Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19164108›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2009

Position sensitivity of feline paraspinal muscle spindles to vertebral movement in the lumbar spine.

Dong-Yuan Cao, Joel G Pickar, Weiginq Ge, Allyson Ianuzzi, Partap S Khalsa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The decreased responsiveness of lumbar muscle spindles to a prior history of spinal muscle lengthening is graded with the magnitude of change in vertebral position.Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology · 2012
    Article
  9. Spinal manipulative therapy and somatosensory activation.Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology · 2012
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dong-Yuan CaoPalmer Center for Chiropractic Research, 741 Brady St., Davenport, IA 52803, USA.
Joel G Pickar
Weiginq Ge
Allyson Ianuzzi
Partap S Khalsa

Funding

Mechanisms and Effects of Chiropractic ManipulationU19AT002006 · NCCIH · PALMER COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTIC · PI MEEKER, WILLIAM C · 2003 to 2006
$2.3M
RENOVATION OF PALMER CENTER FOR CHIROPRACTIC RESEARCHC06RR015433 · NCRR · PALMER COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTIC · PI MEEKER, WILLIAM C · 2000 to 2000
$1.3M
NCCIH NIH HHS U19AT-002006NCRR NIH HHS C06 RR-15433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Muscle spindles contribute to sensorimotor control by supplying feedback regarding muscle length and consequently information about joint position. While substantial study has been devoted to determining the position sensitivity of spindles in limb muscles, there appears to be no data on their sensitivity in the low back. We determined the relationship between lumbar paraspinal muscle spindle discharge and paraspinal muscle lengthening estimated from controlled cranialward movement of the L(6) vertebra in anesthetized cats. Ramp (0.4 mm/s) and hold displacements (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.2 mm for 2.5 s) were applied at the L(6) spinous process. Position sensitivity was defined as the slope of the relationship between the estimated increase in muscle length and mean instantaneous frequency at each length. To enable comparisons with appendicular muscle spindles where joint angle was measured, we also calculated sensitivity in terms of the L(6) and L(7) intervertebral flexion angle (IVA). This angle was estimated from measurements of facet joint capsule strain (FJC) based on a previously established relationship between IVA and FJC strain in the cat lumbar vertebral column during lumbar flexion. Single-unit recordings were obtained from 12 muscle spindle afferents. Longissimus and multifidus muscles contained the receptive field of 10 and 2 afferents, respectively. Mean position sensitivity was 16.3 imp.s(-1).mm(-1) [10.6-22.1, 95% confidence interval (CI), P < 0.001]. Mean angular sensitivity was 5.2 imp.s(-1). degrees (-1) (2.6-8.0, P < 0.003). These slope estimates were more than 3.5 times greater compared with appendicular muscle spindles, and their CIs did not contain previous slope estimates for the sensitivity of appendicular spindles from the literature. Potential reasons for and the significance of the apparently high position sensitivity in the lumbar spine are discussed.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeAction PotentialsAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaCatsCompressive StrengthElectric StimulationElectromyographyMovementMuscle, SkeletalMuscle SpindlesNeurons, AfferentPostureProprioceptionSpinal Nerve RootsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID19164108
PMCPMC2695637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.