The Contribution of Aerobic Fitness and Back Strength to Lift Capacity

Matheson, Leonard N.; Leggett, Scott H.; Mooney, Vert; Schneider, Karen; Mayer, John M.

doi:10.1097/00007632-200206010-00013

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reyna et al 98 have also shown that maximum ILEX strength correlates well (r=0.645) with dynamic lifting tasks supporting this and highlighting that the lumbar extensors may be a weak link 22. Matheson et al 99 further reported that ILEX strength independently contributes to lifting capacity. Mooney et al 100 also reported significant improvement in lift capacity as a result of 8 weeks ILEX training in CLBP participants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

A review of the specificity of exercises designed for conditioning the lumbar extensors

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous exercise approaches have been designed with the intention of conditioning the lumbar extensors. Those examined appear to activate the lumbar extensors; however, the specificity of many of these exercises for producing chronic adaptations may be questionable, potentially due to the compound nature of them allowing involvement of other musculature such as the hip extensors. Many of the reviewed exercises offer potential to condition the lumbar extensors, however, isolation of lumbar extension through appropriate pelvic restraint appears important for optimising specific adaptations in the lumbar extensors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

A review of the specificity of exercises designed for conditioning the lumbar extensors

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus whether or not a person’s ILEX strength improves or not as a result of an intervention may not be a good indicator of the success or failure of the intervention. However, it has been shown that ILEX strength is associated with outcomes such as lift capacity [ 48 , 49 ]. Thus, whether or not a person undergoing ILEX training has a substantial increase in ILEX strength may have implications for their wider functioning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variability in Strength, Pain, and Disability Changes in Response to an Isolated Lumbar Extension Resistance Training Intervention in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strengthening the lumbar extensor musculature is a common recommendation for chronic low back pain (CLBP). Although reported as effective, variability in response in CLBP populations is not well investigated. This study investigated variability in responsiveness to isolated lumbar extension (ILEX) resistance training in CLBP participants by retrospective analysis of three previous randomized controlled trials. Data from 77 participants were available for the intervention arms (males = 43, females = 34) 37 participants data (males = 20, females = 17) from the control arms. Intervention participants had all undergone 12 weeks of ILEX resistance training and changes in ILEX strength, pain (visual analogue scale; VAS), and disability (Oswestry disability index; ODI) measured. True inter-individual (i.e., between participants) variability in response was examined through calculation of difference in the standard deviation of change scores for both control and intervention arms. Intervention participants were classified into responder status using k-means cluster analysis for ILEX strength changes and using minimal clinically important change cut-offs for VAS and ODI. Change in average ILEX strength ranged 7.6 Nm (1.9%) to 192.1 Nm (335.7%). Change in peak ILEX strength ranged −12.2 Nm (−17.5%) to 276.6 Nm (169.6%). Participants were classified for strength changes as low (n = 31), medium (n = 36), and high responders (n = 10). Change in VAS ranged 12.0 mm to −84.0 mm. Participants were classified for VAS changes as negative (n = 3), non-responders (n = 34), responders (n = 15), and high responders (n = 19). Change in ODI ranged 18 pts to −45 pts. Participants were classified for ODI changes as negative (n = 2), non-responders (n = 21), responders (n = 29), and high responders (n = 25). Considerable variation exists in response to ILEX resistance training in CLBP. Clinicians should be aware of this and future work should identify factors prognostic of successful outcomes.

show abstract

“…The EPIC Lift Capacity (ELC) test has demonstrated safety and reliability [20,35,40] that led to its use in a functional capacity evaluation test battery in a multi-site study in California [41]. Subsequent studies by this research team examined the construct validity and utility of the ELC in treatment settings [25], finding that aerobic capacity and back strength made significant independent contributions to lift capacity [42]. Mooney and colleagues [43] found that the combination of self-reported physical function as assessed by the Multidimensional Task Ability Profile test, gender, and age accounted for 67% of the variance in lift capacity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age and gender normative data for lift capacity

Matheson¹,

Verna

Dreisinger³

et al. 2014

Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs) are routinely used in physical medicine to ascertain an individual's work ability; with lift capacity being an important aspect of many evaluations. Despite the widespread use of lift capacity tests, there are few studies that provide age and gender normative data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, reliability, and validity of the EPIC Lift Capacity test, and to examine the effects of age and gender on lift capacity. METHODS: This study used a test-retest design with 4,443 adult participants in good general health. Test-retest of participants' lift capacity was undertaken to examine safety and reliability. Age and gender and the self-reported physical demands of each employed participant's usual and customary job were collected to examine validity. RESULTS: Safety and reliability were demonstrated for both measures of lift capacity for each of the six sub-tests in the EPIC Lift Capacity test battery. Inter-subtest differences and expected age and gender differences were found across all subtests. CONCLUSIONS: The EPIC Lift Capacity test is a safe and reliable test of lift capacity. Normative data are presented that allow comparison within age and gender categories.

show abstract

The Contribution of Aerobic Fitness and Back Strength to Lift Capacity

Cited by 18 publications

References 15 publications

A review of the specificity of exercises designed for conditioning the lumbar extensors

A review of the specificity of exercises designed for conditioning the lumbar extensors

Variability in Strength, Pain, and Disability Changes in Response to an Isolated Lumbar Extension Resistance Training Intervention in Participants with Chronic Low Back Pain

Age and gender normative data for lift capacity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About