Affiliations: Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt/Main, Germany
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Daniel Niederer, Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt/Main, Ginnheimer Landstraße 39 D-60487 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Tel.: +49 (0)69 798 24581; Fax: +49 (0)69 798 24582; E-mail: [email protected].
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The potential to accurately perform cervical movements during more challenging tasks might be of importance to prevent dysfunctional motion characteristics. Although sensorimotor function during dual-task conditions are of increasing interest in biomedical and rehabilitation research, effects of such conditions on movement consistency of the neck have not yet been investigated. OBJECTIVE: In this crossover MiSpEx(Medicine in Spine Exercise)-diagnostic study, we aimed to explore differences between single and dual-task conditions on cervical movement variability. METHODS: Nineteen healthy participants (9 male; 24.5 ± 3.3 y) performed 10 repetitive maximal cervical movements in (1) flexion/extension and (2) lateral flexion, during one single- and during two dual-task test conditions (cognitive, motor) in a randomised and cross-over sequence. Latter consisted of a working memory n-back task (n= 2) and a repetitive ankle movement task. Range of motion (RoM) was assessed using an external three-dimensional ultrasonic movement analysis system. Coefficient of variation (CV) for repetitive RoM was analysed for differences between conditions and controlled for variances in intra-individual movement characteristics. RESULTS: Friedman and post-hoc Bonferroni-adjusted confidence intervals for differences from single- to dual-task values revealed changes in CV in flexion/extension from single-task to motor dual-task (+0.02 ± 0.02 (97.5%CI: 0.01; 0.03); p< 0.05) but not to cognitive dual-task condition (+0.01 ± 0.02 (97.5%CI: 0.003; 0.02)) nor for lateral flexion (p> 0.05). Pearson regression analyses revealed a linear negative (p< 0.01) influence of CV in flexion/extension on differences from single to both cognitive (R=2 0.47) and motor dual-task (R=2 0.55). Results for lateral flexion are comparable, baseline CV negatively impacts differences to cognitive (R=2 0.2) and motor dual-task performance (R=2 0.76; p< 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with comparable low cervical CV at single-task display a profound increase during dual-task conditions while participants with a higher variability remained almost stable or showed a decrease. The results point toward a complex interrelationship of motion patterns and adaptation processes during challenging tasks in respect of cervical CV.
Keywords: Kinematics, MiSpEx, motion analysis, coefficient of variation, dual-task
