Literature DB >> 12167204

Effects of the abdominal belt on muscle-generated spinal stability and L4/L5 joint compression force.

P C Ivancic1, Jacek Cholewicki, A Radebold.   

Abstract

The goals of this study were (1) to determine the effects of abdominal belts on muscle-generated active lumbar spine stability, (2) to determine their effect on the subsequent joint compression force at L4/L5 and (3) to determine whether the effective stability of the spine could be predicted by the active spine stability and belt condition. Electromyographic (EMG) and trunk stiffness data from a previously reported experiment in which 10 subjects performed quick-release tasks (perturbation) with and without an abdominal belt were used as inputs to biomechanical models to estimate the active spine stability and effective stability of the spine, respectively. The subjects exerted isometric trunk flexion, extension and lateral bending trials at 0 and 80% of maximum intra-abdominal pressure when the resisted force was suddenly released. Wearing an abdominal belt had no significant effect on either the muscle-generated lumbar spine stability or the L4/L5 joint compression force in any direction. The effective stability of the spine was adequately predicted by the active spine stability and the effect of the belt, which accounted for approximately 34% of the effective spine stability. The study demonstrated that the abdominal belt contributed to the passive stability of the lumbar spine and did not change the active stability for tests performed within the same experimental session.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12167204     DOI: 10.1080/00140130210136035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ergonomics        ISSN: 0014-0139            Impact factor:   2.778


  7 in total

1.  Abdominal muscle activation increases lumbar spinal stability: analysis of contributions of different muscle groups.

Authors:  Ian A F Stokes; Mack G Gardner-Morse; Sharon M Henry
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2011-05-14       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  Intra-abdominal pressure and abdominal wall muscular function: Spinal unloading mechanism.

Authors:  Ian A F Stokes; Mack G Gardner-Morse; Sharon M Henry
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  The Kinematic and Kinetic Responses of the Trunk and Lower Extremity Joints during Walking with and without the Spinal Orthosis.

Authors:  Chenyan Wang; Xiaona Li; Yuan Guo; Weijin Du; Hongmei Guo; Weiyi Chen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 4.614

4.  Comparison of trunk stiffness provided by different design characteristics of lumbosacral orthoses.

Authors:  Jacek Cholewicki; Angela S Lee; N Peter Reeves; David C Morrisette
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 2.063

5.  A randomized clinical trial comparing extensible and inextensible lumbosacral orthoses and standard care alone in the management of lower back pain.

Authors:  David C Morrisette; Jacek Cholewicki; Sarah Logan; Gretchen Seif; Stephanie McGowan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The effects of a three-week use of lumbosacral orthoses on trunk muscle activity and on the muscular response to trunk perturbations.

Authors:  Jacek Cholewicki; Kevin C McGill; Krupal R Shah; Angela S Lee
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  The effects on postural control and low back pain according to the types of orthoses in chronic low back pain patients.

Authors:  Jeong-Il Kang; Hye-Min Kwon; Dae-Keun Jeong; Hyun Choi; Young-Jun Moon; Jun-Su Park
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2016-11-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.