Validation of a Noninvasive Dynamic Spinal Stiffness Assessment Methodology in an Animal Model of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

Study Design. An experimental in vivo ovine model of intervertebral disc degeneration was used to quantify the dynamic motion response of the lumbar spine. Objective. The purpose of this study was to: (1) compare invasively measured lumbar vertebral bone acceleration responses to noninvasive displacement responses, and (2) determine the effects of a single level degenerative intervertebral disc lesion on these responses. Summary of Background Data. Biomechanical techniques have been established to quantify vertebral motion responses, yet their invasiveness limits their use in a clinical setting. Methods. Twenty-five Merino sheep were examined; 15 with surgically induced disc degeneration at L1–L2 and 10 controls. Triaxial accelerometers were rigidly fixed to the L1 and L2 spinous processes and dorsoventral (DV) mechanical excitation (20–80 N, 100 milliseconds) was applied to L3 using a spinal dynamometer. Peak force and displacement and peak-peak acceleration responses were computed for each trial and a least squares regression analysis assessed the correlation between L3 displacement and adjacent (L2) segment acceleration responses. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to test the homogeneity of slopes derived from the regression analysis and to assess the mean differences. Results. A significant, positive, linear correlation was found between the DV displacement of L3 and the DV acceleration measured at L2 for both normal (R2 = 0.482, P < 0.001) and degenerated disc groups (R2 = 0.831, P < 0.001). The L3 DV displacement was significantly lower (ANCOVA, P < 0.001) for the degenerated group (mean: 10.39 mm) in comparison to the normal group (mean: 9.07 mm). Mean peak-peak L2–L1 DV acceleration transfer was also significantly reduced from 12.40 m/s2 to 5.50 m/s2 in the degenerated animal group (ANCOVA, P < 0.001). Conclusion. The findings indicate that noninvasive displacement measurements of the prone-lying animal can be used to estimate the segmental and intersegmental motions in both normal and pathologic spines.

[1]  T. Keller,et al.  Intervertebral Disc Degeneration Reduces Vertebral Motion Responses , 2007, Spine.

[2]  T. Keller,et al.  Dynamic dorsoventral stiffness assessment of the ovine lumbar spine. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[3]  T. Keller,et al.  Muscular contributions to dynamic dorsoventral lumbar spine stiffness , 2007, European Spine Journal.

[4]  T. Keller,et al.  Spinal manipulation force and duration affect vertebral movement and neuromuscular responses. , 2006, Clinical biomechanics.

[5]  T. Keller,et al.  Neuromechanical characterization of in vivo lumbar spinal manipulation. Part I. Vertebral motion. , 2003, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[6]  Tony S Keller,et al.  Comparison of dynamic posteroanterior spinal stiffness to plain film radiographic images of lumbar disk height. , 2003, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[7]  C. Maher,et al.  Forces applied during manual therapy to patients with low back pain. , 2002, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[8]  W. Vach,et al.  Palpation of the upper thoracic spine: an observer reliability study. , 2002, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[9]  D. Hukins,et al.  Sheep lumbar intervertebral discs as models for human discs. , 2002, Clinical biomechanics.

[10]  Tony S Keller,et al.  Force-deformation response of the lumbar spine: a sagittal plane model of posteroanterior manipulation and mobilization. , 2002, Clinical biomechanics.

[11]  Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde,et al.  Motion palpation findings and self-reported low back pain in a population-based study sample. , 2002, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[12]  T. Keller,et al.  Stiffness and neuromuscular reflex response of the human spine to posteroanterior manipulative thrusts in patients with low back pain. , 2001, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[13]  C. Liebenson,et al.  Motion palpation: it's time to accept the evidence. , 1999, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[14]  S. McGill,et al.  Atlas-axis facet asymmetry. Implications in manual palpation. , 1999, Spine.

[15]  T. Keller,et al.  Validation of the force and frequency characteristics of the activator adjusting instrument: effectiveness as a mechanical impedance measurement tool. , 1999, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[16]  J Crosbie,et al.  Variations in posteroanterior stiffness in the thoracolumbar spine: preliminary observations and proposed mechanisms. , 1998, Physical therapy.

[17]  R. Moore,et al.  The relationship between height, shape and histological changes in early degeneration of the lower lumbar discs , 1998, European Spine Journal.

[18]  R. Adams,et al.  The effects of high and low loading forces on measured values of lumbar stiffness. , 1998, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[19]  C. Maher,et al.  Normal response to large posteroanterior lumbar loads--a case study approach. , 1997, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[20]  C. Maher,et al.  Evaluation of a new device for measuring responses to posteroanterior forces in a patient population, Part 1: Reliability testing. , 1996, Physical therapy.

[21]  W. Herzog,et al.  A new technique of tissue stiffness (compliance) assessment: its reliability, accuracy and comparison with an existing method. , 1996, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[22]  M. Lee,et al.  Direction of manual force applied during assessment of stiffness in the lumbosacral spine. , 1995, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[23]  M. Lee,et al.  Posteroanterior stiffness at three locations in the lumbar spine. , 1994, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[24]  T. Keller,et al.  Measurement and analysis of the in vivo posteroanterior impulse response of the human thoracolumbar spine: a feasibility study. , 1994, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[25]  T Hansson,et al.  A method for the intravital measurement of interspinous kinematics. , 1992, Journal of biomechanics.

[26]  M. Pope,et al.  Intervertebral Motion during Vibration , 1991, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[27]  N L Svensson,et al.  Measurement of stiffness during simulated spinal physiotherapy. , 1990, Clinical physics and physiological measurement : an official journal of the Hospital Physicists' Association, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Medizinische Physik and the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics.

[28]  B. Vernon‐roberts,et al.  1990 Volvo Award in Experimental Studies: Anulus Tears and Intervertebral Disc Degeneration: An Experimental Study Using an Animal Model , 1990, Spine.

[29]  K. Larson,et al.  Interexaminer reliability of eight evaluative dimensions of lumbar segmental abnormality. , 1990, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[30]  Mootz Rd,et al.  Intra- and interobserver reliability of passive motion palpation of the lumbar spine. , 1989 .

[31]  R. Mootz,et al.  Intra- and interobserver reliability of passive motion palpation of the lumbar spine. , 1989, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.