↓ Skip to main content

The effect of the trunk and gluteus maximus muscle activities according to support surface and hip joint rotation during bridge exercise

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Physical Therapy Science, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
The effect of the trunk and gluteus maximus muscle activities according to support surface and hip joint rotation during bridge exercise
Published in
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, January 2018
DOI 10.1589/jpts.30.943
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chan-Myeong Kim, Yong- Soo Kong, Yoon-Tae Hwang, Ji-won Park

Abstract

[Purpose] The purposes of this study were to strengthen gluteus maximus and trunk muscles depending upon the hip joint direction by bridging exercise on an unstable and stable surface, and to suggest an intervention method for efficient and selective exercise. [Participants and Methods] The test measured the muscle activities with the external rotation and internal rotation of 25 degrees and hip joint neutral position of 0 degree on a stable and unstable surface each exercise 3 times for 9 seconds. [Results] External oblique abdominis showed a higher muscle activity on the unstable surface and internal rotation. Erector spinae showed no significant difference on the surfaces and demonstrated the highest muscle activity at the internal rotation. Gluteus maximus showed a higher muscle activity on the stable surface and external rotation and the interaction effect between the surface and the angle indicated a statistical significance as well. [Conclusion] Muscle activities appear different depending upon the change of surface and joint angle, and it can be said that the correct mobilization of muscle fiber relying on the muscle arrangement direction and muscle contraction direction is the most important factor for gluteus maximus.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 22%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 33%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Sports and Recreations 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 July 2018.
All research outputs
#11,706,276
of 13,183,063 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#1,039
of 1,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,738
of 268,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#11
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,183,063 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,242 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 268,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.