks has not been established in these subgroups to date. Methods: A case-control study design recruited 50 NSCLBP subjects (27 Flexion Pattern, 23 Active Extension Pattern) and 28 healthy individuals. Surface electromyography determined muscle activity during functional tasks: reaching upwards, step-down, step-up, lifting and replacing a box, stand-to-sit, sit-to-stand, bending to retrieve (and returning from retrieving) a pen from the floor. Normalised (% sub-maximal voluntary contraction) mean amplitude electromyography of bilateral musculature (transversus abdominis/internal oblique, external oblique, superficial lumbar multifidus and longissimus thoracis) was analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Transversus abdominis/internal oblique activity was significantly increased in the Flexion Pattern group compared to controls during stand-to-sit (p = 0.009) on the left side only. External oblique activity was significantly greater in the Active Extension Pattern group compared to controls during box lift (p = 0.016) on the right side only. Significantly greater activity was identified in the right Superficial lumbar multifidus during step up (p = 0.029), reach up (p = 0.013) and box replace (p = 0.007) in the Active Extension Pattern group compared to controls. However left-sided superficial lumbar multifidus activity was significantly greater in the Flexion Pattern group (compared to controls) only during stand-to-sit (p = 0.009). No significant differences were observed in longissimus thoracis activity bilaterally during any task. No significant differences between NSCLBP subgroups were observed. Conclusions: Muscle activity in these NSCLBP subgroups appears to be highly variable during functional tasks with no clear pattern of activity identified. The findings reflect inconsistencies and variability in trunk muscle activity previously observed in these NSCLBP subgroups. Further work evaluating ratios of muscle activity and changes in muscle activity throughout task duration is warranted.

Objective: To examine functional performance differences using kinematic and kinetic analysis between participants with and without knee osteoarthritis (OA) to determine which outcomes best characterize persons with and without knee OA. Methods: Participants with unilateral moderate knee OA (Kellgren–Lawrence grades 2 or 3) and controls without knee pain were matched for age, gender, and body mass index. Primary outcomes included temporal parameters, joint rotations and moments, and ground reaction forces assessed via 3D motion capture during walking and ascending/descending stairs. Secondary outcomes included timed functional activities (sit to stand; tying shoelaces), 48 hrs lower limb activity monitoring, and patient-reported outcome measures (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions). Results: Eight matched pairs were analyzed. Compared with controls, OA participants exhibited significant reductions in peak frontal hip and sagittal knee moments, and decreased peak anterior ground reaction force with the affected limb while walking. Ascending stairs, OA participants had slower speed, fewer strides per minute, longer cycle and stance times, and increased trunk range of motion (ROM) in assessments of both limbs; longer swing time and reduced ankle ROM in the affected limb; and increased knee frontal ROM in the unaffected limb. Descending stairs, OA participants had fewer strides per minute and decreased trunk transverse ROM in assessments of both limbs; increased knee frontal ROM in the affected limb; and longer strides, shorter stance and cycle times, increased trunk sagittal and decreased knee transverse ROMs in the unaffected limbs vs controls. Compared with controls, OA participants had slower walking cadence (120–130 vs 100–110 steps/min, respectively), took significantly longer on timed functional measures, and had significantly worse scores in patient-reported outcomes. Conclusion: Several objectives and patient-reported measures examined in this study could potentially be considered as outcomes in pharmacologic or physical therapy OA trials.

Inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer a portable and quantitative solution for clinical movement analysis. However, their application in non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) remains underexplored. This study compared the spine and pelvis kinematics obtained from IMUs between individuals with and without NSLBP and across clinical subgroups of NSLBP. A total of 81 participants with NSLBP with flexion (FP; n = 38) and extension (EP; n = 43) motor control impairment and 26 controls (No-NSLBP) completed 10 repetitions of spine movements (flexion, extension, lateral flexion). IMUs were placed on the sacrum, fourth and second lumbar vertebrae, and seventh cervical vertebra to measure inclination at the pelvis, lower (LLx) and upper (ULx) lumbar spine, and lower cervical spine (LCx), respectively. At each location, the range of movement (ROM) was quantified as the range of IMU orientation in the primary plane of movement. The ROM was compared between NSLBP and No-NSLBP using unpaired t-tests and across FP-NSLBP, EP-NSLBP, and No-NSLBP subgroups using one-way ANOVA. Individuals with NSLBP exhibited a smaller ROM at the ULx (p = 0.005), LLx (p = 0.003) and LCx (p = 0.01) during forward flexion, smaller ROM at the LLx during extension (p = 0.03), and a smaller ROM at the pelvis during lateral flexion (p = 0.003). Those in the EP-NSLBP group had smaller ROM than those in the No-NSLBP group at LLx during forward flexion (Bonferroni-corrected p = 0.005), extension (p = 0.013), and lateral flexion (p = 0.038), and a smaller ROM at the pelvis during lateral flexion (p = 0.005). Those in the FP-NSLBP subgroup had smaller ROM than those in the No-NSLBP group at the ULx during forward flexion (p = 0.024). IMUs detected variations in kinematics at the trunk, lumbar spine, and pelvis among individuals with and without NSLBP and across clinical NSLBP subgroups during flexion, extension, and lateral flexion. These findings consistently point to reduced ROM in NSLBP. The identified subgroup differences highlight the potential of IMU for assessing spinal and pelvic kinematics in these clinically verified subgroups of NSLBP.

This study determined differences in spinal-pelvic kinematics sitting on (i) mat (ii) block and (iii) novel 10º forward inclined wedge (Buttafly^TM) in a same-subject repeated measures cross-over design in 60 healthy individuals (34 females). Repeated measures ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences between sitting conditions and lumbar and pelvic sagittal angles. Both, the inclined wedge and the block seating aids reduced overall flexion, but the inclined wedge had a greater influence in the lumbar region whilst the block induced the greatest change in the pelvis. This may be relevant for seating aid design personalised to posture type. Statistically significant gender differences were identified in all 3 seating conditions with males adopting more flexed lumbar spine and posteriorly tilted pelvis. Females flexed less in thoracic spine when sitting on an inclined wedge and a block. These statistically significant differences between males and females may provide first explorative direction for bespoke seating aids design.

Although most causes of abdominal pain have a visceral origin, the musculoskeletal system must be considered when the cause is not obvious. This prospective study aimed to identify questions that would aid the diagnosis of patients with abdominal pain of musculoskeletal origin. Assessment of consecutive patients with abdominal pain recruited from gastroenterological outpatient clinics to develop diagnostic pointers to identify abdominal pain arising from musculoskeletal disorders. Subjects with benign abdominal pain, with or without a change in bowel habit, were recruited from gastroenterological clinics. Patients with inflammatory or neoplastic disease were excluded. The study was conducted in the Physiotherapy Department, Addenbrooke's NHS Trust Hospital, Cambridge. A set of questions developed to indicate a musculoskeletal cause of a patient's abdominal symptoms. RESULTS The questions 'Does taking a deep breath aggravate your symptoms?' and 'Does twisting your back aggravate your symptoms?' had a significant positive indication of abdominal symptoms of musculoskeletal origin. The questions 'Has there been any change in bowel habit since onset of your symptoms?', 'Does eating foods aggravate your symptoms?' and 'Has there been any weight change since onset of symptoms?' had a significant negative indication for abdominal symptoms not of musculoskeletal origin. A combination of these questions gave 96% specificity and 67% sensitivity. These questions may help with the early identification of patients with abdominal pain of musculoskeletal origin and will be tested in further studies.