Title Page
Contents
국문초록 11
ABSTRACT 14
I. Background 17
II. Experiment 1: Comparison of Trunk Muscle Activities and Pelvic Rotation Angles between the Abdominal Draw-in Maneuver and Abdominal Bracing during Four-Point Kneeling Arm and Leg Lift Exercises in Healthy Subjects 20
A. Introduction 20
B. Methods 22
1. Subjects 22
2. Surface electromyography and data processing 24
3. Real-time angle inclinometer 25
4. Procedure 27
5. Statistical analysis 28
C. Results 29
D. Discussion 33
III. Experiment 2: The Effects of Hip Joint Movement on the Lumbo-Pelvic Muscle Activities and Pelvic Rotation during Four-Point Kneeling Arm and Leg Lift Exercise in Healthy Subjects 37
A. Introduction 37
B. Methods 40
1. Subjects 40
2. Surface electromyography and data processing 41
3. Real-time angle inclinometer 42
4. Procedure 43
5. Statistical analysis 46
C. Results 47
1. Electromyographic activity of the trunk and lumbo-pelvic muscles 47
2. Angle of pelvic tilt and rotation 49
D. Discussion 51
IV. Experiment 3: The Effects of the Abdominal Draw-in Maneuver with Biofeedback on Trunk Muscle Activity and Pelvic Rotation during the Four-Point Kneeling Arm and Leg Lift Exercise in Individuals with Chronic Low Back Pain 54
A. Introduction 54
B. Methods 56
1. Subjects 56
2. Surface electromyography and data processing 58
3. Tactile biofeedback (Stretch sensor) 59
4. Real-time angle inclinometer 61
5. Procedure 63
6. Statistical analysis 65
C. Results 66
1. Electromyographic activity of the abdominal and lower back muscles 66
2. Angle of pelvic rotation 68
D. Discussion 74
VI. Conclusions 78
REFERENCES 80
Table 1. General characteristics of the subjects 23
Table 2. Transverse abdominis, external oblique, multifidus, and gluteus maximus activities during the FKALL exercise 30
Table 3. Comparison of pelvic tilt and rotation angles during the FKALL exercise 31
Table 4. Muscle activities of the internal oblique, external oblique, multifidus, and gluteus maximus during the FKALL 48
Table 5. Comparison of the pelvic tilt and rotation angles during the FKALL (N=28) 50
Table 6. Demographic characteristics of the subjects 57
Table 7. Changes in abdominal and lower back muscle activities three interventions between each group 70
Table 8. Comparison of pelvic rotation angles between the groups 71
Fig. 1. BWT901CL Bluetooth inclinometer. 26
Fig. 2. Pelvic tilt and rotation angles with and without the breathing methods. 32
Fig. 3. FKALL exercise with the supporting hip in 120˚ flexion. 44
Fig. 4. FKALL exercise with hip abduction in 30˚ extension. 45
Fig. 5. Sensor device for measuring abdominal wall stretch. 60
Fig. 6. Measurement of real-time pelvic rotation using a WitMotion. 62
Fig. 7. Comparison of pelvic rotation angles between the three interventions in the CLBG and CG. 72
Fig. 8. Comparison of pelvic rotation angles between the CLBG and CG for each intervention. 73