Effects of Postural Education or Corrective Exercise on Forward Head Posture

Postural; Defect Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Effects of Postural Education or Corrective Exercise Intervention on the Craniovertebral Angle in Young Adults With Forward Head Posture: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT05321654
• Other study ID #: IRB-FY20-21-1073
• Secondary ID: UR2201
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: August 26, 2021
• Est. completion date: November 4, 2021

Study information

• Verified date: April 2022
• Source: Liberty University
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This randomized control trial examined the effects of postural education or corrective exercise intervention on the craniovertebral angle (CVA) in young adults with forward head posture (FHP). The objectives were 1: to investigate whether or not a corrective exercise program (CEP) consisting of self-myofascial release (SMR) + stretching; a CEP consisting of SMR + stretching + strengthening; or postural education (PE) had an effect on the CVA; 2. to determine which intervention yielded the greatest postural enhancement if a positive effect was observed in more than one intervention. *[note: SMR is a technique involving the self-application of pressure to fascia and muscle tissue for the purpose of enhancing flexibility, reducing muscle soreness, and influencing muscle relaxation]. It was hypothesized that 4 weeks after receiving either CEP intervention or PE there would be a significant change in the CVA compared to a control group; and that there would be an intervention more effective than the others for improving the CVA. The null hypotheses were: there would be no CVA change after intervention in any of the groups; and there will be no intervention more effective than another for improving the CVA.

Description:

A total of 94 participants responded to invitations to voluntarily participate and completed the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q+), followed by a questionnaire to rate their current stage of change (SOC) from the Transtheoretical Model adapted to assess exercise/postural modification behavior change (this will be discussed further in eligibility section). On this questionnaire, participants also responded to a yes/no question regarding if they have had a recent injury to their head, shoulders, or spine; or have ever been diagnosed with a pathology related to their cervical/thoracic spine or extremities, as part of exclusion criteria for the study. Participants then underwent a head posture screening performed by the primary investigator who is a licensed physical therapist in the Liberty University Biomechanics & Motion Analysis Laboratory with the use of photogrammetry (use of a digital camera and software to measure posture) as described below.

Participants were asked to arrive at the lab wearing either a tank top or t-shirt, as well as to have their hair tied back if necessary. Height and weight were measured using a digital scale (Health-o-meter Professional, model 500KL, McCook, IL). Participants were instructed to sit comfortably on a stool with hands resting approximately two-thirds down their thighs with palms supinated and feet flat on the ground with hips and knees at 90 degrees; and to look straight ahead at an opposite wall in the laboratory. A digital camera (Canon Powershot, model SX540, Tokyo, Japan) was mounted and leveled on a tripod (Manfrotto, model 055, Cassola, IT) and placed three meters away from the subject. Two photographs were taken of participant's posture. Immediately after data capture, image files were uploaded into Kinovea video analysis software (version 8.15) for CVA assessment. CVA assessment will be discussed further in outcome measures section.

Seventy-nine participants met inclusion criteria (discussed in detail in future section) and were enrolled in the study. Randomization of participant group assignments was completed by the PI using a block randomization generator. Utilizing a sequence created by the block randomizer, the PI placed participants who met inclusion criteria into one of four groups: postural education (PE; n = 20), self-myofascial release + stretching (SMRS; n = 20), self-myofascial release + stretching + strengthening (SMRSS; n = 19), and control group (CG; n = 20). Details of these groups will be provided in future sections. A hard-copy of the sequence generator report was kept concealed in a manila folder and was only opened by the PI during group delegation.

Intervention duration was 4 weeks. Two weeks into the study, participants in intervention groups completed a mid-study questionnaire to assess intervention compliance. At the end of the study (after the completion of 4 weeks) participants in intervention groups completed a post-study questionnaire to assess intervention compliance. All study participants were asked to return back to the Biomechanics laboratory after the completion of the 4 week intervention period to undergo follow-up posture screening, which followed the same posture assessment procedures as described above.

Declarations of interest: This study was part of the requirements for completion of a Ph.D. dissertation (Concordia University Chicago) by David Titcomb, DPT.

Conflicts of interest: none.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 79
• Est. completion date: November 4, 2021
• Est. primary completion date: November 4, 2021
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 29 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Completion of informed consent

• Craniovertebral angle = 53 degrees

• Self-rating of Transtheoretical Model stage of change stage = 3/5

Exclusion Criteria:

• Any musculoskeletal injury to the head, shoulders, or spine within the last six months

• Diagnosis of pathology related to the cervical spine, thoracic spine, or upper extremities

• Non-clearance for physical activity based on results of the 2020 PAR-Q+ questionnaire

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Postural; Defect

Intervention

Behavioral:
• Education for Behavior Modification
Please see arm description for a detailed description of the intervention
• Corrective Exercise Program
Please see arm description for a detailed description of the intervention

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Liberty University	Lynchburg	Virginia

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Liberty University	National Academy of Sports Medicine

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (22)

Abdelhameed AA, Abdel-Aziem AA. Exercise training and postural correction improve upper extremity symptoms among touchscreen smartphone users. Hong Kong Physiother J. 2016 Sep 7;35:37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.hkpj.2016.06.001. eCollection 2016 Dec. — View Citation

Bayattork M, Seidi F, Minoonejad H, McClure P, Mozafaripoor E. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and agreement of the scapular dyskinesis test in young men with forward head and round shoulder posture. J Rehabil. Sci. 2019 Dec 10;6(4):169-173. https://doi.org/10.30476/JRSR.2019.82944.1037

Carter SE, Draijer R, Holder SM, Brown L, Thijssen DHJ, Hopkins ND. Regular walking breaks prevent the decline in cerebral blood flow associated with prolonged sitting. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2018 Sep 1;125(3):790-798. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00310.2018. Epub 2018 Jun 7. — View Citation

Cuéllar JM, Lanman TH. "Text neck": an epidemic of the modern era of cell phones? Spine J. 2017 Jun;17(6):901-902. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.03.009. Epub 2017 Mar 20. — View Citation

Engelmann C, Schneider M, Kirschbaum C, Grote G, Dingemann J, Schoof S, Ure BM. Effects of intraoperative breaks on mental and somatic operator fatigue: a randomized clinical trial. Surg Endosc. 2011 Apr;25(4):1245-50. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1350-1. Epub 2010 Sep 11. — View Citation

Fahmy R. NASM Essentials of corrective exercise training. 2nd ed. Burlington, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2022.

Gustafsson E. Ergonomic recommendations when texting on mobile phones. Work. 2012;41 Suppl 1:5705-6. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0925-5705. — View Citation

Hansraj KK. Assessment of stresses in the cervical spine caused by posture and position of the head. Surg Technol Int. 2014 Nov;25:277-9. — View Citation

Kalichman L, Bulanov N, Friedman A. Effect of exams period on prevalence of Myofascial Trigger points and head posture in undergraduate students: Repeated measurements study. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2017 Jan;21(1):11-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2016.04.003. Epub 2016 Apr 7. — View Citation

Kar G, Hedge A. Effect of workstation configuration on musculoskeletal discomfort, productivity, postural risks, and perceived fatigue in a sit-stand-walk intervention for computer-based work. Appl Ergon. 2021 Jan;90:103211. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103211. Epub 2020 Aug 17. — View Citation

Kim BB, Lee JH, Jeong HJ, Cynn HS. Effects of suboccipital release with craniocervical flexion exercise on craniocervical alignment and extrinsic cervical muscle activity in subjects with forward head posture. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2016 Oct;30:31-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2016.05.007. Epub 2016 May 24. — View Citation

Kim SY, Koo SJ. Effect of duration of smartphone use on muscle fatigue and pain caused by forward head posture in adults. J Phys Ther Sci. 2016 Jun;28(6):1669-72. doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.1669. Epub 2016 Jun 28. — View Citation

Kuroda Y, Sato Y, Ishizaka Y, Yamakado M, Yamaguchi N. Exercise motivation, self-efficacy, and enjoyment as indicators of adult exercise behavior among the transtheoretical model stages. Glob Health Promot. 2012 Mar;19(1):14-22. doi: 10.1177/1757975911423073. Epub 2012 Feb 14. — View Citation

Lau KT, Cheung KY, Chan KB, Chan MH, Lo KY, Chiu TT. Relationships between sagittal postures of thoracic and cervical spine, presence of neck pain, neck pain severity and disability. Man Ther. 2010 Oct;15(5):457-62. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.03.009. — View Citation

Lee DY, Nam CW, Sung YB, Kim K, Lee HY. Changes in rounded shoulder posture and forward head posture according to exercise methods. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017 Oct;29(10):1824-1827. doi: 10.1589/jpts.29.1824. Epub 2017 Oct 21. — View Citation

Neupane S, Ali UI, Mathew A. Text neck syndrome-systematic review. Imp. J. Interdiscip. Res. 2017; 3(7): 141-148. http://www.onlinejournal.in

Richards KV, Beales DJ, Smith AJ, O'Sullivan PB, Straker LM. Neck Posture Clusters and Their Association With Biopsychosocial Factors and Neck Pain in Australian Adolescents. Phys Ther. 2016 Oct;96(10):1576-1587. Epub 2016 May 12. — View Citation

Ruivo RM, Pezarat-Correia P, Carita AI. Cervical and shoulder postural assessment of adolescents between 15 and 17 years old and association with upper quadrant pain. Braz J Phys Ther. 2014 Jul-Aug;18(4):364-71. Epub 2014 Jul 18. — View Citation

Sahu M, Sundari KG, David A. Recent ergonomic interventions and evaluations on laptop, smartphones and desktop computer users. In Arockiarajan A, Duraiselvam M, Raju R, editors. Advances in Industrial Automation and Smart Manufacturing. Singapore: Springer; 2021. p. 207-224. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4739-3

Syamala KR, Ailneni RC, Kim JH, Hwang J. Armrests and back support reduced biomechanical loading in the neck and upper extremities during mobile phone use. Appl Ergon. 2018 Nov;73:48-54. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.06.003. Epub 2018 Jun 18. — View Citation

Vate-U-Lan P. Text neck epidemic: a growing problem for smart phone users in Thailand. Int J Comput. Internet Manage. 2015 Sept-Dec;23(3): 551-556.

Warburton DER, Jamnik VK, Bredin SSD, and Gledhill N. The physical activity readiness questionnaire for everyone (PAR-Q+) and electronic physical activity readiness medical examination (ePARmed-X+). Health Fit J of Canada. 2011; 4(2):3-23. https://doi.org/10.14288/hfjc.v4i2.103

* Note: There are 22 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Change in Craniovertebral Angle after 4 weeks	The angle between the intersection of two lines drawn on the photograph: the first line drawn from the tragus of the ear to the spinous process of C7 vertebrae and the second line drawn horizontally through C7 spinous process. In this study, a second researcher directly observed the primary investigator performing each CVA assessment, as well as provided verbal agreement with the accuracy of angle measurement. For each participant, the CVA was derived by taking the mean of two CVA measurements that were assessed on the captured photographs.	Baseline: On day 1 of study enrollment; Post-Intervention: Within 5 days after the end of the 4 week intervention period
Secondary	Midpoint Intervention Compliance	On a questionnaire, participants were asked to rate their compliance with their assigned intervention guidelines. Consistent. 75% adherence to guidelines; Moderately Consistent. 50 to 75% adherence to guidelines; Inconsistent. Less than 50% adherence to guidelines.	Assessed at the start of week 3
Secondary	Endpoint Intervention Compliance	On a questionnaire, participants were asked to rate their compliance with their assigned intervention guidelines. Consistent. 75% adherence to guidelines; Moderately Consistent. 50 to 75% adherence to guidelines; Inconsistent. Less than 50% adherence to guidelines.	Within 5 days after the end of the 4 week intervention period.