A Comparison of dimensional changes of longus colli muscle between rest and maximum isometric contraction of deep cervical flexor muscles in patients with chronic neck pain and healthy subjects by ultrasonography

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Dept. of Physiotherapy, International Branch of Shahid Beheshti Medical University, Tehran, Iran

2 Dept. Physiotherapy, Shahid Beheshti Medical University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Dept. Physiotherapy, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran.

Abstract

Background and Objective: Inefficiency of deep cervical flexor muscles are correlated with chronic neck pain. The purpose of this study was to determine and to compare longus colli muscle dimensions between rest and maximum isometric contraction in patients with chronic neck pain and healthy subjects.
 Materials and Methods: For this case-control study, 16 healthy matched subjects and 16 patients with chronic neck pain were recruited. Using ultrasonography, anterio-posterior, lateral, and cross-sectional dimensions of longus colli in resting position and during maximal isometric contraction of deep cervical flexor muscles were determined. Data were analyzed using paired and independent t-tests.
 Results: Cross-sectional area of longus coli muscle in patients with chronic neck pain in resting position and during contraction was 107.6±38.2 and 89.4±32.03 (p<0.0001) and in healthy subjects was 89.31±32.97 and 75.94±29.43 (p<0.0001) respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups regarding study variables in both resting position and contraction (p>0.05).
 Conclusion: The results showed that cross-sectional area and lateral diameter of longus coli muscle in both patients and healthy subjects and anterio-posterior diameter only in healthy subjects during contraction are lower than resting position. However, anterio-posterior diameter of longus coli in patient with chronic neck pain during contraction was similar to resting position.

Keywords

References

1- O’Leary S, Falla D, Jull G, Vicenzino B. Muscle specificity in tests of cervical flexor muscle performance. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2007; 17(1): 35–40.
 2- Boyd-Clark LC, BriggsCA, Galea MP. Muscle spindle distribution, morphology, and density in longus colli and multifidus muscles of the cervical spine. Spine 2002; 27(7): 694–701.
 3- Falla D, Jull G, O’leary S, Dall’Alba P. Further evaluation of an EMG technique for assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2006; 16(6):621–8.
 4- Jull GA, Falla D, Vicenzino B, Hodges PW. The effect of therapeutic exercise on activation of the deep cervical flexor muscles in people with chronic neck pain. Man Ther 2009; 14(6): 696-701.
 5- Placzek J, Pagett B, Roubal P, Jones B, McMichael H, Rozanski E, et al. The influence of the cervical spine on chronic headache in women: a pilot study. J Man Manip Ther 1999; 7 (1): 33-9.
 6- Akbari A, Ghiasi F, Barahoie M, Arab-Kangan MR. The comprasion of effectiveness of muscles specific stabilization training and dynamic exercises on the chronic neck pain and disability. In Persian. J Gorgan Univ Med Sci 2010; 11(4): 29-38.
 7- Akbari A, Khorashadizadeh S, Abdi A. The Effect of Motor Control Exercise versus General Exercise on Lumbar Local Stabilizing Muscles Thickness: Randomized Controlled Trial of Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2008; 21(2): 105-12.
 8- Taylor MK, Hodgdon JA. Cervical resistance training: effects on isometric and dynamic strength. Aviat Space Environ Med 2006; 77(11): 1131-5.
 9-Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991; 14(7): 409-15.
 10- Melzack R. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain 1987; 30: 191–7.
 11- Falla D. Unravelling the complexity of muscle impairment in chronic neck pain. Man Ther 2004; 9(3): 125–33.
 12- Cagnie B, Dickx N, Peeters I, Tuytens J, Achten E, Cambier D, et al. The use of functional MRI to evaluate cervical flexor activity during different cervical flexion exercises. J Appl Physiol 2008; 104(1): 230–5.
 13-  Cagnie B, Derese E, Vandamme L, Verstraete K, Cambier D, Danneels L. Validity and reliability of ultrasonography  for the longus colli in  asymptomatic subjects. Man Ther  2009; 14(4): 421-6.
 14-Rezasoltani A. The applicability of musce ultrasonography in physiotherapy researches. J Phys Ther Sci 2003; 15(1): 33-7.
 15- Jull G, O'Leary S, Falla D. Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: The craniocervical flexion test. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2008; 31(7): 525-33.
 16- Javanshir K, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Rezasoltani A, Amiri M, Rahgozar M. Ultrasonography of longus colli muscle: A reliability study on healthy subjects and patients with chronic neck pain. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2009; 15(1): 50-6.
17- Rezasoltani A, Ylinen J, Vihko V. Isometric cervical extension force and dimensions of semispinalis capitis muscle. J Rehabil Res Dev 2002;  39(3): 423–8.
18 - Conley MS, Meyer RA, Bloomberg JJ, Feeback DL, Dudley GA. Noninvasive analysis of human neck muscle function. Spine 1995; 20(23): 2505-12.
19- Falla D, Jull G, Dall’Alba P, Rainoldi A, Merletti R. An electromyographic analysis of the deep cervical flexor muscles in performance of craniocervical flexion. Phys Ther 2003; 83(10):899-906.
Daneshvar Medicine
Volume 19, Issue 2 - Serial Number 93
May and June 2011
Pages 71-78

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics