Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Effect Of Cervical Collar On Proprioception In Patients With Non Traumatic Mechanical Neck Pain

Journal Name:

  • Indian Streams Research Journal

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Title: Effect of soft cervical collar on proprioception in patients with non traumatic mechanical neck pain BACKGROUND: Cervical collar is commonly used by patients against non traumatic neck pain. Many studies report reduction of pain following the use of soft cervical collar. Proprioception is considered to make an essential contribution to functional stability of a joint. It is thought that pain can reduce proprioceptive acuity and that this may promote joint pathology in non traumatic neck pain. To date there are no studies that have investigated the immediate effect of soft cervical collar on proprioception in patients with non traumatic neck pain. OBJECTIVE: Effect of soft cervical collar on proprioception in patients with non traumatic mechanical neck pain MATERIALS AND METHODS: 36 subjects (age range, 20–60 years) with non traumatic neck pain were recruited in to the study. The subjects were measured for proprioception with and without soft cervical collar. Proprioceptive reposition errors in degrees were measured by the Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility tests, which include Head-to-Neutral Head Position (NHP) repositioning tests and Head-to-Target repositioning tests with Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) Device. RESULTS: The results of paired t test showed there is significant difference in proprioception with and without soft cervical collar (P<0.001) in both the Head to Neutral Head Position testing and Head to Target Repositioning tests. Cervical proprioception improved with the use of soft cervical collar. CONCLUSION: Soft cervical collar improves cervical proprioception in subjects with non traumatic neck pain.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_177287_3_pp_1-3.pdf
  • 7
1-3
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

1.Woolf AD, Akesson K. Understanding the burden of
musculoskeletal conditions. The burden is huge and not
reflected in national health priorities.BMJ 2001;322:1079-
80
2.Fejer R, Kyvik KO, Hartvigsen J. The prevalence of neck
pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of
the literature. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:834-48
3.Strimpakosa N, Sakellarib V, Gioftsosb G, Cervical joint
position sense: an intra- and inter-examiner reliability study.
Gait & Posture 2006;23:22–31
4.Rix GD, Bagust J: Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility
in patients with chronic, nontraumatic cervical spine pain.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001, 82:911-919.
5.Humphreys BK: Cervical outcome measures: testing for
postural stability and balance. J Manipulative Physiol Ther
2008,31:540-546.
6.Revel M, Andre-Deshays C, Minguet M: Cervicocephalic
kinesthetic sensibility in patients with cervical pain. Arch
Phys Med Rehabil 1991, 72:288-291.
7.Strimpakosa N, Sakellarib V, Gioftsosb G, Cervical joint
position sense: an intra- and inter-examiner reliability study.
Gait & Posture 2006;23:22–31
8.Verhagen AP, Scholten-Peeters GG, van Wijngaarden S, de
Bie RA, Bierma-Zeinstra SM. Conservative treatments for
whiplash. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007.
9.Kongsted A, Qerama E, Kasch H, Bendix T, Bach FW,
Korsholm L, Jensen TS. Neck collar, “Act as Usual”, or
active mobilization for whiplash injury? Spine.
2007;32(6):618–26
10.Amber T, J Troy B, Chris W, Douglas R D, Paul S. The
effects of stochastic resonance electrical stimulation and
neoprene sleeve on knee proprioception. Journal of
Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 2009;4:1-10
11.Lee H-Y, Teng C-C, Chai H-M, Wang S-F. Test-retest
reliability of cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility in three
cardinal planes. Manual Therapy 2006;11:61–8.
12.Loudon JK, Ruhl M, Field E. Ability to reproduce head
position after whiplash injury. Spine 1997;22:865–8.
13.Goebel JA, Hanson JM, Fishel DG. Age-related
modulation of the vestibulo-ocular reflex using real and
imaginary targets. Journal of Vestibular Research
1994;4:269–75.
14.Heikkila HV, Wenngren B. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic
sensibility, active range of cervical motion, and oculomotor
function in patients with whiplash injury. Arch. Phys.
Med.Rehab1998; 79:1089–1094.
15.Brockett C, Warren N, Gregory JE, Morgan DL, Proske
U. A comparison of the effects of concentric versus eccentric
exercise on force and position sense at the human elbow
joint. Brain Res 1997; 771:251–258.
16.Richmond FJR, Bakker DA. Anatomical organization
and sensory receptor content of soft tissues surrounding
upper cervical vertebrae in the cat. Journal of neuro
Physiology 1982; 1:49-61.
17.Rose P.K, Keirstead. Segmental projection from muscle
spindles: a perspective from the upper cervical spinal cord.
Can j physiol Pharmacol:64: 505-508.
18.Taylor JL, McCloskey D.I. Proprioception in the neck.
Exp. Brain Research 1998; 70:351-60
19.Stauffer RN, Qiao EYS, Gyory AN. Biomechanical gait
analysis of the diseased kneejoint. Clin Orthop 1977;
126:246-55.
20.Vanessa B, Kim B, Barry S, Sallie C, Kay C. Abnormal
knee joint position sense in individuals with patellofemoral
pain syndrome. Journal of Orthopaedic Research
2003;20:208-214
21.Kim L. B, Rana SH, Ben RM, Kay MC, Rachelle B,
Michael S, Geoffrey M. Relationship of knee joint
proprioception to pain and disability in individuals with knee
osteoarthritis. Journal of Orthopaedic Research
2003;21:208-214

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com