The main aim of this dissertation was to investigate the relationship between craniovertebral angle (CVA) or forward head posture and head-neck relocation test, Butterfly test, cervical spine mobility meaaured as cervical range of motion and cervical muscle strength in an asymptomatic adult population of 74 people. Measurements were performed using lateral subject photography and digital goniometry, an inertial motion unit (IMU) consisting of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers with associated software, a fixed stand with an integrated tensile-pressure sensor and a wireless EMG system.
We found statistically significant correlations between CVA and the head-neck relocation test, with one weak positive correlation with forward bending constant error mean (0,23, p = 0,03) and one weak negative correlation with turning right constant error mean (-0,22, p = 0,04). We found no statistically significant correlations between CVA and the Butterfly test variables. We found 5 statistically significant correlations between the whole cervical spine range of motion test variables and the CVA: one weak negative correlation with the primary movements backward bending coefficient of variation (-0,36, p < 0,01) and four weak positive correlations with the primary movements forward bending mean (0,27, p = 0,01), associated movements backward bending transverse plane mean (0,33, p = 0,01), associated movements backward bending frontal plane mean (0,29, p = 0,01) and associated movements turning right sagittal plane mean (0,32, p = 0,01). When we tested the correlation between CVA and the force of head retraction and craniocervical flexion, we found no statistically significant correlation.
We have found, that there are links between CVA and neck mobility and aspects of cervicocephalic kinesthesia, which gives us a better understanding of the investigated area and provides guidelines for further research in this field. The first hypothesis (H01), which related to a negative association between craniovertebral angle and head and neck repositioning error back to neutral, and the third hypothesis (H03), which related to a positive association between craniovertebral angle and active range of motion in the cervical spine in all directions of motion, were partially confirmed in the hypothesis testing according to the results. The second hypothesis (H02), which related to a negative association between craniovertebral angle and Butterfly test error, the fourth hypothesis (H04), which related to a positive association between craniovertebral angle and craniocervical flexion strength, and the fifth hypothesis (H05), which referred to a positive association between craniovertebral angle and head retraction strength, were rejected when the hypotheses were tested in the light of the results obtained. We believe that all the hypotheses were not confirmed because we used different measurement devices than in previous studies, we measured pain-free individuals and our variables were abnormally distributed.
|
