Correcting Abnormal Flexion-relaxation in Chronic Lumbar Pain: Responsiveness to a New Biofeedback Training Protocol

Overview

Journal Clin J Pain

Specialties Neurology
Psychiatry

Date 2010 May 18

PMID 20473047

Citations 16

Authors

Randy Neblett

Tom G Mayer

Emily Brede

Robert J Gatchel

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: Lumbar flexion-relaxation is a well-known phenomenon that can reliably be seen in normal participants, but not in most chronic low back pain (CLBP) participants. No earlier studies have investigated any specific clinical intervention designed to correct abnormal flexion-relaxation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the contribution of a surface EMG-assisted stretching (SEMGAS) biofeedback training protocol, within a functional restoration treatment program, on flexion range of motion (ROM) and erector spinae surface EMG (SEMG) during maximum voluntary flexion (MVF).

Methods: Lumbar flexion ROM and MVF SEMG were assessed in 2 groups of CLBP patients at the beginning and end of rehabilitation. One group participated in functional restoration only, whereas the other group participated in functional restoration plus SEMGAS biofeedback training. Both treatment groups were compared with a separate control group of normal, pain-free participants.

Results: Pretreatment ROM and MVF SEMG measures were similar in both treatment groups, but were very different than the control group. At posttreatment, the functional restoration only group remained statistically different than the control group on MVF SEMG and some ROM measures, but the SEMGAS group was statistically equivalent to the control participants on all posttreatment measures, including the ability to show flexion-relaxation.

Discussion: Interdisciplinary functional restoration rehabilitation of CLBP participants is effective for increasing ROM and other functional measures, but the addition of a SEMGAS biofeedback training protocol can result in normalization of the flexion-relaxation phenomenon, so that these participants are comparable with a pain-free control group.

Citing Articles

Subgrouping People With Acute Low Back Pain Based on Psychological, Sensory, and Motor Characteristics: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Ippersiel P, Cote-Picard C, Roy J, Masse-Alarie H Eur J Pain. 2025; 29(4):e70006.

PMID: 40035340 PMC: 11877624. DOI: 10.1002/ejp.70006.

Biofeedback Sensor vs. Physiotherapist Feedback During Core Stabilization Training in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain.

Yeldan I, Canan G, Akinci B Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2023; 49(1):103-113.

PMID: 37878122 DOI: 10.1007/s10484-023-09606-1.

Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis Show an Altered Flexion/Relaxation Phenomenon.

Aranda-Valera I, Garrido-Castro J, Martinez-Galisteo A, Pena-Amaro J, Gonzalez-Navas C, Cuesta-Vargas A Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(5).

PMID: 33947109 PMC: 8146757. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11050810.

Combined abnormal muscle activity and pain-related factors affect disability in patients with chronic low back pain: An association rule analysis.

Shigetoh H, Nishi Y, Osumi M, Morioka S PLoS One. 2020; 15(12):e0244111.

PMID: 33332431 PMC: 7746291. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244111.

MULTI-SEGMENTED TRUNK MOTION OF HEALTHY NON-ELDERLY ADULTS IN DIFFERENT DECADES OF LIFE.

Breloff S, Chou L Biomed Eng (Singapore). 2019; 29(4).

PMID: 30820136 PMC: 6390288. DOI: 10.4015/S1016237217500284.

References

Lethem J, Slade P, Troup J, Bentley G . Outline of a Fear-Avoidance Model of exaggerated pain perception--I. Behav Res Ther. 1983; 21(4):401-8. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(83)90009-8. View

Paquet N, Malouin F, Richards C . Hip-spine movement interaction and muscle activation patterns during sagittal trunk movements in low back pain patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19(5):596-603. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199403000-00016. View

Neblett R, Gatchel R, Mayer T . A clinical guide to surface-EMG-assisted stretching as an adjunct to chronic musculoskeletal pain rehabilitation. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2003; 28(2):147-60. DOI: 10.1023/a:1023814709858. View

Shirado O, Ito T, Kaneda K, Strax T . Flexion-relaxation phenomenon in the back muscles. A comparative study between healthy subjects and patients with chronic low back pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995; 74(2):139-44. View

Mayer T, Anagnostis C, Gatchel R, Evans T . Impact of functional restoration after anterior cervical fusion on chronic disability in work-related neck pain. Spine J. 2003; 2(4):267-73. DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00208-5. View

FLOYD W, Silver P . The function of the erectores spinae muscles in certain movements and postures in man. J Physiol. 1955; 129(1):184-203. PMC: 1365926. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.1955.sp005347. View

Watson P, Booker C, Main C, Chen A . Surface electromyography in the identification of chronic low back pain patients: the development of the flexion relaxation ratio. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 1997; 12(3):165-171. DOI: 10.1016/s0268-0033(97)00065-x. View

Neblett R, Mayer T, Gatchel R . Theory and rationale for surface EMG-assisted stretching as an adjunct to chronic musculoskeletal pain rehabilitation. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2003; 28(2):139-46. DOI: 10.1023/a:1023862625787. View

Brady S, Mayer T, Gatchel R . Physical progress and residual impairment quantification after functional restoration. Part II: Isokinetic trunk strength. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19(4):395-400. View

10.

McGeary D, Mayer T, Gatchel R . High pain ratings predict treatment failure in chronic occupational musculoskeletal disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(2):317-25. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02968. View

11.

Wright A, Mayer T, Gatchel R . Outcomes of disabling cervical spine disorders in compensation injuries. A prospective comparison to tertiary rehabilitation response for chronic lumbar spinal disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24(2):178-83. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199901150-00020. View

12.

Mayer T, Neblett R, Brede E, Gatchel R . The quantified lumbar flexion-relaxation phenomenon is a useful measurement of improvement in a functional restoration program. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(22):2458-65. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b20070. View

13.

Triano J, Schultz A . Correlation of objective measure of trunk motion and muscle function with low-back disability ratings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987; 12(6):561-5. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198707000-00010. View

14.

Ahern D, Follick M, Council J, Litchman H . Comparison of lumbar paravertebral EMG patterns in chronic low back pain patients and non-patient controls. Pain. 1988; 34(2):153-160. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(88)90160-1. View

15.

Flor H, Furst M, Birbaumer N . Deficient discrimination of EMG levels and overestimation of perceived tension in chronic pain patients. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 1999; 24(1):55-66. DOI: 10.1023/a:1022847131149. View

16.

Mayer T, McMahon M, Gatchel R, Sparks B, Wright A, Pegues P . Socioeconomic outcomes of combined spine surgery and functional restoration in workers' compensation spinal disorders with matched controls. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23(5):598-605; discussion 606. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199803010-00013. View

17.

Proctor T, Mayer T, Gatchel R, McGeary D . Unremitting health-care-utilization outcomes of tertiary rehabilitation of patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86(1):62-9. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200401000-00011. View

18.

Jordan K, Mayer T, Gatchel R . Should extended disability be an exclusion criterion for tertiary rehabilitation? Socioeconomic outcomes of early versus late functional restoration in compensation spinal disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23(19):2110-6; discussion 2117. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199810010-00014. View

19.

Curtis L, Mayer T, Gatchel R . Physical progress and residual impairment quantification after functional restoration. Part III: Isokinetic and isoinertial lifting capacity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19(4):401-5. View

20.

Mayer T, Polatin P, Smith B, Gatchel R, Fardon D, Herring S . Spine rehabilitation: secondary and tertiary nonoperative care. Spine J. 2003; 3(3 Suppl):28S-36S. DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00562-4. View