5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Neck/shoulder function in tension-type headache patients and the effect of strength training

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Muscle pain has been associated with reduced maximal muscle strength, and reduced rate of force development (RFD). Strength training (ST) has shown an effect in not only normalizing muscle function but also reducing neck muscle pain.

          Aim

          The aims of this study were to compare muscle function in terms of strength, force steadiness in neck flexion, as well as extension, and rate of RFD of the shoulder in tension-type headache (TTH) patients and healthy controls and to examine the correlation to tenderness. Furthermore, the aim of the study was to examine the effect of ST on neck and shoulder functions in TTH patients.

          Participants and methods

          In all, 60 TTH patients and 30 sex- and age-matched healthy controls were included for a case–control comparison. The 60 patients with TTH were randomized into an ST and an ergonomic and posture correction (EP) control group. The ST group trained for 10 weeks with elastic bands.

          Results

          TTH patients had a lower extension force steadiness with a significant 15% higher coefficient of variation (CoV) compared to healthy controls ( p=0.047). A significantly lower RFD (25%) was noted in the TTH group than in the healthy controls ( p=0.031). A significant ( p<0.01) and moderate correlation to muscle tenderness was found. In the intervention, 23 patients completed ST and 21 patients completed EP. No significant between-group effect was observed, but at 22 weeks follow-up, both groups had a significant within-group effect of improved extension force steadiness (ST: p=0.011 and EP: p<0.01).

          Conclusion

          TTH patients showed a deteriorated muscle function, indicated by a lower force steadiness and RFD, compared to the healthy controls. The effect of ST was not larger than EP as both groups of TTH patients showed some improvement in neck and shoulder functions during the 10 weeks intervention and at follow-up. Future interventions are needed to elucidate if normalization of muscle function can lead to a reduction in headache.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults.

          In order to stimulate further adaptation toward a specific training goal(s), progression in the type of resistance training protocol used is necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of both concentric and eccentric muscle actions and the performance of both single- and multiple-joint exercises. It is also recommended that the strength program sequence exercises to optimize the quality of the exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher intensity before lower intensity exercises). For initial resistances, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 8-12 repetition maximum (RM) be used in novice training. For intermediate to advanced training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range, from 1-12 RM in a periodized fashion, with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using at least 3-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s concentric, 1-2 s eccentric). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 d x wk(-1) for novice and intermediate training and 4-5 d x wk(-1) for advanced training. Similar program designs are recommended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion, with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training, and 2) use of light loads (30-60% of 1 RM) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 2-3 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise. It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises, especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (> 15) using short rest periods (< 90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand, as with prior ones, the recommendations should be viewed in context of the individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training status.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The pain-adaptation model: a discussion of the relationship between chronic musculoskeletal pain and motor activity.

            Articles describing motor function in five chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions (temporomandibular disorders, muscle tension headache, fibromyalgia, chronic lower back pain, and postexercise muscle soreness) were reviewed. It was concluded that the data do not support the commonly held view that the pain of these conditions is maintained by some form of tonic muscular hyperactivity. Instead, it seems clear that in these conditions the activity of agonist muscles is often reduced by pain, even when this does not arise from the muscle itself. On the other hand, pain causes small increases in the level of activity of the antagonist. As a consequence of these changes, force production and the range and velocity of movement of the affected body part are often reduced. To explain how such changes in the behaviour come about, we propose a neurophysiological model based on the phasic modulation of excitatory and inhibitory interneurons supplied by high-threshold sensory afferents. We suggest that the "dysfunction" that is characteristic of several types of chronic musculoskeletal pain is a normal protective adaptation and is not a cause of pain.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The impact of headache in Europe: principal results of the Eurolight project

              Background European data, at least from Western Europe, are relatively good on migraine prevalence but less sound for tension-type headache (TTH) and medication-overuse headache (MOH). Evidence on impact of headache disorders is very limited. Eurolight was a data-gathering exercise primarily to inform health policy in the European Union (EU). This manuscript reports personal impact. Methods The study was cross-sectional with modified cluster sampling. Surveys were conducted by structured questionnaire, including diagnostic questions based on ICHD-II and various measures of impact, and are reported from Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain and United Kingdom. Different methods of sampling were used in each. The full methodology is described elsewhere. Results Questionnaires were analysed from 8,271 participants (58% female, mean age 43.4 y). Participation-rates, where calculable, varied from 10.6% to 58.8%. Moderate interest-bias was detected. Unadjusted lifetime prevalence of any headache was 91.3%. Gender-adjusted 1-year prevalences were: any headache 78.6%; migraine 35.3%; TTH 38.2%, headache on ≥15 d/mo 7.2%; probable MOH 3.1%. Personal impact was high, and included ictal symptom burden, interictal burden, cumulative burden and impact on others (partners and children). There was a general gradient of probable MOH > migraine > TTH, and most measures indicated higher impact among females. Lost useful time was substantial: 17.7% of males and 28.0% of females with migraine lost >10% of days; 44.7% of males and 53.7% of females with probable MOH lost >20%. Conclusions The common headache disorders have very high personal impact in the EU, with important implications for health policy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7090
                2018
                23 February 2018
                : 11
                : 445-454
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet-Glostrup, Glostrup
                [2 ]Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Physical Activity and Health in Work Life University of Southern Denmark, Odense
                [3 ]Department of Clinical research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense
                [4 ]National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [5 ]Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Bjarne Kjeldgaard Madsen, Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Nordre Ringvej 69, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark, Email bjarne.kjeldgaard.madsen@ 123456regionh.dk
                Article
                jpr-11-445
                10.2147/JPR.S146050
                5827678
                © 2018 Madsen et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Clinical Trial Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article