ABDOMINAL BRACING

A variety of experimental and modeling research has shown that the coactivation of the musculature surrounding the spine provides a stiffening mechanism to the vertebral joints and enhances stability.

As a consequence, a variety of trunk coactivation maneuvers and exercises are frequently used in the prevention and the treatment of spine instability. Although many variables need to be considered to understand the effects of coactivation maneuvers on spine stability and compression, the intensity level of muscular activation is a very influential factor. An effective stabilization maneuver depends not only on a sufficient level of torso coactivation but also on proper muscular recruitment and timing patterns. 

The abdominal hollowing maneuver, which coactivates transverse abdominis and internal oblique, has been effective to retrain perturbed motor patterns in abdominal muscles, and consequently theorized to increase spine stability and reduce pain and disability. However, whether this maneuver is effective to control the spine displacement and stability against sudden perturbation is unclear. Findings from biomechanical analyses in which spine stability was quantified suggest that all muscles play an important stabilizing role and must work harmoniously to fulfill this purpose. This would suggest that stabilization maneuvers should not focus on isolating the coactivation of a few muscles, but should produce a more global coactivation such as that generated during the bracing stabilization maneuver (Vera-Garcia, Elvira, Brown, & McGill, 2007)

(Vera-Garcia, Brown, Gray, & McGill, 2006) have recently shown that abdominal bracing –Abdominal bracing consists of the activation of all the abdominal muscles in a global way, at the level of an increase of the torso rigidity; in addition, the abdominal reinforcement causes the extensors of the back to collaborate in the coactivation, which further favors the stiffness of the spine; In addition, this maneuver generates greater intra-abdominal pressure, which generates greater stability. Grenier and McGill observed that for the lumbopelvic, this maneuver is much more effective than the hollowing, said from (Heredia Elvar, 2013)- while positioned with the spine in a neutral lumbar position, produced patterns of antagonist trunk cocontraction that significantly increased spine stability and reduced the movement of the lumbar spine after rapid loading (mentioned in (Vera-Garcia et al., 2007)

Extracted from: https://www.google.es/search?biw=1366&bih=588&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=ZcfcWqn0EcyyUc3RkcAF&q=abdominal+bracing&oq=abdominal+bracing&gs_l=psy-ab.3...3442.4402.0.4466.10.6.0.0.0.0.145.145.0j1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..10.0.0....0.q8Gqc1DkEj8#imgrc=wn_5kX0mrVnqkM:

In (Vera-Garcia et al., 2007) we can see that abdominal bracing resulted in higher levels of preactivation than abdominal hollowing and the authors finding was that abdominal bracing performed better than abdominal hollowing for stabilizing the spine against rapid perturbations. In summary, the basis of our findings, the hollowing maneuver does not directly enhance stability. In contrast, the bracing maneuver fostered torso cocontraction, reduced lumbar displacement, and increased trunk stability, but at the cost of increasing spinal compression.

 You can see a summarize in this link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1B7Owv5RivURo0KLg8v0JzOkvB4m01IMg or if you want to watch a presentation: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pbQqDR1mXt_im1zkOWknzcMAOOL5yiZ7kZ8LhjlOFQE


BIBLIOGRAPHY
Heredia Elvar, J. (2013). Abdominal Bracing (Maniobra Coactivación Global Abdominal) - Instituto Internacional de Ciencias del Ejercicio Físico y Salud. Retrieved March 18, 2018, from https://g-se.com/abdominal-bracing-maniobra-coactivacion-global-bp-l57cfb26e439d3
Vera-Garcia, F. J., Brown, S. H. M., Gray, J. R., & McGill, S. M. (2006). Effects of different levels of torso coactivation on trunk muscular and kinematic responses to posteriorly applied sudden loads. Clinical Biomechanics, 21(5), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.12.006
Vera-Garcia, F. J., Elvira, J. L. L., Brown, S. H. M., & McGill, S. M. (2007). Effects of abdominal stabilization maneuvers on the control of spine motion and stability against sudden trunk perturbations. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 17(5), 556–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.07.004


Comentarios

Publicar un comentario

Entradas populares de este blog

WHAT IS THE CORE??

Imagen
Nowadays there is a confusion about understanding what goes wrong with ‘the core’ is. Its definition has been commonly discussed in the popular media and professional journals for the past decade or more.  However, the precise definition of core is tenuous, with multiple meanings, depending on the interpretation of the literature (Behm, Drinkwater, Willardson, & Cowley, 2010). Among all definitions, the one that we have found which is the most complete is: “the core can be described as a muscular box with the abdominals in the front, paraspinals and gluteals in the back, the diaphragm as the roof, and the pelvic floor and hip girdle musculature as the bottom. Within this box are 29 pairs of muscles that help to stabilize the spine, pelvis, and kinetic chain during functional movements”  (Akuthota, Ferreiro, Moore, & Fredericson, 2008). Pictures found from:  (Willardson & National Strength & Conditioning Association (U.S.), 2014). Anterior view ...
Leer más

CORE ASSESSMENT 3: CORE MUSCLE POWER

Imagen
Test that have focused on core power have utilized some type of medicine ball throw (Shinkle et al. 2012; Cowley and Swensen 2008). Shinkle et al. completed a series of static and dynamic medicine ball throws from a seated position on a bench. Four throws were completed: - A forward throw (figure a) - A backward throw (figure b) - Lateral throws to the right and left to the left (figure c) Using a 6-pound (2,7 kg.) medicine ball. The upper body was held stationary for the static throws, preventing the core muscles from contributing to the throw. For the dynamic throws, the upper body was free to move, allowing contribution of the core muscles. The feet were not secured during any of the throws. Maximum distance for each throw was recorded. Differences between the static and dynamic throws were believed to be due to the core’s contribution. Image A Image B Image C  Images taken from: (Willardson & National Strength & Conditioning Association ...
Leer más

PLANK REGRESSION

Imagen
In this publication, I continued talking about the regression of plank. In the previous publication we talked about the regression in wall and in floor-high surface. In this publication we are going to focus on the regression in the floor. 3. FLOOR: Execute a plank with both knees and palms resting on the floor (elbows extended). Execute a plank without knees supported on the floor (legs extended) and palms resting on the floor (elbows extended). Execute a plank with supporting knees on the floor and resting forearms on the floor (elbows flexed). Execute a plank without supporting knees (legs extended) and forearms supported (elbows flexed). This regression is one of many that may exist. As I mentioned in previous publications, the abdominal plank is a very complete and very complex exercise. This means that if it is not executed correctly, injuries will be caused. For people who have not exercised the abdomen, this regression would...
Leer más