Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and the learning effect of an isokinetic trunk flexion-extension protocol designed to simultaneously assess trunk muscle strength and endurance. In addition, the effect of the participants' sex on the reliability data was examined., Methods: Fifty-seven healthy and physically active young men (n = 28) and women (n = 29) performed the isokinetic protocol 5 times, separated by a week between each of the first 4 sessions and by a month between the last 2 sessions. The protocol consisted of performing 4 trials of 15 maximum flexion-extension concentric exertions at 120°/s (range of trunk motion = 50°). The absolute and relative peak torque and total work were calculated to assess trunk flexion and extension strength. In addition, endurance ratio, modified endurance ratio, fatigue final ratio, recovery ratio, and modified recovery ratio variables were used for the assessment of trunk muscle endurance in both directions., Results: Regarding the absolute reliability, no relevant changes were found between paired-comparison sessions for most strength and endurance variables, except for total work and relative total work variables in the flexion movement in both sexes. In addition, the typical error of the isokinetic variables was lower than 10% in both males and females, and minimum detectable changes ranged from 7% to 20%, with a tendency to be higher in females and in endurance variables. The strength variables showed high-to-excellent intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs; >0.74); however, for the endurance variables only the endurance ratio and the modified endurance ratio obtained moderate-to-high ICC values (0.57 < ICC < 0.82). In addition, the analysis of the variance reported no significant differences between consecutive pairs of sessions for most variables in both sexes., Conclusion: Overall, these findings provide clinicians, trainers, and researchers with a 10-min single-session protocol to perform a reliable muscle strength and endurance evaluation of trunk flexor and extensor muscles, all within the same protocol., (Copyright © 2019. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: The intensity progression of core stabilization exercises (CSEs) is usually based on personal criteria rather than on objective parameters. To develop exercise progressions for four of the most common CSEs based on the postural control challenge imposed on the participants, and to analyze the effect of participants' sex and postural control level on these progressions., Methods: Seventy-six males and females performed five variations of front bridge, back bridge, side bridge and bird-dog exercises on two force platforms. The mean velocity of the center of pressure displacement was calculated to assess exercise intensity through the measurement of the participants' body sway (PBS)., Results: In general, long bridges produced higher PBS than short bridges, bridging with single leg support produced higher PBS than bridging with double leg support and bridging on a hemisphere ball produced higher PBS than bridging on the floor. The most difficult bridging variations were those performed on a hemisphere ball with single leg support. Regarding the bird-dog, two-point positions produced higher PBS than three-point positions and the positions performed on a hemisphere ball produced higher PBS than those performed on the floor., Conclusion: The CSE progressions obtained by males and females were very similar. However, the participants with high trunk control showed less significant differences between exercise variations than the participants with low trunk control, which shows the need to individualize the progressions according to the participants' training level. Overall, this study provides useful information to guide the prescription of CSE progressions in young physically active individuals.

Although core stability (CS) has been assessed through many different tests, the relationships among them are currently unknown. The main objective was to analyze the relationship between 5 representative tests used to assess CS in: (1) laboratory settings: Sudden Loading Test (SLT) and Stable and Unstable Sitting Test (SUST) and (2) field settings: Biering-Sørensen Test (BST), 3-Plane Core Strength Test, and Double-Leg Lowering Test. The reliability of these tests was also examined. In total, 33 recreationally active males performed the tests twice. The relationship between all variables was examined using Pearson correlation coefficient in those variables with a good reliability. Only stiffness and angular displacement in the SLT, dynamic unstable tasks in the SUST, and the holding time in the BST showed good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient: .63-.91, typical error: 9.8%-21.0%). Few and low correlations were observed between the SLT, SUST, and BST. Despite finding several significant correlations among the dynamic unstable tasks of the SUST ( r  ≥ .807, P  < .01), no correlations were found between the loading directions of the SLT. The absence of correlations between these tests suggests that CS measurements are not generalizable, as they probably assess different dimensions of CS, or in the case of the BST, a different capacity (ie, trunk extensor endurance).

Background: Although the Star Excursion Balance test (SEBT) has shown a good intrasession reliability, the intersession reliability of this test has not been deeply studied. Furthermore, there is an evident high influence of the lower limbs in the performance of the SEBT, so even if it has been used to measure core stability, it is possibly not the most suitable measurement., Objective: (1) To assess the absolute and relative between-session reliability of the SEBT and 2 novel variations of this test to assess trunk postural control while sitting, ie, the Star Excursion Sitting Test (SEST) and the Star Excursion Timing Test (SETT); and (2) to analyze the relationships between these 3 test scores., Design: Correlational and reliability test-retest study., Setting: Controlled laboratory environment., Participants: Twenty-seven physically active men (age: 24.54 ± 3.05 years)., Method: Relative and absolute reliability of the SEBT, SEST, and SETT were calculated through the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM), respectively. A Pearson correlation analysis was carried out between the variables of the 3 tests., Main Outcome Measures: Maximum normalized reach distances were assessed for different SEBT and SEST directions. In addition, composite indexes were calculated for SEBT, SEST, and SETT., Results: The SEBT (dominant leg: ICC = 0.87 [0.73-0.94], SEM = 2.12 [1.66-2.93]; nondominant leg: ICC = 0.74 [0.50-0.87], SEM = 3.23 [2.54-4.45]), SEST (ICC = 0.85 [0.68-0.92], SEM = 1.27 [1.03-1.80]), and SETT (ICC = 0.61 [0.30-0.80], SEM = 2.31 [1.82-3.17]) composite indexes showed moderate-to-high 1-month reliability. A learning effect was detected for some SEBT and SEST directions and for SEST and SETT composite indexes. No significant correlations were found between SEBT and its 2 variations (r ≤ .366; P > .05). A significant correlation was found between the SEST and SETT composite indexes (r = .520; P > .01)., Conclusions: SEBT, SEST, and SETT are reliable field protocols to measure postural control. However, whereas the SEBT assesses postural control in single-leg stance, SEST and SETT provide trunk postural control measures with lower influence of the lower-limbs., Level of Evidence: III., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The selection and validation of age- and gender-specific criterion-referenced cut-points for abdominal endurance are still unclear., Objective: To stablish normative values for abdominal endurance in adolescents by age and gender using the Bench Trunk Curl-up Test (BTC). Additionally, the reliability of the BTC was analyzed., Methods: Two hundred and sixteen untrained high school students (104 males - 112 females) were grouped into five age strata. Participants performed the BTC twice with a rest period of 72 h. Descriptive statistics and percentile scores were determined for each gender/age strata., Results: Males showed higher BTC scores than females (males: 90.07 ± 32.65 repetitions; females: 73.43 ± 27.74 repetitions), but no significant differences between age strata nor age * gender interaction were found. Significant differences for the BTC scores between sessions were found (T1 = 72.06 ± 26.28 repetitions; T2 = 81.44 ± 31.27 repetitions). The ICC was 0.82, whereas the typical error was 17.2%., Conclusions: Gender, but not age, is an important factor when abdominal endurance is compared between adolescents. Finally, the BTC is a reliable test, supporting the findings of this study. However, an extensive familiarization period to reduce the learning effect is necessary.

Different methods have been developed to quantify trunk muscle strength and endurance. However, some important protocol characteristics are still unclear, hindering the selection of the most suitable tests in each specific situation. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and the relationship between 3 representative tests of the most common type of protocols used to assess trunk muscle strength and endurance. Twenty-seven healthy men performed each test twice spaced 1 month apart.Trunk strength and endurance were evaluated with an isokinetic dynamometer and 2 field tests including Biering-Sørensen test and Flexion-rotation trunk test. All tests showed a good relative consistency (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]> 0.75), except for the isokinetic endurance variables which had low-moderate reliability (0.37 < ICC > 0.65). Absolute reliability seemed slightly better in the isokinetic protocol than in the field tests, which showed about 12% of test-retest score increase. No significant correlations were found between test scores. After a familiarisation period for the field tests, the 3 protocols can be used to obtain reliable measures of trunk muscle strength and endurance. Based on the correlation analysis, these measures are not related, which highlights the importance of selecting the most suitable trunk test for each situation.

Although trunk muscle function has been suggested to be a determinant of judo performance, its contribution to high-level performance in this sport has been poorly studied. Therefore, several tests were used to assess the differences in trunk muscle function between 11 international and 14 national level judo practitioners (judokas). Trunk strength and endurance were assessed using isokinetic tests and core stability was assessed using two protocols: 1) sudden loading, to assess trunk responses to unexpected external perturbations; 2) stable and unstable sitting, to assess the participants' ability to control trunk balance. No differences between groups were found for trunk flexor isokinetic strength, trunk responses against lateral and posterior loading and trunk control while sitting. However, international level judokas showed significantly higher trunk extensor isokinetic strength (p <0.05) and lower trunk angular displacement after anterior trunk loading (p <0.05) than national level judokas. Few and low (r < 0.512) significant correlations were found between strength, endurance and stability parameters, which suggests that trunk strength and endurance are not limiting factors for trunk stability in competitive judokas. These results support the importance of trunk extensor strength and trunk stability against forward perturbations in elite judo performance.