ArticleExperimental brain research2009
Dynamic responsiveness of lumbar paraspinal muscle spindles during vertebral movement in the cat.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proprioception and Geriatric Low Back Pain.Spine surgery and related research · 2022Review
- Article
- Neural responses to the mechanical characteristics of high velocity, low amplitude spinal manipulation: Effect of specific contact site.Manual therapy · 2015Article
- Effect of changing lumbar stiffness by single facet joint dysfunction on the responsiveness of lumbar muscle spindles to vertebral movement.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2014Article
- Neural responses to the mechanical parameters of a high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation: effect of preload parameters.Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics · 2014Article
- Using vertebral movement and intact paraspinal muscles to determine the distribution of intrafusal fiber innervation of muscle spindle afferents in the anesthetized cat.Experimental brain research · 2013Article
- 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 · 2012Article
- Lengthening but not shortening history of paraspinal muscle spindles in the low back alters their dynamic sensitivity.Journal of neurophysiology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Muscle spindles provide essential information for appropriate motor control. In appendicular muscles, much is known about their position and movement sensitivities, but little is known about the axial muscles of the low back. We investigated the dynamic responsiveness of lumbar paraspinal muscle spindle afferents from L(6) dorsal root filaments during constant velocity movement of the L(6) vertebra (the feline has seven lumbar vertebrae) in Nembutal-anesthetized cats. Actuations of 1 mm applied at the L(6) spinous process were delivered at 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 mm/s. The slow velocity component was measured as the slope of the relationship between displacement during the constant velocity ramp and instantaneous discharge frequency. The quick velocity component was the slope's intercept at zero displacement. The peak component was determined as the highest discharge rates occurring near the end of the ramp compared with control. The slow velocity component over the three increasing velocities was 23.9 (9.9), 21.6 (9.6) and 20.5 (9.5) imp/(s mm) [mean (SD)], respectively. The quick velocity component was 28.4 (8.6), 31.4 (9.8) and 35.8 (10.6) imp/s, respectively. These measures of dynamic responsiveness were at least 5-10 times higher compared with values reported for appendicular muscle spindles. The peak component's velocity sensitivity was 2.9 (imp/s)/(mm/s) [0.2, 5.5, lower, upper 95% confidence interval] similar to that for cervical paraspinal muscles as well as appendicular muscles. Increased dynamic responsiveness of lumbar paraspinal muscle spindles may insure central driving to insure control of intervertebral motion during changes in spinal orientation. It may also contribute to large, rapid and potentially injurious increases in paraspinal muscle activity during sudden and unexpected muscle stretch.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.