Is the Sørensen test valid to assess muscle fatigue of the trunk extensor muscles?

Demoulin, Christophe; Boyer, M.; Duchateau, Jacques; Grosdent, Stéphanie; Jidovtseff, Boris; Crielaard, Jean-Michel; Vanderthommen, Marc

doi:10.3233/bmr-150592

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to the plank test, the Sorensen test targets the endurance of the trunk-extensor muscles. 32 Although cocontraction of the trunk flexors and extensors occurs during both tests, including both measures in a screening examination can help to differentiate deficits in the anterior and posterior core musculature. No difference in maximum Sorensen test time between rowers at risk for LBP and those at less risk was observed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Musculoskeletal Screening to Identify Female Collegiate Rowers at Risk for Low Back Pain

Gonzalez

Diaz

Plummer

et al. 2018

Journal of Athletic Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Rowers are at risk for overuse injuries, including low back pain (LBP). Defining the utility of screening tests for identifying those at risk for LBP can aid in the development of guidelines for injury prevention. Objective To determine if the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and impairments can identify rowers at risk for developing LBP. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Athletic training room. Patients or Other Participants A total of 31 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I, female, open-weight rowers (age = 19.9 ± 1.4 years, height = 163.6 ± 30.8 cm, mass = 84.1 ± 37.63 kg); coxswains were excluded. Main Outcome Measure(s) We assessed the FMS and 5 impairment measures of the Star Excursion Balance Test, closed kinetic chain dorsiflexion range of motion, and the plank, Sorensen, and sit-and-reach tests before the fall season. Low back pain injuries were tracked by the sports medicine staff. Impairment measures were compared between the injured and uninjured athletes. The FMS cutoff score that discriminated injured from uninjured rowers was determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Impairments were compared between those at a higher versus lower risk of LBP. Results Eighteen rowers sustained an LBP injury. No differences in FMS or impairments between groups were demonstrated. The FMS receiver operating characteristic curve analysis cutoff score was 16 points (area under the curve = 0.60, specificity = 0.67, risk ratio = 1.4 [95% confidence interval = 0.91, 2.11]). Rowers with an FMS score ≤16 had a shorter plank-test time (109.5 ± 60.2 seconds) than those with less risk (175.3 ± 98.6 seconds, mean difference = 65.9 seconds, 95% confidence interval = −129.4, −2.3; P = .043). Conclusions Those with an FMS score ≤16 had a shorter plank-test hold time, indicating that a lack of core endurance may contribute to the increased risk of LBP in female rowers. An FMS score ≤16 indicated a small increased risk (1.4) of developing LBP compared with rowers who had scores >16; however, the FMS is not recommended for widespread screening of female rowers because the risk ratio was relatively small and had a wide 95% confidence interval.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…31 Sorensen Test. As described by Demoulin et al, 32 for the Sorensen test, the participants were positioned prone on a table, with the edges of the iliac crest aligned with the edge of the table. The lower body was fixed to the table with straps.…”

Section: Impairment Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Musculoskeletal Screening to Identify Female Collegiate Rowers at Risk for Low Back Pain

Gonzalez

Diaz

Plummer

et al. 2018

Journal of Athletic Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 674 studies (46.4%) were eliminated after reading the title and abstract. Another 181 studies (12.4%) were removed after reading the full-text-120 studies did not use any trunk extensor muscle endurance field-based test (8.2%) and 61 articles did not meet the established inclusion criteria (4.2%) [53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69].…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This search process identified 103 empirical studies that met the inclusion criteria (7.1%), in which 28 articles (1.9%) reported some reliability coefficients [8][9][10][11]18,[23][24][25][26][27]43,[53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69] (resulting in 43 cohort groups, as 9 studies had more than 1 group) and 75 articles (5.1%) induced the reliability (see the references in Document S1 in the Supplementary Materials Section). Figure 1 shows the flow chart of the selection process of the studies.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Reliability of Four Field-Based Trunk Extension Endurance Tests

Martínez-Romero

Ayala

Croix

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the inter- and intra-tester reliability of endurance measures obtained through trunk extension field-based tests and to explore the influence of the moderators on the reliability estimates. The reliability induction rate of trunk extension endurance measures was also calculated. A systematic search was conducted using various databases, and subsequently 28 studies were selected that reported intraclass correlation coefficients for trunk extension endurance measures. Separate meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. When possible, analyses of potential moderator variables were carried out. The inter-tester average reliability of the endurance measure obtained from the Biering-Sorensen test was intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.94. The intra-session reliability estimates of the endurance measures recorded using the Biering-Sorensen test, the prone isometric chest raise test, and the prone double straight-leg test were ICC = 0.88, 0.90, and 0.86, respectively. The inter-session average reliability of the endurance measures from the Biering-Sorensen test, the prone isometric chest raise test, and the dynamic extensor endurance test were ICC = 0.88, 0.95, and 0.99, respectively. However, due to the limited evidence available, the reliability estimates of the measures obtained through the prone isometric chest raise, prone double straight-leg, and dynamic extensor endurance tests should be considered with a degree of caution. Position control instruments, tools, and familiarization session demonstrated a statistical association with the inter-session reliability of the Biering-Sorensen test. The reliability induction rate was 72.8%. Only the trunk extension endurance measure obtained through the Biering-Sorensen test presented sufficient scientific evidence in terms of reliability to justify its use for research and practical purposes.

show abstract

“…Poor trunk extension endurance has been identified as a risk factor for the development of LBP [ 4 ]. Specifically, poor time to task failure (TTF) on the Sørensen back extension endurance test, which requires an individual to maintain the upper body in an unsupported horizontal position to the point of fatigue, predicts first-time episodes of LBP [ 5 , 6 ] and chronic LBP [ 7 ]. Although the Sørensen test has been used for the identification of LBP risk, the underlying mechanisms driving poor performance on the test are not well understood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining Physiological and Psychological Predictors of Time to Task Failure on a Virtual Reality Sørensen Test in Participants With and Without Recurrent Low Back Pain: Exploratory Study

Applegate¹,

Russ

Leitkam

et al. 2018

JMIR Serious Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSørensen trunk extension endurance test performance predicts the development of low back pain and is a strong discriminator of those with and without low back pain. Performance may greatly depend on psychological factors, such as kinesiophobia, self-efficacy, and motivation. Virtual reality video games have been used in people with low back pain to encourage physical activity that would otherwise be avoided out of fear of pain or harm. Accordingly, we developed a virtual reality video game to assess the influence of immersive gaming on the Sørensen test performance.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to determine the physiological and psychological predictors of time to task failure (TTF) on a virtual reality Sørensen test in participants with and without a history of recurrent low back pain.MethodsWe recruited 24 individuals with a history of recurrent low back pain and 24 sex-, age-, and body mass index–matched individuals without a history of low back pain. Participants completed a series of psychological measures, including the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale, Pain Resilience Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and a self-efficacy measure. The maximal isometric strength of trunk and hip extensors and TTF on a virtual reality Sørensen test were measured. Electromyography of the erector spinae, gluteus maximus, and biceps femoris was recorded during the strength and endurance trials.ResultsA two-way analysis of variance revealed no significant difference in TTF between groups (P=.99), but there was a trend for longer TTF in females on the virtual reality Sørensen test (P=.06). Linear regression analyses were performed to determine predictors of TTF in each group. In healthy participants, the normalized median power frequency slope of erector spinae (beta=.450, P=.01), biceps femoris (beta=.400, P=.01), and trunk mass (beta=−.32, P=.02) predicted TTF. In participants with recurrent low back pain, trunk mass (beta=−.67, P<.001), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (beta=−.43, P=.01), and self-efficacy (beta=.35, P=.03) predicted TTF.ConclusionsTrunk mass appears to be a consistent predictor of performance. Kinesiophobia appears to negatively influence TTF for those with a history of recurrent low back pain, but does not influence healthy individuals. Self-efficacy is associated with better performance in individuals with a history of recurrent low back pain, whereas a less steep median power frequency slope of the trunk and hip extensors is associated with better performance in individuals without a history of low back pain.

show abstract

Is the Sørensen test valid to assess muscle fatigue of the trunk extensor muscles?

Abstract: This study shows that the Sørensen test performed until failure in a young healthy population results in a reduced ability of the trunk extensor muscles to generate maximal force, and indicates that this test is valid for the assessment of fatigue in trunk extensor muscles.

Cited by 26 publications

References 41 publications

Musculoskeletal Screening to Identify Female Collegiate Rowers at Risk for Low Back Pain

Musculoskeletal Screening to Identify Female Collegiate Rowers at Risk for Low Back Pain

A Meta-Analysis of the Reliability of Four Field-Based Trunk Extension Endurance Tests

Determining Physiological and Psychological Predictors of Time to Task Failure on a Virtual Reality Sørensen Test in Participants With and Without Recurrent Low Back Pain: Exploratory Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About