An earlier version of this manuscript entitled “Evaluation of Atypical Headache Subjects” was presented atthe Annual Meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy, Los Angeles, California, November, 1983.
Effect of Movement and Position in the Evaluation of Tension Headache and Nonheadache Control Subjects†
Version of Record online: 22 JUN 2005
Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain
Volume 24, Issue 2, pages 88–93, March 1984
How to Cite
Sturgis, E. T., Schaefer, C. A., Ahles, T. A. and Sikora, T. L. (1984), Effect of Movement and Position in the Evaluation of Tension Headache and Nonheadache Control Subjects. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 24: 88–93. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.1984.hed2402088.x
- Issue online: 22 JUN 2005
- Version of Record online: 22 JUN 2005
- Accepted for Publication: June 7, 1983
- Cited By
This study evaluated the effects of three positions (reclining, standing, sitting) and four movements (leftand right cervical rotation; left and right lateral tilt) on the frontalis, sternocleidomastoid, and trapeziuselectromyographic (EMG) responses of 12 muscle contraction headache and 12 non-headache controls.While the headache group tended to show higher levels of muscle activity, position and movement effectswere much greater than headache group effects. Knowledge of kinesiology is required if one is tomeaningfully interpret muscular activity in the nonresting condition. The frontalis muscle was the musclewhich best discriminated headache and nonheadache groups. The reclining position was the position thatbest differentiated headache groups, suggesting an inability of headache subjects to relax even whenmuscle tension was not needed to maintain position. Results of the study have implications forassessments of muscular activity which deviate from the standard laboratory assessment which measuresonly frontalis EMG while the subject closes his eyes and rests in a recliner.