Is Neck Posture Subgroup in Late Adolescence a Risk Factor for Persistent Neck Pain in Young Adults? A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether sagittal neck sitting posture subgroup membership in late adolescence was a risk factor for persistent neck pain (PNP) in young adults. METHODS: There were 686 participants enrolled in the Raine Study at the 17- and 22-year follow-ups. At 17 years of age, posture was measured by photographs, and 4 subgroups of sitting neck posture were determined by cluster analysis. Height and weight were measured, and exercise frequency, depression, and PNP were assessed by questionnaire. At 22 years of age, participants answered questions about neck pain and occupation type. Logistic regression examined if neck posture subgroups at 17 years of age were a risk factor for PNP at 22 years of age, taking into account other factors. RESULTS: Female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.16-2.65) and PNP at 17 years of age (OR = 3.78, 95% CI = 2.57-5.57) were associated with PNP at 22 years of age. In females, neck posture subgroup at 17 years of age was a risk factor for PNP at 22 years of age. Compared with the upright subgroup, both the slumped thorax/forward head subgroup groups and the intermediate subgroup had decreased odds for PNP at 22 years of age (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.08-0.76; OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15-0.99, respectively). No association was found in males. CONCLUSION: After taking into account PNP at 17 years, sitting neck posture at 17 was not a risk factor for PNP at 22 years of age in males, whereas in females, more relaxed postures (slumped thorax/forward head and Intermediate postures) were protective of neck pain compared with upright posture. IMPACT: Females in late adolescence who sat in slumped thorax/forward head or intermediate posture rather than upright sitting posture had a lower risk of PNP as a young adult. The practice of generic public health messages to sit up straight to prevent neck pain needs rethinking.

Neck Posture Clusters and Their Association With Biopsychosocial Factors and Neck Pain in Australian Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence on the association between sagittal neck posture and neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine the existence of clusters of neck posture in a cohort of 17-year-olds and (2) to establish whether identified subgroups were associated with biopsychosocial factors and neck pain. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study. METHODS: The adolescents (N=1,108) underwent 2-dimensional photographic postural assessment in a sitting position. One distance and 4 angular measurements of the head, neck, and thorax were calculated from photo-reflective markers placed on bony landmarks. Subgroups of sagittal sitting neck posture were determined by cluster analysis. Height and weight were measured, and lifestyle and psychological factors, neck pain, and headache were assessed by questionnaire. The associations among posture subgroups, neck pain, and other factors were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Four distinct clusters of sitting neck posture were identified: upright, intermediate, slumped thorax/forward head, and erect thorax/forward head. Significant associations between cluster and sex, weight, and height were found. Participants classified as having slumped thorax/forward head posture were at higher odds of mild, moderate, or severe depression. Participants classified as having upright posture exercised more frequently. There was no significant difference in the odds of neck pain or headache across the clusters. LIMITATIONS: The results are specific to 17-year-olds and may not be applicable to adults. CONCLUSION: Meaningful sagittal sitting neck posture clusters were identified in 17-year-olds who demonstrated some differences with biopsychosocial profiling. The finding of no association between cluster membership and neck pain and headaches challenges widely held beliefs about the role of posture in adolescent neck pain.

The effect of different standing and sitting postures on trunk muscle activity in a pain-free population.

STUDY DESIGN: A normative, single-group study was conducted. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is a difference in electromyographic activation of specific lumbopelvic muscles with the adoption of common postures in a pain-free population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Clinical observations indicate that adopting passive postures such as sway standing and slump sitting can exacerbate pain in individuals with low back pain. These individuals often present with poor activation of the lumbopelvic stabilizing musculature. At this writing, little empirical evidence exists to document that function of the trunk and lumbopelvic musculature are related to the adoption of standardized standing and sitting postures. METHODS: This study included 20 healthy adults, with equal representation of the genders. Surface electromyography was used to measure activity in the superficial lumbar multifidus, internal oblique, rectus abdominis, external oblique, and thoracic erector spinae muscles for four standardized standing and sitting postures. RESULTS: The internal oblique, superficial lumbar multifidus, and thoracic erector spinae muscles showed a significant decrease in activity during sway standing (P = 0.027, P = 0.002, and P = 0.003, respectively) and slump sitting (P = 0.007, P = 0.012, and P = 0.003, respectively), as compared with erect postures. Rectus abdominis activity increased significantly in sway standing, as compared with erect standing (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The findings show that the lumbopelvic stabilizing musculature is active in maintaining optimally aligned, erect postures, and that these muscles are less active during the adoption of passive postures. The results of this study lend credence to the practice of postural retraining when facilitation of the lumbopelvic stabilizing musculature is indicated in the management of specific spinal pain conditions.