The responses of leg and trunk muscles to sudden unloading of the hands: implications for balance and spine stability

Objective. To examine the anticipatory and responsive actions of leg and trunk muscles, and their role in whole-body and spine control in situations of sudden unloading of the hands in the sagittal plane. Design. EMG and force plate measures were used to determine the baseline, anticipatory response...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical biomechanics (Bristol) 2003-11, Vol.18 (9), p.812-820
Hauptverfasser: Brown, S.H.M., Haumann, M.L., Potvin, J.R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective. To examine the anticipatory and responsive actions of leg and trunk muscles, and their role in whole-body and spine control in situations of sudden unloading of the hands in the sagittal plane. Design. EMG and force plate measures were used to determine the baseline, anticipatory responses and post unloading responses of selected trunk and leg muscles under different conditions of unload timing knowledge. Background. Postural muscles have been observed to increase activation in anticipation of a known loading situation to decrease the overall effect of an impulsive load delivered to the spine. It is thought that this increased activation places the spine in a more stable state, thereby reducing the likelihood of injury. Comparisons have not been made previously of the responses of postural muscles to unloading conditions where the certainty of unload timing is varied. Methods. Eleven male subjects, holding a 6.8 kg load in the hands, were subjected to three different unloading conditions: (1) voluntary load drop; (2) known timing of load release; (3) unknown timing of load release. Anterior–posterior center of pressure data, as well as EMG activity on 8 right side muscles, were collected for 10 trials in each condition. Results. Anterior–posterior center of pressure responses were significantly different ( P
ISSN:0268-0033
1879-1271
DOI:10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00167-0