Core Stability, Part 1: Overview of the Concept

Colston, Marisa A.

doi:10.1123/ijatt.17.1.8

Cited by 19 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…16,17 Recent literature suggests that hip-muscle function should also be considered due to the muscle attachments and transition of forces to the lower extremity. 18 Previous literature also indicates that altered hip-muscle function may exist among individuals with a history of LBP. 10,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Greater side-to-side hip-extension-strength asymmetries, 19,20 along with increased gluteus maximus (GMax) muscle activity during prone hip extension 25 and rotational movements, 23 have been associated with LBP.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Hip-Abduction Torque and Muscle Activation in People With Low Back Pain

Sutherlin¹,

Hart²

2015

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Hip-Abduction Torque and Muscle Activation in People With Low Back Pain

Sutherlin¹,

Hart²

2015

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Low variability in movement patterns is also believed to increase the likelihood for persistent susceptibility to lower back dysfunction (Moseley & Hodges, 2006). Coordinated co-contraction of the core musculature creates a stabilizing effect that is similar to that provided by tension on the guy-wires of a radio tower (Colston, 2012), which is important to withstanding loads created by overhead activities (Akuthota & Nadler, 2004). The ability to maintain core stability during an activity is believed to be particularly important for avoidance of work-related injuries associated with jobs that involve awkward postures (Gorelick, Brown, & Groeller, 2003;Peate, Bates, Lunda, Francis, & Bellamy, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is More Injury‐Prone? Prediction and Assessment of Injury Risk

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injuries are the primary determinant of an individual's mobility, which affect not just their workplace productivity in intensive environments such as manufacturing, but also their decision‐making ability and quality of life. Managers typically assign workers to projects or tasks without having knowledge about their functional capabilities or current state of injury risk as injuries remain highly underreported at workplaces for fear of reprisal and other reasons. Therefore, high‐quality research on injury prevention is nearly nonexistent. Procedures that we use in this study for developing a prediction model for identification of college football players at an elevated injury risk could also be used to quantify injury risk in various occupational settings. Using a number of measurements and models, we arrive at an estimate of an individual's injury likelihood. Our measures include ratings of movement efficiency through physical performance tests, acceleration using Internet of Things (IoT) devices, functional role classifications, and recorded exposures to high‐risk conditions. Findings prescribe several approaches and decision rules for prediction of injury risk and suggest that training programs need to consider an individual's injury risk rather than offer a ‘one‐size‐fits‐all’ approach. The analytics models derived from a combination of injury risk screening and surveillance data can be used for making decisions about targeting employee‐centric risk‐reduction interventions, improved matching of tasks to individuals, or deciding job rotation for improved performance, all while enhancing the quality of life of individuals and reducing the escalating costs of work‐related injuries borne by employers. These models can also be developed for smartphones.

show abstract

“…However, Gibbons and Comerford 24 and Behm et al 7 believe that the function of relevant muscles is more complex and that no single category is more important than another. 7,15,24 …”

Section: Functional Core Anatomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The classification systems all have merit, but some contain more detail and differentiation in muscle function, 7,15,24 whereas others are an oversimplification, 8,24 which may lead clinicians to focus on specific muscles and muscle groups rather than function and demands of the task.…”

Section: Functional Core Anatomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several authors have proposed a more functional perspective to describe the core as the foundation of the kinetic chain responsible for facilitating the transfer of torque and momentum between the lower and upper extremities for gross motor tasks of daily living, exercise, and sport. 2,7,15,16,34 Core stability necessitates instantaneous changes by the central nervous system to elicit appropriate combinations and intensities of muscle recruitment for stiffness (ie, stability) as well as mobility demands of the system. 2,7,23,34,54,63 It is important to know the function of the relevant anatomy when developing core stabilization training for injury prevention purposes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Core Stability Training for Injury Prevention

Bliven

Anderson

2013

Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach

259

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context:Enhancing core stability through exercise is common to musculoskeletal injury prevention programs. Definitive evidence demonstrating an association between core instability and injury is lacking; however, multifaceted prevention programs including core stabilization exercises appear to be effective at reducing lower extremity injury rates.Evidence Acquisition:PubMed was searched for epidemiologic, biomechanic, and clinical studies of core stability for injury prevention (keywords: “core OR trunk” AND “training OR prevention OR exercise OR rehabilitation” AND “risk OR prevalence”) published between January 1980 and October 2012. Articles with relevance to core stability risk factors, assessment, and training were reviewed. Relevant sources from articles were also retrieved and reviewed.Results:Stabilizer, mobilizer, and load transfer core muscles assist in understanding injury risk, assessing core muscle function, and developing injury prevention programs. Moderate evidence of alterations in core muscle recruitment and injury risk exists. Assessment tools to identify deficits in volitional muscle contraction, isometric muscle endurance, stabilization, and movement patterns are available. Exercise programs to improve core stability should focus on muscle activation, neuromuscular control, static stabilization, and dynamic stability.Conclusion:Core stabilization relies on instantaneous integration among passive, active, and neural control subsystems. Core muscles are often categorized functionally on the basis of stabilizing or mobilizing roles. Neuromuscular control is critical in coordinating this complex system for dynamic stabilization. Comprehensive assessment and training require a multifaceted approach to address core muscle strength, endurance, and recruitment requirements for functional demands associated with daily activities, exercise, and sport.

show abstract

Core Stability, Part 1: Overview of the Concept

Cited by 19 publications

References 50 publications

Hip-Abduction Torque and Muscle Activation in People With Low Back Pain

Hip-Abduction Torque and Muscle Activation in People With Low Back Pain

Who is More Injury‐Prone? Prediction and Assessment of Injury Risk

Core Stability Training for Injury Prevention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About