Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The fascicular anatomy and peak force capabilities of the sternocleidomastoid muscle

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The fascicular morphology of the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) is not well described in modern anatomical texts, and the biomechanical forces it exerts on individual cervical motion segments are not known. The purpose of this study is to investigate the fascicular anatomy and peak force capabilities of the SCM combining traditional dissection and modern imaging.

Methods

This study is comprised of three parts: Dissection, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomechanical modelling. Dissection was performed on six embalmed cadavers: three males of age 73–74 years and three females of age 63–93 years. The fascicular arrangement and morphologic data were recorded. MRIs were performed on six young, healthy volunteers: three males of age 24–37 and three females of age 26–28. In vivo volumes of the SCM were calculated using the Cavalieri method. Modelling of the SCM was performed on five sets of computed tomography (CT) scans. This mapped the fascicular arrangement of the SCM with relation to the cervical motion segments, and used volume data from the MRIs to calculate realistic peak force capabilities.

Results

Dissection showed the SCM has four parts; sterno-mastoid, sterno-occipital, cleido-mastoid and cleido-occipital portions. Force modelling shows that peak torque capacity of the SCM is higher at lower cervical levels, and minimal at higher levels. Peak shear forces are higher in the lower cervical spine, while compression is consistent throughout.

Conclusions

The four-part SCM is capable of producing forces that vary across the cervical motion segments. The implications of these findings are discussed with reference to models of neck muscle function and dysfunction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amevo B, Macintosh JE, Worth D, Bogduk N (1991) Instantaneous axes of rotation of the typical cervical motion segments: I. an empirical study of technical errors. Clin Biomech 6:31–37. doi:10.1016/0268-0033(91)90039-S

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Amevo B, Worth D, Bogduk N (1991) Instantaneous axes of rotation of the typical cervical motion segments: a study in normal volunteers. Clin Biomech 6:111–117. doi:10.1016/0268-0033(91)90008-E

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Amevo B, Worth D, Bogduk N (1991) Instantaneous axes of rotation of the typical cervical motion segments: II. Optimization of technical errors. Clin Biomech 6:38–46. doi:10.1016/0268-0033(91)90040-W

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Amiri M, Jull G, Bullock-Saxton J, Darnell R, Lander C (2007) Cervical musculoskeletal impairment in frequent intermittent headache. Part 2: subjects with concurrent headache types. Cephalalgia 27:891–898

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bogduk N, Macintosh JE, Pearcy MJ (1992) A universal model of the lumbar back muscles in the upright position. Spine 17:897–913

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ettema GJ, Huijing PA (1989) Properties of the tendinous structures and series elastic component of EDL muscle-tendon complex of the rat. J Biomech 22:1209–1215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Falla DL, Jull GA, Hodges PW (2004) Patients with neck pain demonstrate reduced electromyographic activity of the deep cervical flexor muscles during performance of the craniocervical flexion test. Spine 29:2108–2114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fukunaga T, Miyatani M, Tachi M, Kouzaki M, Kawakami Y, Kanehisa H (2001) Muscle volume is a major determinant of joint torque in humans. Acta Physiol Scand 172:249–255. doi:10.1046/j.1365-201x.2001.00867.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fukunaga T, Roy RR, Shellock FG, Hodgson JA, Edgerton VR (1996) Specific tension of human plantar flexors and dorsiflexors. J Appl Physiol (1985) 80:158–165

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gadeberg P, Andersen H, Jakobsen J (1999) Volume of ankle dorsiflexors and plantar flexors determined with stereological techniques. J Appl Physiol (1985) 86:1670–1675

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Häggman-Henrikson B, Nordh E, Eriksson PO (2013) Increased sternocleidomastoid, but not trapezius, muscle activity in response to increased chewing load. Eur J Oral Sci 121:443–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jull G, Kristjansson E, Dall’Alba P (2004) Impairment in the cervical flexors: a comparison of whiplash and insidious onset neck pain patients. Man Ther 9:89–94

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jull GA, O’Leary SP, Falla DL (2008) Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: the craniocervical flexion test. J Manip Physiol Ther 31:525–533. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kamibayashi LK, Richmond FJ (1998) Morphometry of human neck muscles. Spine 23:1314–1323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koivukangas T, Katisko J, Koivukangas J (2014) Detection of the spatial accuracy of a magnetic resonance and surgical computed tomography scanner in the region of surgical interest. J Med Imaging 1:015502. doi:10.1117/1.JMI.1.1.015502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Last RJ (1963) Anatomy: regional and applied. Churchill, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lieber RL (1997) Muscle fiber length and moment arm coordination during dorsi- and plantarflexion in the mouse hindlimb. Acta Anat (Basel) 159:84–89

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moore KL, Dalley AF, Agur AM (2013) Clinically oriented anatomy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  19. Narici MV, Maganaris CN, Reeves ND, Capodaglio P (2003) Effect of aging on human muscle tissue. J Appl Physiol (1985) 95:2229–2234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. O’Leary S, Falla D, Jull G (2011) The relationship between superficial muscle activity during the cranio-cervical flexion test and clinical features in patients with chronic neck pain. Man Ther 16:452–455. doi:10.1016/j.math.2011.02.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. O’Leary S, Falla D, Jull G, Vicenzino B (2007) Muscle specificity in tests of cervical flexor muscle performance. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 17:35–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Penning L (1988) Differences in anatomy, motion, development and aging of the upper and lower cervical disk segments. Clin Biomech 3:37–47

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rankin G, Stokes M, Newham DJ (2005) Size and shape of the posterior neck muscles measured by ultrasound imaging: normal values in males and females of different ages. Man Ther 10:108–115. doi:10.1016/j.math.2004.08.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Roberts N, Cruz-Orive LM, Reid NMK, Brodie DA, Bourne M, Edwards RHT (1993) Unbiased estimation of human body composition by the Cavalieri method using magnetic resonance imaging. J Microsc 171:239–253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sinnatamby CS (2011) Last’s anatomy: regional and applied. Elsevier Health Sciences, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  26. Standring S, Anand N, Birch R, Collins P, Crossman AR, Gleeson M, Jawaheer G, Smith AL, Spratt JD, Stringer MD et al (2016) Gray’s anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. Elsevier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stickland NC (1975) A detailed analysis of the effects of various fixatives on animal tissue with particular reference to muscle tissue. Stain Technol 50:255–264

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Testut L (1899) Traite d’anatomie humaine. Doin, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  29. Vasavada AN, Li S, Delp SL (1998) Influence of muscle morphometry and moment arms on the moment-generating capacity of human neck muscles. Spine 23:412–422

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Winters JM, Peles JD (1990) Neck muscle activity and 3-D head kinematics during quasi-static and dynamic tracking movements. Mult Muscle Sys. Springer, Berlin, pp 461–480

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Susan Mercer to this project. She was deeply involved in the early stages of this research, and was a great mentor for the lead author. We also express our thanks to the individuals and families who generously bequeath their bodies for teaching and research, which make this work possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Dunedin, 9016, New Zealand

    Ewan Kennedy

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Otago, Dunedin, 9016, New Zealand

    Michael Albert

  3. Department of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, 9016, New Zealand

    Helen Nicholson

Authors
  1. Ewan Kennedy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Albert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Helen Nicholson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ewan Kennedy.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This research was funded at a departmental level, and received no external funding.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and regional research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Appendix

Appendix

Estimated peak force generating capacities of the SCM in males and females based on MRI volumes. Estimates are presented based on a specific tension value of 15 Ncm−2, as this represents a mid-range value for specific tension derived from MRI muscle volumes [9].

SM is the Sterno-mastoid, SO is the Sterno-occipital, CM is the Cleido-mastoid, CO is the Cleido-occipital. C0/1 is the Vertebral level of occiput on C1, C1/2 is the Vertebral level of C1 on C2, etc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kennedy, E., Albert, M. & Nicholson, H. The fascicular anatomy and peak force capabilities of the sternocleidomastoid muscle. Surg Radiol Anat 39, 629–645 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-016-1768-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-016-1768-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation