Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 25, Issue 10, pp 3130–3136 | Cite as

Cervicocephalic relocation test to evaluate cervical proprioception in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

  • Marc-Alexandre Guyot
  • Olivier Agnani
  • Laurent Peyrodie
  • Demaille Samantha
  • Cécile Donze
  • Jean-Francois CatanzaritiEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional deformity of the spine associated with disturbed postural control. Cervical proprioception participates in controlling orthostatic posture via its influence on head stabilization. We hypothesized that patients with AIS exhibit altered cervical proprioception.

Methods

We conducted a case–control study to evaluate cervical proprioception using the cervicocephalic relocation test (CRT) in 30 adolescents with AIS (15.5 ± 1.5 years; Cobb 24.8° ± 9.5°) versus 14 non-scoliotic controls (14.6 ± 2.0 years). CRT evaluates cervical proprioception by measuring the capacity to relocate the head on the trunk after active rotation of the head in the transversal plane without visual control. Each subject performed ten right and then ten left head rotations.

Results

The CRT results were pathological in 12 AIS patients (40 %). The CRT mean was significantly different between AIS patients with a pathological CRT (5° ± 1.4° for right rotation; 4.2° ± 0.9° for left rotation) compared with AIS patients with a normal CRT (2.7° ± 0.6° for right rotation; 2.9° ± 0.8° for left rotation) or with the control group (3.5° ± 2.1° for right rotation; 3.1° ± 1.2° for left rotation).

Conclusion

Cervical proprioception is impaired in certain AIS patients. This anomaly may worsen the prognosis of AIS (headache; balance disorders; worsened spinal deformity; complication after spinal fusion). We recommend systematic screening for altered cervical proprioception in AIS patients.

Keywords

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis Cervicocephalic relocation test Cervical proprioception Oculo-cervical reprogrammation protocol 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the HARPS Association members for their helpful comments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no potential conflict of interest, real or perceived. There was no study sponsor, in study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, and the decision to submit the paper for publication.

References

  1. 1.
    Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JC, Danielsson A, Morcuende JA (2008) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet 371:1527–1537CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Sèze M, Cugy E (2012) Pathogenesis of idiopathic scoliosis: a review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 55:128–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Patten SA, Margaritte-Jeannin P, Bernard JC, Alix E, Labalme A, Besson A, Girard SL, Fendri K, Fraisse N, Biot B, Poizat C, Campan-Fournier A, Abelin-Genevois K, Cunin V, Zaouter C, Liao M, Lamy R, Lesca G, Menassa R, Marcaillou C, Letexier M, Sanlaville D, Berard J, Rouleau GA, Clerget-Darpoux F, Drapeau P, Moldovan F, Edery P (2015) Functional variants of POC5 identified in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. J Clin Invest 125:1124–1128CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haumont T, Gauchard GC, Lascombes P, Perrin PP (2011) Postural instability in early-stage idiopathic scoliosis in adolescent girls. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:E847–E854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simoneau M, Mercier P, Blouin J, Allard P, Teasdale N (2006) Altered sensory-weighting mechanisms is observed in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. BMC Neurosci 7:68CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Catanzariti JF, Agnani O, Guyot MA, Wlodyka-Demaille S, Khenioui H, Donze C (2014) Does adolescent idiopathic scoliosis relate to vestibular disorders? A systematic review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 57:465–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Assaiante C, Mallau S, Viel S, Jover M, Schmitz C (2005) Development of postural control in healthy children: a functional approach. Neural Plast 12:109–118CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hicheur H, Vieilledent S, Berthoz A (2005) Head motion in humans alternating between straight and curved walking path: combination of stabilizing and anticipatory orienting mechanisms. Neurosci Lett 383:87–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barra J, Marquer A, Joassin R, Reymond C, Metge L, Chauvineau V, Pérennou D (2010) Humans use internal models to construct and update a sense of verticality. Brain 133:3552–3563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berthoz A (2002) The brain’s sense of movement. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Courtine G, De Nunzio AM, Schmid M, Beretta MV, Schieppati M (2007) Stance- and locomotion-dependent processing of vibration-induced proprioceptive inflow from multiple muscles in humans. J Neurophysiol 97:772–779CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Catanzariti JF, Salomez E, Bruandet JM, Thevenon A (2001) Visual deficiency and scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:48–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Assaiante C, Mallau S, Jouve JL, Bollini G, Vaugoyeau M (2012) Do adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) neglect proprioceptive information in sensory integration of postural control? PLoS One 7:e40646CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Revel M, Andre-Deshays C, Minguet M (1991) Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility in patients with cervical pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 72:288–291PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pinsault N, Fleury A, Virone G, Bouvier B, Vaillant J et al (2008) Test–retest reliability of cervicocephalic relocation test to neutral head position. Physiother Theory Pract 24:380–391CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Freppel S, Bisdorff A, Colnat-Coulbois S, Ceyte H, Cian C, Gauchard G et al (2013) Visuo-proprioceptive interactions in degenerative cervical spine diseases requiring surgery. Neuroscience 255:226–232CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mallau S, Bollini G, Jouve JL, Assaiante C (2007) Locomotor skills and balance strategies in adolescents idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:E14–E22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eijgelaar PN, Wapstra FH, Otten E, Veldhuizen AG (2014) Altered head orientation patterns in children with idiopathic scoliosis in conditions with sensory conflict. Eur Spine J 23:2626–2634CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gauchard GC, Lascombes P, Kuhnast M, Perrin PP (2001) Influence of different types of progressive idiopathic scoliosis on static and dynamic postural control. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:1052–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kwan MK, Wong KA, Lee CK, Chan CY (2015) Is neck tilt and shoulder imbalance the same phenomenon? A prospective analysis of 89 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients (Lenke type 1 and 2). Eur Spine J. (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nault ML, Allard P, Hinse S, Le Blanc R, Caron O, Labelle H, Sadeghi H (2002) Relations between standing stability and body posture parameters in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:1911–1917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bruyneel AV, Chavet P, Ebermeyer E, Mesure S (2011) Idiopathic scoliosis: relations between the Cobb angle and the dynamical strategies when sitting on a seesaw. Eur Spine J 20:247–253CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Simoneau M, Lamothe V, Hutin E, Mercier P, Teasdale N, Blouin J (2009) Evidence for cognitive vestibular integration impairment in idiopathic scoliosis patients. BMC Neurosci 10:102CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor J, McCloskey DI (1991) Illusions of head and visual target displacement induced by vibration of neck muscles. Brain 114:755–759CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McKenna GJ, Peng GC, Zee DS (2004) Neck muscle vibration alters visually perceived roll in normals. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5:25–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yagi M, King AB, Boachie-Adjei O (2012) Incidence, risk factors, and natural course of proximal junctional kyphosis: surgical outcomes review of adult idiopathic scoliosis. Minimum 5 years of follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:1479–1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Boor R, Schwarz M, Goebel B, Voth D (2004) Somatosensory evoked potentials in Arnold–Chiari malformation. Brain Dev 26:99–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Revel M, Minguet M, Gregoy P, Vaillant J, Manuel JL (1994) Changes in cervicocephalic kinesthesia after a proprioceptive rehabilitation program in patients with neck pain: a randomized controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 75:895–899CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc-Alexandre Guyot
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Olivier Agnani
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Laurent Peyrodie
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Demaille Samantha
    • 2
    • 3
  • Cécile Donze
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Jean-Francois Catanzariti
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    Email author
  1. 1.Service de Médecine Physique et de RéadaptationCentre Hospitalier Saint PhilibertLilleFrance
  2. 2.Université Nord de FranceLilleFrance
  3. 3.UCLilleLilleFrance
  4. 4.Groupe Hospitalier de l’Institut Catholique de LilleLilleFrance
  5. 5.Hautes Etudes d’Ingénieur Unité de Traitement des Signaux BiomédicauxLilleFrance
  6. 6.Soins de Suite et de Réadaptation Pédiatrique Marc SauteletVilleneuve d’AscqFrance
  7. 7.Service de RhumatologieCHRU de LilleLilleFrance

Personalised recommendations