원문정보
Pelvic Compression Using a Compression Belt and Non-elastic Taping on Trunk and Hip Extensor Muscle Activity during Prone Hip Extension: A Comparative Study of Experienced and Non-experienced Low Back Pain Group
초록
영어
Background : Prone hip extension (PHE) is commonly used for exercises and tests in patients with low back pain. Previous studies have shown that pelvic compression belts (PCB) and non-elastic taping (NET) contribute greatly to improvements in lumbopelvic stability. This study aimed to compare the effect of two lumbopelvic stability methods such as PCB and NET on the trunk and hip extensor muscle activities during PHE tests. Methods: Subjects who experienced low back pain (low back pain group, LBPG; n=20) and those who did not experience low back pain (non-LBPG; n=20) participated in this study. The subjects were instructed to perform PHE with and without a PCB and NET. PHE tests were performed in the condition wherein the two stabilization methods were applied, and the actions of the muscles at that time were measured using surface electromyography (EMG). EMG data were collected from the hamstring, gluteus maximus, erector spine (ES), and multifidus (MF) muscles. The data were collected three times for 5 s with a 1-min rest between each of the three sets. Results: In the LBPG, EMG of the ES muscle was significantly reduced when NET or a PCB was applied (p<.05). There was no difference in the change in the ES muscle activity when NET and a PCB were applied. The ratio of MF/ES muscleactivity showed a significant increase in the LBPG with NET (p<.05). Conclusion: Both NET and PCB applied to subjects who experienced low back pain significantly reduced the ES muscle activity during PHE exercises and helped control the balance of the superficial and deep trunk extensor muscles.
목차
I. 서론
Ⅱ. 연구방법
1. 연구대상자
2. 연구절차
3. 평가 도구 및 방법
4. 엎드려 고관절 신전 운동 방법
5. 분석방법
Ⅲ. 연구결과
1. 연구대상자의 일반적인 특성
2. 중재 방법에 따른 측정 근육에 근활성도 비교
3. 중재 방법에 따른 측정 근육의 근활성도 비(ratio) 비교
Ⅳ. 고찰
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌