Rehabilitative Ultrasound Imaging of the Abdominal Muscles

Diagnostic accuracy of common clinical tests for assessing abdominal muscle function after motor-complete spinal cord injury above T6

“…13,14 Changes in muscle thickness measured from ultrasound recordings are highly correlated with changes in muscle activation recorded using surface and indwelling EMG. [15][16][17] Ultrasound has another advantage over surface EMG and manual examination, in that it can distinguish muscle activity from multiple layers of overlapping deep and superficial abdominal muscles.…”

“…The muscle thickness was measured offline and taken as the average of three measurements (Figure 2). 14,15 For both EMG and ultrasound data, if the average root mean square amplitude or muscle thickness of the two contraction trials for a given muscle and task exceeded 2 s. d. above the mean resting value (calculated from all trials), the value was defined as 'present' for the given technique and was included in the frequency analysis. [18][19][20] For each task, only the appropriate muscles were included to determine presence of response (flexion: bilateral RA; rotation: ipsilateral TrA/OI and contralateral OE; lateral bending: ipsilateral OE; hollowing: bilateral TrA/OI and Valsalva: all muscles).…”

Changes in Deep Abdominal Muscle Thickness During Common Trunk-Strengthening Exercises Using Ultrasound Imaging

“…The technique used to obtain the images of the lateral abdominal muscles and the measurement techniques have been previously described. 37, [39][40][41] The center of the transducer was placed in a transverse plane just superior to the iliac crest, in line with the mid-axillary line. To standardize the location of the transducer, the hyperechoic interface between the TrA and the thoracolumbar fascia was positioned in the right side of the ultrasound image (…”

Rehabilitative Ultrasound Imaging: The Roadmap Ahead

“…1 Although preliminary evidence has suggested that those that met the stabilization clinical prediction rule may have altered motor behavior during the abdominal drawing-in maneuver, 21 more research is needed to prospectively address this relationship. Additionally, future research is required to determine if specific measurements obtained by RUSI may be helpful in further identifying those predicted to succeed with a stabilization exercise approach.…”

“…20 This special issue of the JOSPT and another to be published in October 2007 represent an additional product of the symposium: a collection of commentaries, case reports, and research reports that document current applications and evidence for RUSI in patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders, with a goal of providing a roadmap for future research in this area. Between the 2 special issues on RUSI, 5 manuscripts were written by the symposium delegates to provide an overview of RUSI technology, 23 how RUSI has been applied in both clinical and research settings to study the musculature of the abdominal wall, 21 posterior spine, 19 and pelvic floor, 24 and the potential of RUSI as a biofeedback tool to help with rehabilitation. 4 1950s and it has proven to be an effective, safe, and relatively inexpensive tool for assessing morphologic characteristics and structural integrity of visceral organs and soft tissues.…”