Do Verbal and Tactile Cueing Selectively Alter Gluteus Maximus and Hamstring Recruitment During a Supine Bridging Exercise in Active Females? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Autor:	Hollman, John H., Berling, Tyler A., Crum, Ellen O., Miller, Kelsie M., Simmons, Brent T., Youdas, James W.
Předmět:	HAMSTRING muscle physiology HIP joint physiology GLUTEAL muscles ANALYSIS of variance CHI-squared test CLINICAL trials CONFIDENCE intervals ELECTROMYOGRAPHY RANGE of motion of joints PROBABILITY theory QUESTIONNAIRES STATISTICAL sampling STATISTICS T-test (Statistics) DATA analysis EFFECT sizes (Statistics) RANDOMIZED controlled trials PRE-tests & post-tests PROMPTS (Psychology) DATA analysis software DESCRIPTIVE statistics RESISTANCE training PHYSIOLOGY
Zdroj:	Journal of Sport Rehabilitation; Mar2018, Vol. 27 Issue 2, p138-143, 6p, 3 Diagrams, 1 Chart, 1 Graph
Abstrakt:	Context: Hip extension with hamstring-dominant rather than gluteus maximus-dominant recruitment may increase anterior femoracetabular forces and contribute to conditions that cause hip pain. Cueing methods during hip extension exercises may facilitate greater gluteus maximus recruitment. Objective: We examined whether specific verbal and tactile cues facilitate gluteus maximus recruitment while inhibiting hamstring recruitment during a bridging exercise. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Biomechanics laboratory. Participants: 30 young adult women (age 24 [3] y; BMI 22.2 [2.4] kg/m2). Intervention: Participants were tested over 2 sessions, 1 week apart, while performing 5 repetitions of a bridging exercise. At their second visit, participants in the experimental group received verbal and tactile cues intended to facilitate gluteus maximus recruitment and inhibit hamstring recruitment. Control group participants received no additional cues beyond original instructions. Main Outcome Measures: Gluteus maximus and hamstring recruitment were measured with surface electromyography, normalized to maximal voluntary isometric contractions (MVICs). Results: Gluteus maximus recruitment was unchanged in the control group and increased from 16.8 to 33.0% MVIC in the cueing group (F = 33.369, P < .001). Hamstring recruitment was unchanged in the control group but also increased from 16.5 to 29.8% MVIC in the cueing group (F = 6.400, P = .02). The effect size of the change in gluteus maximus recruitment in the cueing group (Cohen's d = 1.5, 95% CI = 0.9 to 2.2) was not significantly greater than the effect size in hamstring recruitment (Cohen's d = 0.8, 95% CI = 0.1 to 1.5). Conclusions: Verbal and tactile cues hypothesized to facilitate gluteus maximus recruitment yielded comparable increases in both gluteus maximus and hamstring recruitment. If one intends to promote hip extension by facilitating gluteus maximus recruitment while inhibiting hamstring recruitment during bridging exercises, the cueing methods employed in this study may not produce desired effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze:	Complementary Index
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu