BACKGROUND: Literature describing differences in motor control between low back pain (LBP) patients and healthy controls is very inconsistent, which may be an indication for the existence of subgroups. Pain-related psychological factors might play a role causing these differences. PURPOSE: To examine the relation between fear of movement and variability of kinematics and muscle activation during gait in LBP patients. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional experimental design. PATIENT SAMPLE: Thirty-one Chinese LBP patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-report measures: Visual Analog Score for pain; TAMPA-score; Physiologic measures: electromyography, range of motion. FUNCTIONAL MEASURES: LBP history; the physical load of profession, physical activity. METHODS: Patients were divided in high and low fear of movement groups. Participants walked on a treadmill at four speeds: very slow, slow, preferred and fast. Kinematics of the thorax and the pelvis were recorded, together with the electromyography of five bilateral trunk muscle pairs. Kinematic and electromyography data were analysed in terms of stride-to-stride pattern variability. Factor analysis was applied to assess interdependence of 11 variability measures. To test for differences between groups, a mixed-design multivariate analysis of variance was conducted. RESULTS: Kinematic variability and variability of muscle activation consistently loaded on different factors and thus represented different underlying variables. No significant Group effects on variability of kinematics and muscle activation were found (Hotelling's Trace F=0.237; 0.396, p=.959;.846, respectively). Speed significantly decreased kinematic variability and increased variability in muscle activation (Hotelling's Trace F=8.363; 4.595, p<.0001; <.0001, respectively). No significant interactions between Group and Speed were found (Hotelling's Trace F=0.204; 0.100, p=.762;.963, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not support the hypothesis that variability in trunk kinematics and trunk muscle activation during gait in LBP patients are associated with fear of movement.

Objectiev:
This study aimed to investigate which characteristics of athlete, wheelchair and athlete-wheelchair interface are the best predictors of wheelchair basketball mobility performance.

Design:
Sixty experienced wheelchair basketball players performed a wheelchair mobility performance test to assess their mobility performance. To determine which variables were the best predictors of mobility performance, forward stepwise linear regression analyses were performed on a set of 33 characteristics, including ten athlete, nineteen wheelchair and four athlete-wheelchair interface characteristics.

Results:
Eight of the characteristics turned out to be significant predictors of wheelchair basketball mobility performance. Classification, experience, maximal isometric force, wheel axis height and hand rim diameter - which both interchangeable with each other and wheel diameter - camber angle, and the vertical distance between shoulder and rear wheel axis – which was interchangeable with seat height - were positively associated with mobility performance. The vertical distance between the front seat and the footrest was negatively associated with mobility performance.

Conclusion:
With this insight, coaches and biomechanical specialists are provided with statistical findings to determine which characteristics they could focus on best to improve mobility performance. Six out of eight predictors are modifiable and can be optimized to improve mobility performance. These adjustments could be carried out both in training (maximal isometric force) and in wheelchair configurations (e.g. camber angle).