A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of psoas major muscle thickness measured by sonography during active straight leg raising in subjects with and without uncontrolled lumbopelvic rotation. | LitMetric

Comparison of psoas major muscle thickness measured by sonography during active straight leg raising in subjects with and without uncontrolled lumbopelvic rotation.

Man Ther

Department of Physical Therapy, Kinetic Ergocise Based on Movement Analysis Laboratory, College of Health Science, Yonsei University, Wonju, South Korea. Electronic address:

Published: February 2016

Background: The psoas major (PM) is important for stabilizing lumbopelvic region during active straight leg raising (ASLR). Uncontrolled lumbopelvic rotation (ULPR) frequently occurs during ASLR in subjects with poor lumbo-pelvic stability and may contribute to asymmetric symptoms including pain in lumbopelvic region.

Objects: This study compared the thickness of contralateral PM (cPM) using ultrasound imaging during ASLR in subjects with and without ULPR.

Method: Healthy male subjects (18 without ULPR, 19 with ULPR) were recruited. The thickness of the cPM during rest and ASLR without loading and with a 1-kg load was measured by ultrasound imaging. The relative muscle thickness was calculated as the thickness during ASLR/thickness at rest. Two-way mixed-model analysis of variance was used to identify significant differences in the relative thickness of the cPM between groups and within a loading status. The level of statistical significance was set at α = 0.05.

Results: The resting thickness of the cPM in subjects without ULPR did not differ from that of subjects with ULPR. The relative thickness of the cPM in subjects without ULPR was significantly greater during ASLR than that in subjects with ULPR both without loading and with a load (p < 0.01). No significant change in thickness of the cPM was evident in those with ULPR.

Conclusion: The thickness of the cPM was significantly greater during ASLR in subjects without ULPR than with ULPR. This result indicates that persons with ULPR have less activation of the cPM to stabilize the lumbar spine during ASLR.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2015.07.006DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

subjects ulpr
20
thickness cpm
16
aslr subjects
12
psoas major
8
thickness
8
muscle thickness
8
active straight
8
straight leg
8
leg raising
8
subjects
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!