THE EFFECT OF MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS ON BODY REGIONS AND PAIN LEVELS IN ELDERLY PEOPLE ON DYNAMIC BALANCE ABILITY
1Department of Counseling Health & Kinesiology, Texas A&M University–San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
2Department of Prescription and Rehabilitation of Exercise, Dankook University, Cheonan, Republic of Korea
3Department of Icheon Training Center, Korea Paralympic Committee, Icheon, Republic of Korea
DOI: 10.31083/jomh.v16i3.285 Vol.16,Issue 3,July 2020 pp.98-108
Published: 16 July 2020
Background and objective
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are caused by factors such as aging, smoking, high body mass index (BMI), muscle loss, repetition of specific movements, and physical activity of intense muscle demands. MSDs cause pain, decrease the range of motion of joints, reduce proprioception sensory function, and reduce posture maintenance. This study aims to present basic data on prescription of exercise for musculo-skeletal movements in elderly people by evaluating the dynamic balance ability according to the presence of MSDs and the body regions affected by MSDs, and verifying the effects of MSD pain on the dynamic balance ability.
Material and methods
This study examined and identified differences according to the presence MSDs (Disorders, n = 51, age = 67.35 ± 2.62 years; Control, n = 15, age = 66.33 ± 3.10 years) and MSDs of body regions (shoulder, n = 14, age = 66.14 ± 1.95 years; lower back, n = 17, age = 67.82 ± 1.77 years; and knee, n = 20, age = 67.80 ± 2.36 years) in 66 elderly males. The causal relationship between MSD pain and dynamic balance ability was analyzed. The dynamic balance ability was measured using S3-Check (Multi-Functional Training, MFT S3; GmbH, Germany) where the subject takes off his shoes and positions on a 530-mm diameter round platform that moves in the axial direction (left-right or front-back) in the measuring range of +20° to –20° tilt angle.
The postural stability level was lower in the MSD group than in the group without MSD (left-right, P < 0.001; front-back, P < 0.001). The group with MSDs in the knee and the lower back showed lower results in the left-right and front-back stability index than the group without MSDs. Also, the knee and lower back MSD group showed lower scores in the front-back stability index than the shoulder MSD group. The level of sensory-motor function was lower in the MSD group than in the group without MSD (left-right, P < 0.001; front-back, P < 0.01). The MSD pain showed significantly positive standardized coefficients in the order of sensorimotor index (front-back, β = 0.404, P < 0.01; left-right, β = 0.397, P < 0.01) and stability index (front-back, β = 0.382, P < 0.01; left-right, β = 0.311, P < 0.01). As the degree of MSD pain increased, the postural stability level and sensory-motor function decreased.
We verified that the MSDs of body regions (knee and lower back) and pain level in the elderly are important factors in the decrease of dynamic balance ability.
dynamic balance ability; elderly; fall; musculoskeletal disorders; pain level; risk
Jinho Park,Kun Ho Lee. THE EFFECT OF MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS ON BODY REGIONS AND PAIN LEVELS IN ELDERLY PEOPLE ON DYNAMIC BALANCE ABILITY. Journal of Men's Health. 2020. 16(3);98-108.
1. Bernard BP, Putz-Anderson V. Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors; a critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related muscu-loskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, USA. 1997;97:41. https://doi. org/10.26616/nioshpub97141.
2. Ingram M, Symmons DPM. The burden of mus-culoskeletal conditions. Medicine. Elsevier BV; 2018;46:152–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.
3. Arvidsson I, Arvidsson M, Axmon A, Hansson, GA, Johansson, CR, & Skerfving, S. Musculoskeletal disorders among female and male air traffic control-lers performing identical and demanding computer work. Ergonomics 2006;49:1052–1067. https://doi. org/10.1080/00140130600733816.
4. da Costa BR, Vieira ER. Risk factors for work- related musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review of recent longitudinal studies. Am J Ind Med. 2010;53:285–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20750.
5. Tonelli S, Culp K, Donham K. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders in senior farmers: Safety and health considerations. Workplace Health Saf. 2014;62:333–341. https://doi. org/10.1177/216507991406200804.
6. Vandervoort AA. Aging of the human neuro-muscular system. Muscle Nerve Off J Am Assoc Electrodiag Med. 2002;25:17–25. https://doi. org/10.1002/mus.1215.
7. Champagne A, Prince F, Bouffard V, Lafond D. Balance, falls-related self-efficacy, and psycho-logical factors amongst older women with chronic low back pain: A preliminary case-control study. Rehabil Res Pract. 2012;2012:430374. https://doi. org/10.1155/2012/430374.
8. Gheno R, Cepparo JM, Rosca CE, Cotten A. Musculoskeletal disorders in the elderly. J Clin Imag Sci. 2012;2:1–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/ 2156-7514.99151.
9. March LM, Brnabic AJ, Skinner JC, Schwarz JM, Finnegan T, Druce J, Brooks PM. Musculoskeletal disability among elderly people in the commu-nity. Med J Aust 1998;168:439–442. https://doi. org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1998.tb139023.x.
10. Ferrer-Peña R, Moreno-López M, Calvo-Lobo C, López-de-Uralde-Villanueva I, Fernández-Carnero J. Relationship of dynamic balance impair-ment with pain-related and psychosocial measures in primary care patients with chronic greater tro-chanteric pain syndrome. Pain Med 2019;20:810–
11. Brech GC, Andrusaitis SF, Vitale GF, Greve JMDA. Correlation of disability and pain with postural bal-ance among women with chronic low back pain. Clinics 2012;67:959–962. https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2012(08)17.
12. Chen Q, Hayman LL, Shmerling RH, Bean JF, Leveille SG. Characteristics of chronic pain associ-ated with sleep difficulty in older adults: The main-tenance of balance, independent living, intellect, and zest in the elderly (MOBILIZE) Boston study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59:1385–1392. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03544.x.
13. World Health Organization (WHO). World report on ageing and health. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2017;145:150. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-5916. 207249.
14. Sehl ME, Yates FE. Kinetics of human aging: I. Rates of senescence between ages 30 and 70 years in healthy people. J Geront A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56:B198–B208. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.5.B198.
15. Raschner C, Lembert S, Platzer H, Patterson C, Hilden T, Lutz M.. S3-check-evaluation and gen-eration of normal values of a test for balance ability and postural stability. Sportverletzung Sportschaden Organ der Gesellschaft Orthopadisch-Traumatologische Sportmedizin 2008;22:100–105. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1027239.
16. Bergland A, Wyller TB. Risk factors for serious fall related injury in elderly people living at home. Inj Prev. 2004;10:308–313. https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2003.004721.
17. Sturnieks DL, St George R, Lord SR. Balance disorders in the elderly. Neurophysiol Clin/Clin Neurophys. 2008;38:467–478. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.neucli.2008.09.001.
18. Tinetti ME. Preventing falls in elderly persons. New Eng J Med 2003;348:42–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. neucli.2008.09.001.
19. Yagci N, Cavlak U, Aslan UB, Akdag B. Relationship between balance performance and musculoskeletal pain in lower body comparison healthy middle aged and older adults. Arch Gerontol Geriat. 2007;45:109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. archger.2006.09.005.
20. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 1983;17:45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(83)90126-4.
21. Carlsson AM. Assessment of chronic pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale. Pain 1983;16:87–101. https://doi. org/10.1016/0304-3959(83)90088-X.
22. Raschner C, Hildebrandt C, Mohr J, Muller L. Sex differences in balance among Alpine ski rac-ers: Cross-sectional age comparisons. Percept Mot Skills 2017;124:1134–1150. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0031512517730730.
23. Baierle T, Kromer T, Petermann C, Magosch P, Luomajoki H. Balance ability and postural sta-bility among patients with painful shoulder dis-orders and healthy controls. BMC Musculoskel Disord. 2013;14:282. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-282.
24. Riemann BL, Lephart SM. The sensorimotor sys-tem, part II: The role of proprioception in motor control and functional joint stability. J Athletic Train. 2002;37:80. https://doi.org/10.5608/0000.
25. Wojtyczek B, Pasławska M, Raschner C. Changes in the balance performance of Polish recreational skiers after seven days of Alpine skiing. J Hum Kinet. 2014;44:29–40. https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2014-0108.
26. Lord SR, Clark RD, Webster IW. Postural stability and associated physiological factors in a population of aged persons. J Gerontol. 1991;46:M69–M76. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/46.3.M69.
27. Hellebrandt FA, Braun GL. The influence of sex and age on the postural sway of man. Am J Phy Anthropol. 1939;24:347–360. https://doi. org/10.1093/geronj/46.3.M69.
28. Clark NC, Röijezon U, Treleaven J. Proprioception in musculoskeletal rehabilitation. Part 2: Clinical assessment and intervention. Manual Ther. 2015;20:378–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. math.2015.01.009.
29. Ahmed AF. Effect of sensorimotor training on bal-ance in elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis. J Adv Res. 2011;2:305–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jare.2011.02.001.
30. Treede R-D, Apkarian AV, Bromm B, Greenspan JD, Lenz FA.. Cortical representation of pain: Functional characterization of nociceptive areas near the lateral sulcus. Pain 2000;87:113–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00350-X.
31. Sullivan EV, Rose J, Rohlfing T, Pfefferbaum
A. Postural sway reduction in aging men and women: Relation to brain structure, cogni-tive status, and stabilizing factors. Neurobiol Aging 2009;30:793–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. neurobiolaging.2007.08.021.
32. Treede R-D. Neurophysiological studies of pain pathways in peripheral and central nervous system disorders. J Neurol. 2003;250:1152–1161. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2007.08.021.
Science Citation Index Expanded Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.
Social Sciences Citation Index Social Sciences Citation Index contains over 3,400 journals across 58 social sciences disciplines, as well as selected items from 3,500 of the world’s leading scientific and technical journals. More than 9.37 million records and 122 million cited references date back from 1900 to present.
Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in the social and behavioral sciences.
Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.
SCOPUS Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.
DOAJ DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.
CrossRef Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. Crossref committed to open scholarly infrastructure and collaboration, this is now announcing a very deliberate path.
Portico Portico is a community-supported preservation archive that safeguards access to e-journals, e-books, and digital collections. Our unique, trusted process ensures that the content we preserve will remain accessible and usable for researchers, scholars, and students in the future.