Background: The gluteus maximus (GM) muscle comprise the lumbo-pelvic complex and is an important stabilizing muscle during leg extension. In patients with low back pain (LBP) with weakness of the GM, spine leads to compensatory muscle activities such as instantaneous increase of the erector spinae (ES) muscle activity. Four-point kneeling arm and leg lift (FKALL) is most common types of lumbopelvic and GM muscles strengthening exercise. We assumed that altered hip position during FKALL may increase thoraco-lumbar stabilizer like GM activity more effectively method. Objects: The purpose of this study was investigated that effects of the three exercise postures on the right-sided GM, internal oblique (IO), external oblique (EO), and multifidus (MF) muscle activities and pelvic kinematic during FKALL. Methods: Twenty eight healthy individuals participated in this study. The exercises were performed three conditions of FKALL (pure FKALL, FKALL with 120° hip flexion of the supporting leg, FKALL with 30° hip abduction of the lifted leg). Participants performed FKALL exercises three times each condition, and motion sensor used to measure pelvic tilt and rotation angle. Results: This study demonstrated that no significant change in pelvic angle during hip movement in the FKALL (p > 0.05). However, the MF and GM muscle activities in FKALL with hip flexion and hip abduction is greater than pure FKALL position (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our finding suggests that change the posture of the hip joint to facilitate GM muscle activation during trunk stabilization exercises such as the FKALL.

Background: Forward head posture (FHP) is a postural alignment of the cervical vertebrae that leads to increased gravitational load on cervical segmental motions. The overhead arm lift test assesses the ability to actively dissociate and control low cervical flexion and move the shoulders through overhead flexion. Objects: The purpose of this study was to explore muscle activities in the upper trapezius (UT), serratus anterior (SA), sternocleidomastoid (SCM), and lower trapezius (LT) alongside changes in head position during the overhead arm lift test in individuals with FHP. Methods: Fifteen subjects with forward head posture and fifteen subjects with normal subjcects were enrolled in this study. The patients performed the overhead arm lift test, and muscle activities of the UT, SCM, SA, and LT were measured using surface electromyography and by evaluating changes in head position. Independent t-tests were used to detect significant differences between the two groups and Cohen’s d was calculated to measure the size of the mean difference between the groups. Results: The FHP group demonstrated significantly increased muscle activity of the UT (32.46±7.64), SCM (12.79±4.01), and LT (45.65±10.52) and significantly decreased activity in the SA (26.65±6.15) than the normal group. The change in head position was significantly higher in the FHP group (6.66±2.08) than the normal group. Effect sizes for all parameters assessed were large between the two groups. Conclusion: The subjects with excessive FHP displayed were unable to fix their heads in position during the overhead arm lift test. The overhead arm lift test can thus be used in clinical settings to confirm control of the neck in these subjects.

The aim of this study is to compare the effect of abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM) on lower trapezius (LT), serratus anterior (SA), and erector spinae (ES) muscle activity during arm lifts in prone and standing positions. Twenty healthy subjects were recruited, and NoraxonTeleMyo 2400T was used to collect electromyographic signals from the LT, SA, and ES muscles. A two-way repeated analysis of variance (ANOVA) used a significance level of .05. If a significant interaction was found, pairwise comparisons were performed with a Bonferroni adjustment (.05/4=.013). The results of the study were as follows: 1) In LT, no significant ADIM by position interaction was found (=.356, p=.558). There was a significant main effect for ADIM. LT muscle activity with ADIM was significantly greater compared with muscle activity without ADIM (=82.863, p<.001). There was also a significant main effect for position. LT muscle activity in the prone position was greater compared with muscle activity in the standing position (=116.401, p<.001). 2) In SA, significant ADIM by position interaction was found (=8.687, p=.008). There were significant differences in all pairwise comparisons. The greatest SA muscle activity was observed in the standing position with ADIM. 3) In ES, significant ADIM by position interaction was found (=122.473, p<.001). The lowest ES muscle activity was elicited in the standing position with ADIM. Based on these results, ADIM is advocated in the prone position to increase LT muscle activity. In addition, it is concluded that arm lifts in the standing position with ADIM offer the most favorable combination for reducing ES muscle activity and increasing SA muscle activity.