Gluteus medius muscle function in people with and without low back pain: a systematic review

Sadler, Sean; Cassidy, Samuel; Peterson, Benjamin; Spink, Martin J; Chuter, Vivienne

doi:10.1186/s12891-019-2833-4

Cited by 41 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings of lower gluteus medius mean and peak amplitude in participants with planus foot types are in contrast to previous research that has shown higher levels of activity in people with chronic low back pain and pronated feet [5]. However, a recent systematic review found the relationship between low back pain and gluteus medius muscle activity to be inconclusive [42]. Another systematic review investigating the effect of foot posture on lower leg muscle activity during gait found some evidence to show that in people with planus type feet, greater levels of anti-pronator muscle activity (e.g.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity

Sadler

Spink

Jonge

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Abnormal gluteus medius muscle activity is associated with a number of musculoskeletal conditions. Research investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity is both conflicting and limited. The primary aim was to investigate the relationship between foot type and gluteus medius muscle activity during shod walking. The secondary aims of this study were to explore the effect and amount of usage of a pair of unmodified prefabricated foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity during shod walking. Methods Foot type was determined using the foot posture index and gluteus medius muscle activity was measured with surface electromyography in 50 healthy adults during shod walking. Participants were then fitted with prefabricated foot orthoses and required to return after 4 weeks. Pearson’s correlation and one-way ANOVA were used to determine effect of foot type. Paired t-tests and ANCOVA were used to determine effect of foot orthoses. Results Participants with a cavus foot type demonstrated significantly more gluteus medius mean (p = 0.04) and peak amplitude (p = 0.01), and a greater range in amplitude (p = 0.01) compared to participants with a neutral foot type. Compared to a planus foot type, participants with a cavus foot type demonstrated significantly larger mean (p = 0.02) and peak amplitude (p = 0.01), and a greater range in amplitude (p = 0.01). Prefabricated foot orthoses did not change the gluteus medius muscle activity. Conclusion When assessing healthy adults with a cavus foot type, clinicians and researchers should be aware that these participants may display higher levels of gluteus medius muscle activity during gait compared to neutral and planus type feet. Additionally, clinicians and researchers should be aware that the type of prefabricated foot orthoses used did not change gluteus medius muscle activity over 4 weeks. Future research should aim to explore this relationship between foot type and gluteus medius muscle activity in larger sample sizes, consider the potential role of other lower extremity muscles and biomechanical variables, and investigate if these findings also occur in people with pathology.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity

Sadler

Spink

Jonge

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several musculoskeletal factors related to movement and/or muscular activity impairments have been highlighted in NSCLBP patients compared to asymptomatic participants 10 . Kinematic parameters such as range of motion, segment coordination or movement variability 11 , 12 , as well as electromyographic parameters such as maximal activity, timing activity or fatigability 13 , 14 , are regularly measured in NSCLBP population. However, due to methodological differences and/or the heterogeneity of the NSCLBP population, some studies reported contradictory findings 15 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of movement and muscular activity biomarkers to discriminate non-specific chronic low back pain patients from an asymptomatic population

Moissenet

Rose-Dulcina

Armand

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification of relevant and valid biomarkers to distinguish patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) from an asymptomatic population in terms of musculoskeletal factors could contribute to patient follow-up and to evaluate therapeutic strategies. Several parameters related to movement and/or muscular activity impairments have been proposed in the literature in that respect. In this article, we propose a systematic and comprehensive review of these parameters (i.e. potential biomarkers) and related measurement properties. This systematic review (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020144877) was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases until July 2019. In the included studies, all movements or muscular activity parameters having demonstrated at least a moderate level of construct validity were defined as biomarkers, and their measurement properties were assessed. In total, 92 studies were included. This allowed to identify 121 movement and 150 muscular activity biomarkers. An extensive measurement properties assessment was found in 31 movement and 14 muscular activity biomarkers. On the whole, these biomarkers support the primary biomechanical concepts proposed for low back pain. However, a consensus concerning a robust and standardised biomechanical approach to assess low back pain is needed.

show abstract

“…Gmed weakness may eventually lead to loss of dynamic lateral stability of the pelvis and lower back which may lead to the development of LBP. 25 To our knowledge based on the literature search, no studies have been done to compare Gmed muscle activity in NSCLBP and healthy individuals measured with the hip abducted in side-lying position. The primary aim of this present study was to compare the difference of Gmed muscle activation in NSCLBP and healthy individuals using SEMG.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electromyographic Analysis of Gluteus Medius Activity in People with Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain Compared to Healthy Controls

Pruthviraj¹,

Lalrinkimi²,

Archana³

et al. 2021

IJPOT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives:The functioning of the hip and trunk muscles has an effect on low back region. Gluteus medius (Gmed) being the primary hip abductor plays a significant role in maintaining the stability of the pelvis. Despite the significance, this muscle activity is least addressed and is also thought to be one among the major causes of pain in the low back. The aim of the study was to compare the activity of Gmed in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) and healthy individuals using Surface Electromyography (SEMG).Methods: 506 subjects were screened, of which 200 subjects were selected. Group A: NSCLBP (n=100) and GROUP B: Healthy controls (n=100). Both groups were instructed to perform maximum voluntary contractions. The mean root mean square (RMS) value of Gmed muscle activity for the exercise task was recorded and analyzed using SEMG. Results:The results demonstrated that the mean RMS value of the right Gmed muscle activity for GROUP A was lesser (53.00 ± 24.81) than GROUP B (87.9 ± 37.47). The mean RMS value of the left Gmed activity was also lesser for GROUP A (55.99 ± 27.21) compared to GROUP B (89.72 ± 39.83). The difference in means between the two groups showed highly significant outcome (P<0.001). Conclusion:The study concluded that the muscle activity of Gmed between the groups was lesser in Group A compared to Group B indicating differential activation of the muscle in people with NSCLBP. However, there was no significant difference in mean RMS value of the right and left Gmed muscle activity when compared within the groups respectively.

show abstract

Gluteus medius muscle function in people with and without low back pain: a systematic review

Cited by 41 publications

References 44 publications

An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity

An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity

A systematic review of movement and muscular activity biomarkers to discriminate non-specific chronic low back pain patients from an asymptomatic population

Electromyographic Analysis of Gluteus Medius Activity in People with Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain Compared to Healthy Controls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About