scholarly journals The Effects of Core Stabilization Exercise with the Abdominal Drawing-in Maneuver Technique versus General Strengthening Exercise on Lumbar Segmental Motion in Patients with Clinical Lumbar Instability: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 12-Month Follow-Up

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (15) ◽  
pp. 7811
Author(s):  
Rungthip Puntumetakul ◽  
Pongsatorn Saiklang ◽  
Weerasak Tapanya ◽  
Thiwaphon Chatprem ◽  
Jaturat Kanpittaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Muscle Activation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Abdominal Muscle ◽  
Segmental Motion ◽  
Lumbar Instability ◽  
Stabilization Exercise ◽  
Core Stabilization ◽  
Core Stabilization Exercise

Trunk stability exercises that focus on either deep or superficial muscles might produce different effects on lumbar segmental motion. This study compared outcomes in 34 lumbar instability patients in two exercises at 10 weeks and 12 months follow up. Participants were divided into either Core stabilization (deep) exercise, incorporating abdominal drawing-in maneuver technique (CSE with ADIM), or General strengthening (superficial) exercise (STE). Outcome measures were pain, muscle activation, and lumbar segmental motion. Participants in CSE with ADIM had significantly less pain than those in STE at 10 weeks. They showed significantly more improvement of abdominal muscle activity ratio than participants in STE at 10 weeks and 12 months follow-up. Participants in CSE with ADIM had significantly reduced sagittal translation at L4-L5 and L5-S1 compared with STE at 10 weeks. Participants in CSE with ADIM had significantly reduced sagittal translations at L4-L5 and L5-S1 compared with participants in STE at 10 weeks, whereas STE demonstrated significantly increased sagittal rotation at L4-L5. However, at 12 months follow-up, levels of lumbar sagittal translation were increased in both groups. CSE with ADIM which focuses on increasing deep trunk muscle activity can reduce lumbar segmental translation and should be recommended for lumbar instability.

scholarly journals Effects of Core Stabilization Exercise versus General Trunk-Strengthening Exercise on Balance Performance, Pain Intensity and Trunk Muscle Activity Patterns in Clinical Lumbar Instability Patients: A Single Blind Randomized Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rungthip PUNTUMETAKUL ◽  
Pongsatorn SAIKLANG ◽  
Wantanee YODCHAISARN ◽  
Torkamol HUNSAWONG ◽  
Janyawat RUANGSRI
Keyword(s):  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Muscle Activation ◽  
Activity Patterns ◽  
Abdominal Muscle ◽  
Trunk Muscle ◽  
Balance Performance ◽  
Stabilization Exercise ◽  
Core Stabilization ◽  
Core Stabilization Exercise

Postural balance is important for activities of daily living. Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) exhibit balance problems, such as difficulty performing daily activities. Specifically, CLBP patients with clinical lumbar instability (CLI) have demonstrated deep trunk muscular dysfunction that induces poor postural control and may result in a high risk of falling. This study aimed to investigate the effect of a 10-week core stabilization exercise (CSE) regimen versus a strengthening trunk exercise (STE) regimen and conduct a 3-month follow-up on balance, pain, and trunk muscle activity patterns in CLI patients. A single-blind randomized controlled trial was used to compare the effects of CSE and STE on balance, pain, and trunk muscle activity patterns in 38 CLBP patients with CLI. The results of the 5-times-sit-to-stand test (FTSST) and pain intensity revealed significant improvements in both groups after ten weeks of exercise and at the 3-month follow-up point. However, the differences in the FTSST scores and pain intensity between the CSE and STE patients were not significant. Moreover, the CSE group presented significantly greater deep abdominal muscle activation than the STE group after ten weeks of exercise. In addition, both groups exhibited a trend of improvement in terms of deep back muscle activation. Therefore, the current study results suggest that both exercise regimens can improve balance performance and pain intensity. Moreover, the CSE group showed more significant improvements in deep abdominal muscle activation than the STE group.

scholarly journals EFFECTS OF CORE STABILIZATION EXERCISE ON MUSCLE ACTIVITY DURING HORIZONTAL SHOULDER ADDUCTION WITH LOADS IN HEALTHY ADULTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED STUDY

2021 ◽  
pp. 2140049
Author(s):  
CHANHEE PARK ◽  
SAMWON YOON ◽  
HYUNSIK YOON ◽  
KYOUNGTAE KIM ◽  
YOUNGJOO CHA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Muscle Activation ◽  
Healthy Adults ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Maximal Voluntary Isometric Contraction ◽  
Spinal Stabilization ◽  
Stabilization Exercise ◽  
Core Stabilization ◽  
Upper Trapezius

The importance of core stabilization exercises for extremities associated with dynamic spinal stabilization prior to movement has been demonstrated. However, no previous studies have investigated the muscle-coordinated effects on the upper trapezius (UT), anterior deltoid (AD), pectoralis major (PM), bilateral transverse abdominis (TrA), bilateral internal oblique (IO), and bilateral external oblique (EO) in healthy adults. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of the dynamic neuromuscular stabilization (DNS) breathing technique and the abdominal bracing (AB) technique on UT, AD, PM, bilateral IO/TrA, and bilateral EO motor control in healthy participants during horizontal shoulder adduction. Thirty-six participants, eight of whom were female, were randomized into an AB and a DNS group and performed horizontal shoulder adduction with loads (8 and 17 lb). The clinical outcomes were UT, AD, and PM muscle activation and TrA/IO and EO muscle activation. Paired t-tests were used to analyze electromyography (EMG) data to determine statistically significant differences in muscle activity between the two techniques. For the EMG analysis, the maximal voluntary isometric contraction was measured for normalization and then divided by the EMG amplitude value. The results showed that UT, AD, and PM muscle amplitudes were lower and TrA/IO and EO muscle amplitudes were higher with DNS than with AB ([Formula: see text]). Our findings provide clinical evidence that core exercise with DNS is more effective in lessening UT, AD, and PM muscle activation and improving bilateral TrA/IO motor control than with AB.

The SNAP Trial: 2-Year Results of a Double-Blind Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of a Silicon Nitride Versus a PEEK Cage in Patients After Lumbar Fusion Surgery

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822098547
Author(s):  
R. F. M. R. Kersten ◽  
F. C. Öner ◽  
M. P. Arts ◽  
M. Mitroiu ◽  
K. C. B. Roes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Silicon Nitride ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Segmental Motion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Disability Questionnaire

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Objectives: Lumbar interbody fusion with cages is performed to provide vertebral stability, restore alignment, and maintain disc and foraminal height. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is commonly used. Silicon nitride (Si3N4) is an alternative material with good osteointegrative properties. This study was designed to assess if Si3N4 cages perform similar to PEEK. Methods: A non-inferiority double-blind multicenter RCT was designed. Patients presenting with chronic low-back pain with or without leg pain were included. Single- or double-level instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using an oblique PEEK or Si3N4 cage was performed. The primary outcome was the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The non-inferiority margin for the RMDQ was 2.6 points on a scale of 24. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI), Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), SF-36 Physical Function, patient and surgeon Likert scores, radiographic evaluations for subsidence, segmental motion, and fusion. Follow-up was planned at 3, 6, 12, and 24-months. Results: Ninety-two patients were randomized ( i.e. 48 to PEEK and 44 to Si3N4). Both groups showed good clinical improvements on the RMDQ scores of up to 5-8 points during follow-up. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical and radiographic outcomes. Mean operative time and blood loss were statistically significantly higher for the Si3N4 cohort. Although not statistically significant, there was a higher incidence of complications and revisions associated with the Si3N4 cage. Conclusions: There was insufficient evidence to conclude that Si3N4 was non-inferior to PEEK.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document