Examining the Influence of Fatigue on Anticipatory Postural Adjustments of the Trunk Muscles and Movement-related Cortical Potentials in Healthy Subjects During a Rapid Arm Task Perturbation
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Muscle Fatigue
- Sponsor
- University Ghent
- Enrollment
- 22
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Trunk muscle EMG latency
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 2 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
This study aims at examining the influence of both physically and cognitively induced fatigue on trunk motor control on the one hand and brain activity related to movement preparation on the other hand, in healthy adult subjects. Furthermore, a comparison between the effects of both types of fatigue will be made. For this purpose a motor control task will be performed and compared before and after 3 specific interventions: i.e. a control intervention, a physical task and a cognitive task. Muscle and brain activity will be measured during each motor control task.
It is hypothesised that motor control will not be altered after a control task, i.e. seated rest for 45 minutes. With regards to the physical fatigue condition, it is expected that trunk muscles will contract earlier after this task than before due to altered motor control. Cognitive fatigue is hypothesised to have similar underlying processes as physical fatigue, thus a similar earlier muscle contraction is also expected after cognitive fatigue.
Lastly, as both types of fatigue are expected to induce a similar effect on motor control no significant differences between cognitive and physical fatigue are hypothesised. However, it is possible that the magnitude of this effect differs between types of fatigue, i.e. that 1 of both types has a bigger effect on motor control than the other.
With regards to brain activity in preparation of a motor control task similar hypotheses are formulated: no effect of the control task on brain activity, earlier and possibly increased brain activity after both fatiguing tasks, and no differences between both types of fatigue besides a possible difference in magnitude of effect.
Detailed Description
September 2016 - January 2017. 16 healthy, adult male and female participants aged 18-45 were tested for 3 conditions on 2 separate days, i.e. a control condition on test day 1; a physical and cognitive fatiguing condition in randomised order on test day 2. 2 blocks of 80 rapid arm movements (RAM1 and RAM2) with the dominant arm were performed per condition, while electroencephalography (EEG) of the brain and surface electromyography (sEMG) of the Internal Oblique/Transversus Abdominis, External Oblique, Multifidus and Iliocostalis Lumborum pars Thoracis muscles were measured bilaterally. sEMG of the Anterior Deltoid muscle of the dominant arm was also measured. These RAM's were used to induce an internal perturbation to the postural balance of subjects and is an often used task in the study of trunk motor control. In between 2 blocks of the RAM the condition-specific interventions were given. The control condition consisted of RAM1 - 45 minute rest - RAM2; the physical fatigue condition consisted of RAM1 - 45 minute physical fatigue task - RAM2; the cognitive fatigue condition consisted of RAM1 - 45 minute cognitive fatigue task - RAM2. The physical fatiguing task was a static endurance task for the paravertebral muscles, i.e. modified Biering-Sörensen task, followed by a static endurance task for the abdominal muscles, i.e. a static abdominal curl in 45° of trunk flexion while seated. The cognitive fatiguing task was a modified incongruent Stroop color-word task for 45 minutes. At the beginning of each test day several questionnaires were also administered to control for fatigue and physical activity, i.e. Checklist Individual Strength (CIS), Profile Of Mood States (POMS) and International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). January - February 2018. an additional 6 subjects were tested in order to increase the sample size of this study. Statistical analysis will be performed to assess whether and to what extent both physical and cognitive fatigue might influence motor control as measured with EMG during RAM. Furthermore, the effect of both types of fatigue on cortical movement preparation will also be assessed based on the EEG measurements.
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Healthy adult subjects.
Exclusion Criteria
- •People with a history of pain or current pain
- •severe pathologies
- •cardiorespiratory disorders
- •neurological disorders
- •vestibular disorders
- •endocrinologic disorders
- •psychiatric and cognitive disorders
- •colour blindness
- •sleeping disorders
- •psychological disorders or major depressions
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Trunk muscle EMG latency
Time Frame: 2 hours
Latency of the activation onset of the trunk muscles on EMG compared to prime mover onset (Anterior Deltoid) in milliseconds.
Contingent Negative Variation
Time Frame: 2 hours
A cortical EEG-potential that reflects movement preparation in the timeframe between a warning cue and a go cue in Volt.
Secondary Outcomes
- Checklist Individual Strength(5 minutes at the beginning of each test day)
- International Physical Activities Questionnaire(15 minutes at the beginning of each test day)
- General questionnaire(10 minutes at the beginning of test day 1)
- General questionnaire-Short(10 minutes at the beginning of test day 2)
- Visual Analogue Scale for Fatigue(10 seconds for every measurement)
- Rating of Perceived Exertion/Borg(5 seconds for every measurement)
- Profile Of Mood States-Short Form(5 minutes at the beginning of each test day)