The objective of this study was to develop and test an EMG-based coactivation index and compare it to a coactivation index defined by a biologically-assisted lumbar spine model to differentiate between tasks. The purpose was to provide a universal approach to assess coactivation of a multi-muscle system when a computational model is not accessible. The EMG-based index developed utilized anthropometric-defined muscle characteristics driven by torso kinematics and EMG. Muscles were classified as agonists/antagonists based upon 'simulated' moments of the muscles relative to the total 'simulated' moment. Different tasks were used to test the range of the index including lifting, pushing, and Valsalva. Results showed that the EMG-based index was comparable to the index defined by a biologically-assisted model (r(2) = 0.78). Overall, the EMG-based index provides a universal, usable method to assess the neuromuscular effort associated with coactivation for complex dynamic tasks when the benefit of a biomechanical model is not available. Practitioner Summary A universal coactivation index for the lumbar spine was developed to assess complex dynamic tasks. This method was validated relative to a model-based index for use when a high-end computational model is not available. Its simplicity allows for fewer inputs and usability for assessment of task ergonomics and rehabilitation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,363,636
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Ergonomics
#1,625
of 2,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,680
of 317,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ergonomics
#25
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 317,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
