Effects of the support surface condition on muscle activity of abdominalis and erector spinae during bridging exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various exercise protocols have been designed to improve trunk stability in the fields of rehabilitation and sport.Bridging exercise on the floor, foam roll, or gymball is often prescribed for improving trunk stability.The aim of this study was to determine the muscle activity of the abdominalis and erector spinae during bridging and unilateral bridging exercises on a firm surface, on the sit-fit, and on a foam roll.Eighteen healthy young subjects with no medical v history of lower-extremity or lumbar spine disease were recruited for this study.Muscle activity was recorded using surface EMG electrods from the both sides of the rectus abdominalis, external obliques, internal obliques, and erector spinae muscles during bridging and unilateral bridging exercises.A one-way repeated analysis of variance was used to compare the EMG activity of each muscle according to the support surface condition.Differences in the EMG activities between the bridging and unilateral bridging exercises, and between the right side and left side were assessed using a paired t-test, and the level of statistical significance was set at 0.05.The study showed that the EMG activities of the both rectus abdominalis, both external obliques, and the right internal oblique were significantly higher when the bridging exercise was performed using the foam roll than when using the sit-fit.The EMG activities of the both external obliques, both internal obliques, and both erector spinae during bridging exercise using the foam roll were significantly higher than that using the firm surface.The EMG activities of the left rectus abdominis, both external obliques, and the right internal oblique were significantly higher during unilateral bridging exercise using the foam roll than when using the sit-fit.The EMG activities of the right external oblique, right internal oblique, and both erector spinae during unilateral bridging exercise using the foam roll were significantly higher than when using the firm surface.The EMG activity of the left erector spina was significantly higher when using the sit-fit than when using the firm surface during the unilateral bridging exercise.The EMG activities of all of the muscles were significantly higher during the unilateral bridging exercise than during the bridging exercise.There was vi no significant difference in the EMG activity of each muscle between the right side and the left side during the bridging exercise.In the unilateral bridging exercise, the EMG activity of the right rectus abdominis was significantly higher than that of the left rectus abdominis in all three support surface conditions.In addition, the EMG activity of the right erector spina was significantly higher than that of the left erector spina when performing the unilateral bridging exercise using the firm surface and the sit-fit.Based on these fidings, performing the unilateral bridging exercise using the sit-fit or the foam roll is a useful method for facilitating trunk-muscle strength and hence lumbar stability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".