Trunk muscle activity during bridging exercises on and off a Swissball

Abstract

BackgroundA Swiss ball is often incorporated into trunk strengthening programs for injury rehabilitation and performance conditioning. It is often assumed that the use of a Swiss ball increases trunk muscle activity. The aim of this study was to determine whether the addition of a Swiss ball to trunk bridging exercises influences trunk muscle activity.MethodsSurface electrodes recorded the myoelectric activity of trunk muscles during bridging exercises. Bridging exercises were performed on the floor as well as on a labile surface (Swiss ball).Results and DiscussionDuring the prone bridge the addition of an exercise ball resulted in increased myoelectric activity in the rectus abdominis and external oblique. The internal oblique and erector spinae were not influenced. The addition of a swiss ball during supine bridging did not influence trunk muscle activity for any muscles studied.ConclusionThe addition of a Swiss ball is capable of influencing trunk muscle activity in the rectus abdominis and external oblique musculature during prone bridge exercises. Modifying common bridging exercises can influence the amount of trunk muscle activity, suggesting that exercise routines can be designed to maximize or minimize trunk muscle exertion depending on the needs of the exercise population.

Trunk Muscle Activity During Lumbar Stabilization Exercises on Both a Stable and Unstable Surface

“…Stable Unstable The finding that there was no difference in trunk muscle activity between stable and unstable surfaces for the back bridge exercise is consistent with findings of previous studies, 10,15,24 thereby suggesting that trunk muscle activity is not systematically influenced by surface stability during this exercise.…”

“…This differs from the findings of a previous study that used surface electrodes, in which greater activity was observed with the unstable surface only for the RA and EO, with no difference observed for the internal obliques (IOs)/TrA. 15 This difference between studies could be attributed to a difference in the difficulty of the exercise. In the study by Lehman et al, 15 subjects placed their forearms on a Swiss ball, while in the present study we …”

“…15 This difference between studies could be attributed to a difference in the difficulty of the exercise. In the study by Lehman et al, 15 subjects placed their forearms on a Swiss ball, while in the present study we …”

“…10,15,17,24,25,27 Each exercise was performed on both a stable and an unstable surface. Instructors provided feedback to ensure that a consistent spine and lower limb posture was maintained during the exercises, for which the subjects were requested to hold their posture for 3 seconds.…”

Electromyographic Analysis of Transversus Abdominis and Lumbar Multifidus Using Wire Electrodes During Lumbar Stabilization Exercises

“…Despite a lack of statistical significance, it is noted that the activation of the EO on the side of the leg that was lifted was slightly higher for the 2 exercises with arm and leg lifts. In a previous study, Lehman et al 19 reported EO activity levels of approximately 45% MVC during the elbow-toe exercise, a value significantly lower than in the current study. Significant asymmetry of EO activation was measured with the 2 side bridge exercises, where the body was supported by the right arm and foot, with the higher activation level noted for the right EO, the side of support.…”