Effects of trunk muscle fatigue and load timing on spinal responses during sudden hand loading

Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate the responses of the spine during sudden loading in the presence of back and abdominal muscle fatigue, with a primary focus on the implications for spinal stability. Fifteen females were studied and each received sudden loads to the hands, at bot...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of electromyography and kinesiology 2009-08, Vol.19 (4), p.e237-e245
Hauptverfasser: Grondin, Diane E, Potvin, Jim R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate the responses of the spine during sudden loading in the presence of back and abdominal muscle fatigue, with a primary focus on the implications for spinal stability. Fifteen females were studied and each received sudden loads to the hands, at both known and unknown times. Participants received these loading trials (a) while rested, (b) with back muscle fatigue, and (c) with a combination of back and abdominal muscle fatigue. Measures were taken on the EMG activity of two trunk extensor and two abdominal muscles, and on the trunk angle and centre of pressure. A 3 × 2 Repeated Measures ANOVA was also performed. There were no preparations made prior to the perturbation even when it could be anticipated. However, the peak responses that followed were greater in the unexpected versus the expected condition. In addition, trunk muscle fatigue led to an increase in the baseline activity of the trunk muscles but no additional increase in activity just prior to loading. There was increased activation of both (opposing) muscle groups when only one muscle group was fatigued. Because the peak responses following the perturbation were enhanced in the unknown timing condition, preparations must have taken place prior to the anticipated perturbations, perhaps in other segments of the body that were not measured. Also, the load impact may not have been great enough to elicit large preparations. The heightened baseline activity with fatigue suggests that there may have been increased spinal stiffness whenever the spine was fatigued, and not just immediately prior to an impending perturbation. The increased activation of opposing muscle groups is evidence of increased cocontraction in response to fatigue, possibly to maintain stability with decreasing coordination.
ISSN:1050-6411
1873-5711
DOI:10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.05.006