Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Devorski, Luka; b | Skibski, Andrewa; b | Fukuda, David H.b; c | Stout, Jeffrey R.a; b | Ingersoll, Christopher D.b | Mangum, L. Colbya; b; *
Affiliations: [a] Rehabilitation, Athletic Assessment & Dynamic Imaging (READY) Laboratory, Institute of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA | [b] College of Health Professions and Sciences, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA | [c] Physiology of Work & Exercise Response (POWER) Laboratory, Institute of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: L. Colby Mangum, Institute of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Science, University of Central Florida, 4364 Scorpius St, Health Sciences Bldg II Room 235, Orlando, FL 32816-2205, USA. E-mail: lauren.mangum@ucf.edu.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Adequate normalization methodology to establish maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) is needed to compare %MVIC values for core exercise completed until discontinuation. Clinicians can use %MVIC classifications to guide their preventative and rehabilitative exercise interventions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare %MVIC of the external oblique (EO) between normalization techniques of side-lying lateral trunk flexion and Roman chair lateral trunk flexion. METHODS: Twenty-two participants completed two MVIC techniques followed by one repetition of the prone bridge plank (PBP), torso elevated side plank (TESP), foot elevated side plank (FESP), dead bug and bird dog. The average %MVIC during the first 5-seconds, last 5-seconds and overall duration of exercise were included for analysis. ANOVA was used to compare normalized %MVIC from each of the 5 exercises between MVIC techniques. Alpha set a priori p= 0.05. RESULTS: The side-lying table technique yielded no %MVIC values above 100%, while the Roman chair technique produced 7 values above 100%. The largest mean difference between techniques was during the last 5-seconds of the torso elevated side plank (57.87 ± 38.51%MVIC, p< 0.001). CONCLUSION: The side-lying table technique likely provides the optimal methodology of %MVIC determination.
Keywords: Core stability, isometric contraction, surface electromyography
DOI: 10.3233/BMR-220368
Journal: Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1179-1184, 2023
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl