Trunk muscle exercises are widely performed, and many studies have been performed to examine their effects on low back pains. However, the effect of trunk muscles activations during walking with pelvic floor muscle contraction (PFMC) and abdominal hollowing (AH) has not been clarified.
To investigate whether walking with PFMC and AH is more effective for promoting local trunk muscle activation than walking without PFMC and AH.
Twenty healthy men (28.9 ± 3.14 years, 177.2 ± 4.25 cm, 72.1 ± 6.39 kg, body mass index 22.78 ± 2.38 kg/m2) were participated in this study. Surface electrodes were attached over the multifidus (MF), lumbar erector spinae (LES), thoracic erector spinae (TES), transverse abdominus-internal oblique abdominals (TrA-IO), external oblique abdominals (EO), and rectus abdominus (RA). The amplitudes of electromyographic signals were measured during a normal walking with and without PFMC and AH.
PFMC and AH while walking was found to result in significant bilateral increases in the normalized maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of MFs and TrA-IOs (p< 0.05). Ratios of local muscle activity to global muscle activities were increased while performing PFMC and AH during normal walking. Bilateral TrA-IO/EO activity ratios were significantly increased by PFMC and AH (p< 0.05).
Performance of the PFMC and AH during walking resulted in significantly more recruitment of local trunk muscles. This study suggests that PFMC and AH during normal daily walking improves activation of muscles responsible for spinal dynamic stabilization and might be useful if integrated into low back disability and pain physical rehabilitation efforts.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 April 2021.
All research outputs
#21,900,558
of 34,358,242 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Back & Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation
#394
of 797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,116
of 451,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Back & Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation
#39
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,358,242 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 797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 451,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
