Background: Forward head posture affects many individuals and can cause pain and dysfunction in the muscles and joints of the head, neck, and shoulders. Objectives: This study aimed to assess muscle activity and onset time of cervical and scapular muscles during 180° shoulder flexion and abduction in individuals with normal head posture (NHP) and in those with forward head posture (FHP), both before and after correction. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Thirty-six individuals were divided into FHP and NHP groups. Muscle activity and muscle contraction onset time of the splenius capitis, sternocleidomastoid, upper middle and lower trapezius, and serratus anterior muscles were measured during shoulder flexion and abduction using wireless surface electromyography. Results: The FHP group exhibited increased muscle activity compared to the NHP group (P<.05), notably in the sternocleidomastoid and middle trapezius muscles, more so during shoulder abduction than flexion (P<.05). Regarding muscle contraction onset time, sternocleidomastoid onset was fastest during shoulder abduction in the FHP group (P<.05), while serratus anterior onset was slowest during both shoulder abduction and flexion (P<.05). Conclusion: These findings highlight distinct muscle activity and muscle contraction onset time patterns based on head posture and shoulder movement. Selective muscle activation strategies may help reduce heightened sternocleidomastoid and trapezius activity and enhance serratus anterior engagement in individuals with FHP.

Background: People these days use smartphone extensively as a means of diverse social activities, but excessive use of it has also created increasing forward head posture (FHP) with neck pain. To improve this FHP, neck stabilization exercise is necessary. Objectives: This study was to investigate the effects of stabilization exercise using biofeedback on FHP subjects with neck pain. Design: A non-randomized, controlled intervention study. Methods: This study chose 18 college students in their 20s whose neck disability index (NDI) was equal to or higher than 10 and cranio-vertebral angle indicated FHP as experimental group. The control group selected 18 persons with no neck pain and a normal range of cranio-vertebral angle. The stabilization movement was performed by applying three phases of pressure, with low of 20 mmHg, intermediate of 25 mmHg, and high of 30 mmHg, using the Stabilizer. To check the effects of stabilization exercise according to pressure, the circumference of deep neck muscles was measured with ultrasonic waves, and the activity of surface muscle of sternocleidomastoid (SCM) was measured using electromyography (EMG). Results: When the circumference of the deep neck flexor was analyzed according to the pressure change during stabilization exercise, the experimental group showed increase at all pressures. The activity of the SCM of the surface muscle increased in both groups as the pressure increased. Conclusion: The application of stabilization exercise was found to be more effective on forward head posture subjects with neck pain at lower pressures.

Background: The craniocervical flexion test (CCFT) was developed for the activation and endurance of deep cervical flexors. However, the muscle thickness and muscle thickness changing ratio of the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) and deep cervical flexor (DCF) muscles in subjects with and without forward head posture (FHP) have not been reported. Objects: To determine the difference in thickness of the SCM and DCF muscles and the difference in the muscle thickness changing ratio between SCM, DCF, and DCF/SCM 20 mmHg and DCF/SCM 30 mmHg between subjects with and without FHP. Methods: Thirty subjects with and without FHP were enrolled. The muscle thickness of the SCM and DCF was measured when maintained at a baseline pressure of 20 mmHg and a maximum pressure of 30 mmHg using a pressure biofeedback unit during the CCFT. Ultrasonography was used to capture images of SCM and DCF muscle thickness during the CCFT, which was calculated using the picture archiving and communication system (PACS). Results: We observed a significant difference within the pressure main effect between SCM and DCF at a baseline pressure of 20 mmHg and a maximum pressure of 30 mmHg (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the muscle thickness and muscle thickness changing ratio for SCM and DCF during CCFT between subjects with and without FHP. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the muscle thickness recruitment pattern during CCFT in posture changes between subjects with and without FHP.

Background: Forward head posture (FHP) causes various posture imbalances associated with the head and neck. Myofascial release is an effective treatment method used for relaxing muscles and reducing muscle hyperactivity, but no studies have been conducted on suboccipital and neck muscles related to FHP. Objects: The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effect of roller massages on the cranio-cervical flexion (CCF) range of motion (ROM) and CCF strength applied to suboccipital and neck muscles in subject with forward head posture. Methods: Twenty-four FHP subjects (male: 13, female: 11) were recruited for this study. All subjects were recruited with a craniovertebral angle (CVA) of 53 degrees or less and a head tilt angle (HTA) of 20.66 degrees or higher. CCF strength was measured using Pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) in the supine posture and CCF ROM was measured using smartphone-based inclinometer. Roller massage (RM) was applied to suboccipital and neck muscles for 2 minutes and CCF ROM and strength were remeasured. Results: These results of this study showed that CCF ROM was a significant difference in CCF ROM before and after RM (p < 0.05). CCF strength also showed a significant difference before and after RM (p < 0.05). Conclusion: RM method might be recommended to increase the immediate ROM and strength of CCF in subjects with forward head posture.

Background: The craniocervical flexion (CCF) exercise is one of the effective exercise in correcting forward head posture (FHP). However, some people with FHP achieve CCF with compensatory movements, for example, low cervical flexion using superficial neck flexors such as the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle. No study has yet investigated whether a dualpressure biofeedback unit (D-PBU) method to prevent low cervical flexion would be helpful in performing pure CCF movement. Objects: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of the CCF using D-PBU method and the traditional CCF method on the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the longus colli muscle (LCM) and the activity of SCM muscle in subjects with FHP. Methods: Twentyfour FHP subjects (male: 16, female: 8) were recruited for this study. All subjects performed CCF using two different methods: The traditional CCF method and the CCF using D-PBU method. The CSA of the LCM was measured via ultrasound, and surface electromyography was used to measure SCM muscle activity. Results: The change in CSA of the LCM was significantly larger during the CCF using D-PBU method (1.28±.09) compared with the traditional CCF method (1.19±.08) (p<.05). The SCM muscle activity using the CCF using D-PBU method (2.01±1.97 %MVIC) was significantly lower than when using the traditional CCF method (2.79±2.32 %MVIC) (p<.05). Conclusion: The CCF using D-PBU method can be recommended for increasing LCM activation and decreasing SCM muscle activity during CCF movement in subjects with FHP.

Background: A forward head posture (FHP) is one of the most common types of poor head posture in patients with neck disorder. A prolonged FHP might increase pressure on the posterior cranio-cervical structure and exhibit reduced performance on a cranio-cervical flexion test (CCFT). CCFT is included to activate deep cervical flexor muscles and inhibit excessive activation of superficial cervical flexor muscles. Therefore, the selective activation of deep cervical flexors is needed for effective exercise for FHP. Objects: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle thickness between longus colli (Lco) and sternocleidomastoid (SCM) using ultrasonography in subjects with FHP depending on head support. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, case-control research design study. The ultrasonographic images of Lco and SCM were taken in 17 subjects with FHP during the 5 phases of the CCFT with and without a head support. Towel was used for supporting head to make the neutral head position in supine. Changes in muscle thickness during the test were calculated to infer muscle activation. Data were analyzed using repeated measures of two-way analysis of variance with the significance level of .05. Results: When subjects performed the CCFT with head support, there was a significant difference in muscle thickness of Lco and SCM (p<.05). According to a post hoc paired t-test, change of thickness of Lco was greater at all phases, and change of thickness of SCM muscle was less at phase 4 and 5 in condition with head support (p<.01) compared to condition without head support (p<.01). Conclusion: The result of this study suggest that applying head support for neutral head position during CCFT could be a useful method for activating Lco muscle without excessive activation of SCM muscle.

Background: For the treatment of forward head posture (FHP) and forward shoulder posture, methods for strengthening scapular retractors and deep cervical flexors and stretching pectoralis and upper cervical extensors are generally used. No study has yet assessed whether suboccipital release (SR) followed by cranio-cervical flexion exercise (CCFE) (SR-CCFE) will result in a positive change in the shoulders and neck, showing a “downstream” effect. Objects: The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of SR-CCFE on craniovertebral angle (CVA), shoulder abduction range of motion (ROM), shoulder pain, and muscle activities of upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), and serratus anterior (SA) and LT/UT and SA/UT muscle activity ratios during maximal shoulder abduction in subjects with FHP. Methods: In total, 19 subjects (7 males, 12 females) with FHP were recruited. The subject performed the fifth phase of CCFE immediately after receiving SR. CVA, shoulder abduction ROM, shoulder pain, muscle activities of UT, LT, and SA, and LT/UT and SA/UT muscle activity ratios during maximal shoulder abduction were measured immediately after SR-CCFE. A paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to determine the significance of differences in scores between pre- and post-intervention in the same group. Results: The CVA (p<.001) and shoulder abduction ROM (p<.001) were increased significantly postversus pre-intervention. Shoulder pain was decreased significantly (p<.001), and LT (p<.05) and SA (p<.05) muscle activities were increased significantly post- versus pre-intervention. The LT/UT muscle activity ratio was increased significantly post- versus pre-intervention (p<.05). However, there was no significant change in UT muscle activity and SA/UT muscle activity ratio between pre- and post-intervention (p˃.05). Conclusion: SR-CCFE was an effective intervention to improve FHP and induce downstream effect from the neck to the trunk and shoulders in subjects with FHP.

This study compared the effects of the initial head position (i.e., a HHP versus a relaxed head position) of subjects with and without a FHP on the thickness of the deep and superficial neck flexor muscles during CCF. The study recruited 6 subjects with a FHP and 10 subjects without a FHP. The subjects performed CCF in two different head positions: a HHP, with the head aligned so that the forehead and chin formed a horizontal line, and a relaxed head position (RHP), with the head aligned in a self-selected comfortable position. During the CCF exercise, the thickness of the longus colli (LCo) and the thickness of the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) were recorded using ultrasonography. The thickness of each muscle was measured by Image J software. The statistical analysis was performed with a two-way mixed-model analysis of variance. The thickness of the SCM differed significantly (p<.05) between the subjects with and without FHP. According to a post hoc independent t-test, the change in thickness of the SCM increased significantly during CCF in the subjects with FHP while adopting a HHP compared to that in the subjects without FHP. The change in thickness of the SCM was not significantly different between the two positions in subjects without FHP, and there was no significant change in thickness of the LCo muscle during the CCF exercise according to the initial position in both subjects with and without FHP. The results suggest that CCF should be performed in RHP to minimize contraction of the SCM in subjects with a FHP.