Motor adaptations to trunk perturbation: effects of experimental back pain and spinal tissue creep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In complex anatomical systems, such as the trunk, motor control theories suggest that many motor solutions can be implemented to achieve a similar goal. Although reflex mechanisms act as a stabilizer of the spine, how the central nervous system uses trunk redundancy to adapt neuromuscular responses under the influence of external perturbations, such as experimental pain or spinal tissue creep, is still unclear. The aim of this study was to identify and characterize trunk neuromuscular adaptations in response to unexpected trunk perturbations under the influence of spinal tissue creep and experimental back pain. Healthy participants experienced a repetition of sudden external trunk perturbations in two protocols: 1) 15 perturbations before and after a spinal tissue creep protocol and 2) 15 perturbations with and without experimental back pain. Trunk neuromuscular adaptations were measured by using high-density electromyography to record erector spinae muscle activity recruitment patterns and a motion analysis system. Muscle activity reflex attenuation was found across unexpected trunk perturbation trials under the influence of creep and pain. A similar area of muscle activity distribution was observed with or without back pain as well as before and after creep. No change of trunk kinematics was observed. We conclude that although under normal circumstances muscle activity adaptation occurs throughout the same perturbations, a reset of the adaptation process is present when experiencing a new perturbation such as experimental pain or creep. However, participants are still able to attenuate reflex responses under these conditions by using variable recruitment patterns of back muscles. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The present study characterizes, for the first time, trunk motor adaptations with high-density surface electromyography when the spinal system is challenged by a series of unexpected perturbations. We propose that the central nervous system is able to adapt neuromuscular responses by using a variable recruitment pattern of back muscles to maximize the motor performance, even under the influence of pain or when the passive structures of the spine are altered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".