Unsupervised machine learning for clustering forward head posture, protraction and retraction movement patterns based on craniocervical angle data in individuals with nonspecific neck pain

Abstract

Abstract Objectives The traditional understanding of craniocervical alignment emphasizes specific anatomical landmarks. However, recent research has challenged the reliance on forward head posture as the primary diagnostic criterion for neck pain. An advanced relationship exists between neck pain and craniocervical alignment, which requires a deeper exploration of diverse postures and movement patterns using advanced techniques, such as clustering analysis. We aimed to explore the complex relationship between craniocervical alignment, and neck pain and to categorize alignment patterns in individuals with nonspecific neck pain using the K-means algorithm. Methods This study included 229 office workers with nonspecific neck pain who applied unsupervised machine learning techniques. The craniocervical angles (CCA) during rest, protraction, and retraction were measured using two-dimensional video analysis, and neck pain severity was assessed using the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). CCA during sitting upright in a comfortable position was assessed to evaluate the resting CCA. The average of midpoints between repeated protraction and retraction measures was considered as the midpoint CCA. The K-means algorithm helped categorize participants into alignment clusters based on age, sex and CCA data. Results We found no significant correlation between NPQ scores and CCA data, challenging the traditional understanding of neck pain and alignment. We observed a significant difference in age (F = 140.14, p < 0.001), NPQ total score (F = 115.83, p < 0.001), resting CCA (F = 79.22, p < 0.001), CCA during protraction (F = 33.98, p < 0.001), CCA during retraction (F = 40.40, p < 0.001), and midpoint CCA (F = 66.92, p < 0.001) among the three clusters and healthy controls. Cluster 1 was characterized by the lowest resting and midpoint CCA, and CCA during pro- and -retraction, indicating a significant forward head posture and a pattern of retraction restriction. Cluster 2, the oldest group, showed CCA measurements similar to healthy controls, yet reported the highest NPQ scores. Cluster 3 exhibited the highest CCA during protraction and retraction, suggesting a limitation in protraction movement. Discussion Analyzing 229 office workers, three distinct alignment patterns were identified, each with unique postural characteristics; therefore, treatments addressing posture should be individualized and not generalized across the population.