The Effects of Visual Biofeedback Gluteus Squeeze Exercise on Erector Spinae Muscle Activities and Lumbar Spine and Hip Movement Patterns during Forward Bending in Healthy Adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Dong-Hwi Kim ◽  
Jae-Seop Oh ◽  
Mi-Hyun Kim ◽  
Duk-Hyun An ◽  
Jung-Ho Son
Spine ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (13) ◽  
pp. 1472-1477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuto Watanabe ◽  
Kei Miyamoto ◽  
Takahiro Masuda ◽  
Katsuji Shimizu

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 359-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji-yeon Yoon ◽  
Ji-won Kim ◽  
Min-hyeok Kang ◽  
Duk-hyun An ◽  
Jae-seop Oh

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Zhu ◽  
Wen-xin Niu ◽  
Zhi-peng Wang ◽  
Xiao-long Pei ◽  
Bin He ◽  
...  

The normal physiological loads from muscles experienced by the spine are largely unknown due to a lack of data. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of varying muscle directions on the outcomes predicted from finite element models of human lumbar spine. A nonlinear finite element model of L3–L5 was employed. The force of the erector spinae muscle, the force of the rectus abdominis muscle, follower loads, and upper body weight were applied. The model was fixed in a neural standing position and the direction of the force of the erector spinae muscle and rectus abdominis muscle was varied in three directions. The intradiscal pressure, reaction moments, and intervertebral rotations were calculated. The intradiscal pressure of L4-L5 was 0.56–0.57 MPa, which agrees with the in vivo pressure of 0.5 MPa from the literatures. The models with the erector spinae muscle loaded in anterior-oblique direction showed the smallest reaction moments (less than 0.6 Nm) and intervertebral rotations of L3-L4 and L4-L5 (less than 0.2 degrees). In comparison with loading in the vertical direction and posterior-oblique direction, the erector spinae muscle loaded in the anterior-oblique direction required lower external force or moment to keep the lumbar spine in the neutral position.


2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110107
Author(s):  
Robert J. Owen ◽  
Noah Quinlan ◽  
Addisyn Poduska ◽  
William Ryan Spiker ◽  
Nicholas T. Spina ◽  
...  

Study Design: Retrospective review. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks at improving perioperative pain control and function following lumbar spine fusions. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients undergoing < 3 level posterolateral lumbar fusions. Data was stratified into a control group and a block group. We collected postop MED (morphine equivalent dosages), physical therapy ambulation, and length of stay. PROMIS pain interference (PI) and physical function (PF) scores, ODI, and VAS were collected preop and at the first postop visit. Chi-square and student’s t-test ( P = .05) were used for analysis. We also validated a novel fluoroscopic technique for ESP block delivery. Results: There were 37 in the block group and 39 in the control group. There was no difference in preoperative opioid use ( P = .22). On postop day 1, MED was reduced in the block group (32 vs 51, P < .05), and more patients in the block group did not utilize any opioids (22% vs 5%, P < .05). The block group ambulated further on postop day 1 (312 ft vs 204 ft, P < .05), and had reduced length of stay (2.4 vs 3.2 days, P < .05). The block group showed better PROMIS PI scores postoperatively (58 vs 63, P < .05). The novel delivery technique was validated and successful in targeting the correct level and plane. Conclusions: ESP blocks significantly reduced postop opioid use following lumbar fusion. Block patients ambulated further with PT, had reduced length of stay, and had improved PROMIS PI postoperatively. Validation of the block demonstrated the effectiveness of a novel fluoroscopic delivery technique. ESP blocks represent an underutilized method of reducing opioid consumption, improving postoperative mobilization and reducing length of stay following lumbar spine fusion.


Author(s):  
Sang-Yeol Lee ◽  
Se-Yeon Park

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical studies have revealed the advantages of using suspension devices. Although the supine, lateral, and forward leaning bridge exercises are low-intensity exercises with suspension devices, there is a lack of studies directly comparing exercise progression by measuring muscular activity and subjective difficulty. OBJECTIVE: To identify how the variations in the bridge exercise affects trunk muscle activity, the present study investigated changes in neuromuscular activation during low-intensity bridge exercises. We furthermore explored whether the height of the suspension point affects muscle activation and subjective difficulty. METHODS: Nineteen asymptomatic male participants were included. Three bridge exercise positions, supine bridge (SB), lateral bridge (LB), forward leaning (FL), and two exercise angles (15 and 30 degrees) were administered, thereby comparing six bridge exercise conditions with suspension devices. Surface electromyography and subjective difficulty data were collected. RESULTS: The rectus abdominis activity was significantly higher with the LB and FL exercises compared with the SB exercise (p< 0.05). The erector spinae muscle activity was significantly higher with the SB and LB exercises, compared with the FL exercise (p< 0.05). The LB exercise significantly increased the internal oblique muscle activity, compared with other exercise variations (p< 0.05). The inclination angle of the exercise only affected the internal oblique muscle and subjective difficulty, which were significantly higher at 30 degrees compared with 15 degrees (p< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Relatively higher inclination angle was not effective in overall activation of the trunk muscles; however, different bridge-type exercises could selectively activate the trunk muscles. The LB and SB exercises could be good options for stimulating the internal oblique abdominis, and the erector spinae muscle, while the FL exercise could minimize the erector spinae activity and activate the abdominal muscles.


2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Hidalgo ◽  
François Gobert ◽  
Dominique Bragard ◽  
Christine Detrembleur
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 234 (8) ◽  
pp. 2215-2226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn M. Beaudette ◽  
Katelyn J. Larson ◽  
Dennis J. Larson ◽  
Stephen H. M. Brown

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document