↓ Skip to main content

Muscle Activation Among Supine, Prone, and Side Position Exercises With and Without a Swiss Ball

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator
podcasts
2 podcasts

Readers on

mendeley
319 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.
Article details
Title
Muscle Activation Among Supine, Prone, and Side Position Exercises With and Without a Swiss Ball
Published in
Sports Health, June 2016
DOI 10.1177/1941738116653931
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Prone, supine, and side position exercises are employed to enhance core stability. Overall core muscle activity would be greater in prone position exercises compared with supine and side position exercises. Controlled laboratory study. Eighteen men and women between 23 and 45 years of age served as subjects. Surface electrodes were positioned over the upper and lower rectus abdominis, external and internal obliques, rectus femoris, latissimus dorsi, and lumbar paraspinals. Electromyography data were collected during 5 repetitions of 10 exercises, then normalized by maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVIC). Differences in muscle activity were assessed using 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance, while t tests with a Bonferroni correction were employed to assess pairwise comparisons. Upper and lower rectus abdominis activity was generally significantly greater in the crunch, bent-knee sit-up, and prone position exercises compared with side position exercises. External oblique activity was significantly greater in the prone on ball with right hip extension, side crunch on ball, and side bridge (plank) on toes compared with the prone and side bridge (plank) on knees, the crunch, or the bent-knee sit-up positions. Internal oblique activity was significantly greater in the prone bridge (plank) on ball and prone on ball with left and right hip extension compared with the side crunch on ball and prone and side bridge (plank) on knees positions. Lumbar paraspinal activity was significantly greater in the 3 side position exercises compared with all remaining exercises. Latissimus dorsi activity was significantly greater in the prone on ball with left and right hip extension and prone bridge (plank) on ball and on toes compared with the crunch, bent-knee sit-up, and prone and side bridge (plank) on knees positions. Rectus femoris activity was significantly greater in the prone on ball with left hip extension, bent-knee sit-up, or prone bridge (plank) on toes compared with the remaining exercises. Prone position exercises are good alternatives to supine position exercises for recruiting core musculature. Side position exercises are better for oblique and lumbar paraspinal recruitment. Because high core muscle activity is associated with high spinal compressive loading, muscle activation patterns should be considered when prescribing trunk exercises to those in which high spinal compressive loading may be deleterious.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 319 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 319 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 43 13%
Student > Master 41 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Professor 14 4%
Other 45 14%
Unknown 132 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 66 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 11%
Engineering 4 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 <1%
Other 16 5%
Unknown 148 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 15 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,279,222
of 34,550,734 outputs
Outputs from Sports Health
#312
of 1,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,515
of 346,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Health
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,550,734 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 346,403 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.