Motor control exercise according to Richardson and McGill approaches on abdominal muscles recruitment pattern during rapid arm movements and pain Intensity in subjects with chronic low back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) leads to impaired motor control and function of the trunk muscles. Different approaches for motor control exercise, like Carolyn Richardson and Stuart McGill, improve the core abdominal function in a long-term, providing lumbar dynamic stability. However, there is no consensus regarding the intervention on deep muscles feedward delay. To compare the effect of motor control exercise for dynamic stability accoring the Richardson and McGill approaches on abdominal muscles’ electromyographic (EMG) onset timing, during rapid arm movements, and pain intensity in subjects whit CLBP. Experimental study with a sample of 29 subjects volunteers with CLBP, randomly in Motor Control Exercise_Richardson Approach Group (MCE_Richardon) (n=9), Motor Control Exercise McGill Approach Group (MCE_McGill) (n=11) and Control Group (CG) (n=9). To evaluate timing of EMGonset during rapid arm flexion, abduction and extension movements was used surface electromyography of transversus abdominal/ internal oblique (TrA/IO), external oblique (EO), rectus abdominis (RA) and anterior, medium and posterior deltoids. The pain intensity was measured by visual analog scale. The experimental groups were subjected to diffrent motor control exerciso programs during 8 weeks, one according to the Richardson approach and another according to the McGill approach. The CG did not undertake any intervention. The assessements took place before and after 8 weeks of the application of exercise programs. The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance test was used to comparisons between groups, while the Dunn Test was used, with a significance level 0.05. After 8 weeks of completion the diferente motor control exercise programs (M1), EMG onset of the TrA/IO was significantly lower on the MCE_Richardson group, when compared with the CG, in all rapid arm movements (flexion: p=0.011; abduction p=0.010; extension: p=0.010). EMG onset of EO and RA was significantly lower on the MCE_McGill group, when compared with the CG, in all rapid arm movements (flexion: p=0.009 and p= 0.005; abduction: p=0.038 and p=0.016 and extension: p=0.005 and p=0.044, respectively). At M1, it was found that the pain intensity on MCE_Richardson was significantly lower when compared to CG (p˂0.001). Motor control exercise according to the Carolyn Richardson approach seems to have more effect on local stabilizing muscles (TrA/IO) while the approach of Stuar McGill appears to have more effect on global stabilizing muscles (EO and RA). However, only MCE_Richardson had a significant reduction on low back pain intensity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".