↓ Skip to main content

Behavior of the Linea Alba During a Curl-up Task in Diastasis Rectus Abdominis: An Observational Study.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 2,391)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
42 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
63 X users
facebook
18 Facebook pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
316 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Behavior of the Linea Alba During a Curl-up Task in Diastasis Rectus Abdominis: An Observational Study.
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, July 2016
DOI 10.2519/jospt.2016.6536
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diane Lee, Paul W Hodges

Abstract

Study Design Cross-sectional repeated measures. Background Rehabilitation of diastasis rectus abdominis (DRA) generally aims to reduce the inter-rectus distance (IRD). We tested the hypothesis that activation of the transversus abdominis (TrA) before a curl-up would reduce IRD narrowing, with less linea alba (LA) distortion/deformation, which may allow better force transfer between sides of the abdominal wall. Objectives This study investigated behavior of the LA and IRD during curl-ups performed naturally and with preactivation of the TrA. Methods Curl-ups were performed by 26 women with DRA and 17 healthy control participants using a natural strategy (automatic curl-up) and with TrA preactivation (TrA curl-up). Ultrasound images were recorded at 2 points above the umbilicus (U point and UX point). Ultrasound measures of IRD and a novel measure of LA distortion (distortion index: average deviation of the LA from the shortest path between the recti) were compared between 3 tasks (rest, automatic curl-up, TrA curl-up), between groups, and between measurement points (analysis of variance). Results Automatic curl-up by women with DRA narrowed the IRD from resting values (mean U-point between-task difference, -1.19 cm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.45, -0.93; P<.001 and mean UX-point between-task difference, -0.51 cm; 95% CI: -0.69, -0.34; P<.001), but LA distortion increased (mean U-point between-task difference, 0.018; 95% CI: 0.0003, 0.041; P = .046 and mean UX-point between-task difference, 0.025; 95% CI: 0.004, 0.045; P = .02). Although TrA curl-up induced no narrowing or less IRD narrowing than automatic curl-up (mean U-point difference between TrA curl-up versus rest, -0.56 cm; 95% CI: -0.82, -0.31; P<.001 and mean UX-point between-task difference, 0.02 cm; 95% CI: -0.22, 0.19; P = .86), LA distortion was less (mean U-point between-task difference, -0.025; 95% CI: -0.037, -0.012; P<.001 and mean UX-point between-task difference, -0.021; 95% CI: -0.038, -0.005; P = .01). Inter-rectus distance and the distortion index did not change from rest or differ between tasks for controls (P≥.55). Conclusion Narrowing of the IRD during automatic curl-up in DRA distorts the LA. The distortion index requires further validation, but findings imply that less IRD narrowing with TrA preactivation might improve force transfer between sides of the abdomen. The clinical implication is that reduced IRD narrowing by TrA contraction, which has been discouraged, may positively impact abdominal mechanics. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):580-589. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6536.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 316 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 40 13%
Student > Master 35 11%
Other 29 9%
Student > Postgraduate 23 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 6%
Other 58 18%
Unknown 113 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 79 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 59 19%
Sports and Recreations 38 12%
Unspecified 8 3%
Psychology 3 <1%
Other 7 2%
Unknown 122 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 406. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2024.
All research outputs
#73,874
of 25,554,853 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
#15
of 2,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,573
of 367,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
#2
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,554,853 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,391 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,630 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.