ALBERT

Description: BackgroundIllusions that alter perception of the body provide novel opportunities to target brain-based contributions to problems such as persistent pain. One example of this, mirror therapy, uses vision to augment perceived movement of a painful limb to treat pain. Since mirrors can’t be used to induce augmented neck or other spinal movement, we aimed to test whether such an illusion could be achieved using virtual reality, in advance of testing its potential therapeutic benefit. We hypothesised that perceived head rotation would depend on visually suggested movement.MethodIn a within-subjects repeated measures experiment, 24 healthy volunteers performed neck movements to 50oof rotation, while a virtual reality system delivered corresponding visual feedback that was offset by a factor of 50%–200%—the Motor Offset Visual Illusion (MoOVi)—thus simulating more or less movement than that actually occurring. At 50oof real-world head rotation, participants pointed in the direction that they perceived they were facing. The discrepancy between actual and perceived direction was measured and compared between conditions. The impact of including multisensory (auditory and visual) feedback, the presence of a virtual body reference, and the use of 360oimmersive virtual reality with and without three-dimensional properties, was also investigated.ResultsPerception of head movement was dependent on visual-kinaesthetic feedback (p = 0.001, partial eta squared = 0.17). That is, altered visual feedback caused a kinaesthetic drift in the direction of the visually suggested movement. The magnitude of the drift was not moderated by secondary variables such as the addition of illusory auditory feedback, the presence of a virtual body reference, or three-dimensionality of the scene.DiscussionVirtual reality can be used to augment perceived movement and body position, such that one can perform a small movement, yet perceive a large one. The MoOVi technique tested here has clear potential for assessment and therapy of people with spinal pain.

Description: Objective Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most disabling and costly conditions worldwide. It remains unclear why many individuals experience persistent and recurrent symptoms after an acute episode whereas others do not. A longitudinal cohort study was established to address this problem. We aimed to; (1) evaluate whether promising and potentially modifiable biological, psychological, social and behavioural factors, along with their possible interactions, predict LBP outcome after an acute episode; (2) compare these factors between individuals with and without acute LBP; and (3) evaluate the time-course of changes in these factors from LBP onset. This paper outlines the methodology and compares baseline characteristics between acute LBP and control, and LBP participants with and without follow-up. Results 133 individuals with acute LBP and 74 pain-free individuals participated. Bio-psycho-social and behavioural measures were collected at baseline and 3-monthly for 12 months (LBP) or 3 months (control). Pain and disability were recorded fortnightly. Baseline characteristics were mostly similar between those who did and did not return for follow-up. Initial analyses of this cohort have revealed important insights into the pathways involved in acute-to-chronic LBP. These and future findings will provide new targets for treatment and prevention of persistent and recurrent LBP.

Description: Background Reduced tactile acuity has been observed in several chronic pain conditions and has been proposed as a clinical indicator of somatosensory impairments related to the condition. As some interventions targeting these impairments have resulted in pain reduction, assessing tactile acuity may have significant clinical potential. While two-point discrimination threshold (TPDT) is a popular method of assessing tactile acuity, large measurement error has been observed (impeding responsiveness) and its validity has been questioned. The recently developed semi-automated ‘imprint Tactile Acuity Device’ (iTAD) may improve tactile acuity assessment, but clinimetric properties of its scores (accuracy score, response time and rate correct score) need further examination. Aims Experiment 1: To determine inter-rater reliability and measurement error of TPDT and iTAD assessments. Experiment 2: To determine internal consistencies and floor or ceiling effects of iTAD scores, and investigate effects of age, sex, and anthropometry on performance. Methods Experiment 1: To assess inter-rater reliability (ICC(2,1)) and measurement error (coefficient of variation (CoV)), three assessors each performed TPDT and iTAD assessments at the neck in forty healthy participants. Experiment 2: To assess internal consistency (ICC(2,k)) and floor or ceiling effects (skewness z-scores), one hundred healthy participants performed the iTAD’s localisation and orientation tests. Balanced for sex, participants were equally divided over five age brackets (18–30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60 and 61–70). Age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and neck surface area were assessed to examine their direct (using multiple linear regression analysis) and indirect (using sequential mediation analysis) relationship with iTAD scores. Results Mean ICC(2,1) was moderate for TPDT (0.70) and moderate-to-good for the various iTAD scores (0.65–0.86). The CoV was 25.3% for TPDT and ranged from 6.1% to 16.5% for iTAD scores. Internal consistency was high for both iTAD accuracy scores (ICC(2,6) = 0.84; ICC(2,4) = 0.86). No overt floor or ceiling effects were detected (all skewness z-scores