Co-contraction recruitment and spinal load during isometric trunk flexion and extension

被引:62
作者
Granata, KP [1 ]
Lee, PE [1 ]
Franklin, TC [1 ]
机构
[1] Virginia Polytech Inst & State Univ, Sch Biomed Engn & Sci, Dept Engn Sci & Mech, Musculoskeletal Biomech Labs, Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA
关键词
low-back; spine; co-contraction; push;
D O I
10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.07.006
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Background Pushing and pulling tasks account for 20% of occupational low-back injury claims. Primary torso muscle groups recruited during pushing tasks include rectus abdominis and the external obliques. However, analyses suggest that antagonistic co-contraction of the paraspinal muscles is necessary to stabilize the spine during flexion exertions. The study quantified co-contraction and spinal load differences during isometric flexion and extension exertions. The goal was to provide insight into the mechanisms requiring greater co-contraction during trunk flexion exertions compared to extension exertions. Methods. Electromyographic (EMG) signals were recorded from the trunk muscles of healthy volunteers during isometric trunk flexion and extension exertions. A biomechanical model was implemented to estimate total muscle force from the measured EMG and trunk moment data. A similar model estimated the muscle forces necessary to achieve equilibrium while minimizing the sum of squared muscle forces. The difference in these forces represented co-contraction. Spinal load attributed to co-contraction was computed. Results. Average co-contraction during flexion exertions was approximately twice the value of co-contraction during extension, i.e. 28% and 13% of total muscle forces respectively. Co-contraction accounted for up to 47% of the total spinal load during flexion exertions. Consequently, spinal compression during the flexion tasks was nearly 50% greater than during extension exertions despite similar levels of trunk moment. Interpretation. Co-contraction must be considered when evaluating spinal load during pushing exertions. Results underscore the need to consider neuromuscular control of spinal stability when evaluating the biomechanical risks. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1029 / 1037
页数:9
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   VALIDATION OF A BIODYNAMIC MODEL OF PUSHING AND PULLING [J].
ANDRES, RO ;
CHAFFIN, DB .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1991, 24 (11) :1033-1045
[2]  
Bergmark A, 1989, Acta Orthop Scand Suppl, V230, P1
[3]   Quantitative assessment of co-contraction in cervical musculature [J].
Choi, H .
MEDICAL ENGINEERING & PHYSICS, 2003, 25 (02) :133-140
[4]   Postural control of trunk during unstable sitting [J].
Cholewicki, J ;
Polzhofer, GK ;
Radebold, A .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 2000, 33 (12) :1733-1737
[5]   EMG ASSISTED OPTIMIZATION - A HYBRID APPROACH FOR ESTIMATING MUSCLE FORCES IN AN INDETERMINATE BIOMECHANICAL MODEL [J].
CHOLEWICKI, J ;
MCGILL, SM .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1994, 27 (10) :1287-1289
[6]   Mechanical stability of the in vivo lumbar spine: Implications for injury and chronic low back pain [J].
Cholewicki, J ;
McGill, SM .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 1996, 11 (01) :1-15
[7]   Stabilizing function of trunk flexor-extensor muscles around a neutral spine posture [J].
Cholewicki, J ;
Panjabi, MM ;
Khachatryan, A .
SPINE, 1997, 22 (19) :2207-2212
[8]   EULER STABILITY OF THE HUMAN LIGAMENTOUS LUMBAR SPINE .2. EXPERIMENT [J].
CRISCO, JJ ;
PANJABI, MM ;
YAMAMOTO, I ;
OXLAND, TR .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 1992, 7 (01) :27-32
[9]   MECHANICAL LOADING ON THE LOW-BACK IN 3 METHODS OF REFUSE COLLECTING [J].
DELOOZE, MP ;
STASSEN, ARA ;
MARKSLAG, AMT ;
BORST, MJ ;
WOONING, MM ;
TOUSSAINT, HM .
ERGONOMICS, 1995, 38 (10) :1993-2006
[10]   PASSIVE TISSUES HELP THE BACK MUSCLES TO GENERATE EXTENSOR MOMENTS DURING LIFTING [J].
DOLAN, P ;
MANNION, AF ;
ADAMS, MA .
JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1994, 27 (08) :1077-1085