3.9 Article

Acute, Non-Specific Low Back Pain Does Not Impair Isometric Deadlift Force or Electromyographic Excitation: A Cross-Sectional Study

期刊

SPORTS
卷 10, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/sports10110168

关键词

low back pain; pain; EMG; deadlift; clinical assessment; resistance training

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acute, non-specific low back pain does not impair peak and rapid force or muscle excitation. Hexagonal barbells may optimize knee extensor and trapezius activation. Deadlift-based force assessments appear safe and may be useful in the assessment of functional strength in patients with acute, non-specific low back pain.
Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability. The use of deadlift-based assessments in assessing LBP is becoming common in clinical settings, but these concepts have not been well studied. We sought to compare force and muscle excitation during isometric deadlifts in participants suffering from LBP versus asymptomatic controls. We also compared these outcomes for conventional versus hexagonal barbells. Sixteen adults with mild-to-moderate, acute, non-specific LBP and 19 controls performed maximal, isometric deadlifts while standing on a force plate using conventional and hexagonal barbells. Surface electromyographic signals were recorded from the upper trapezius, external oblique, erector spinae, vastus lateralis, and biceps femoris. Normalized peak force and peak rate of force development were similar for those with acute, non-specific LBP and controls. Surface electromyographic excitation was not different between groups, but was higher with the hexagonal barbell for the vastus lateralis and upper trapezius. Both groups felt equally safe and confident. In summary, the presence of acute, non-specific LBP did not impair peak and rapid force or muscle excitation. Hexagonal barbells may optimize knee extensor and trapezius activation. Deadlift-based force assessments appear safe and may be useful in the assessment of functional strength in patients with acute, non-specific LBP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据