↓ Skip to main content

Muscle Strength and Neuromuscular Control in Low-Back Pain: Elite Athletes Versus General Population

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
23 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Muscle Strength and Neuromuscular Control in Low-Back Pain: Elite Athletes Versus General Population
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00436
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Moreno Catalá, Arno Schroll, Gunnar Laube, Adamantios Arampatzis

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the athletic-based specificity of muscle strength and neuromuscular control of spine stability in chronic non-specific low-back pain (LBP). Thirty elite athletes and 29 age-matched non-athletes with (15 athletes and 15 non-athletes) and without LBP (15 athletes and 14 non-athletes) participated in the study. Muscle strength was measured during maximal isometric trunk flexion and trunk extension contractions. The neuromuscular control of spine stability was analyzed by determining trunk stiffness, trunk damping, and onset times of the lumbar and thoracic erector spinae muscles after sudden perturbations (quick release experiments) as well as maximum Lyapunov exponents (local dynamic stability) using non-linear time series analysis of repetitive lifting movements. LBP was assessed using the visual analog scale. We found lower maximal trunk extension moments (p = 0.03), higher trunk damping (p = 0.018) and shorter onset times (p = 0.03) of the investigated trunk muscles in LBP patients in both athletes and non-athletes. Trunk stiffness and the local dynamic stability did not show any differences (p = 0.136 and p = 0.375, respectively) between LBP patients and healthy controls in both groups. It can be concluded that, despite the high-level of training in athletes, both athletes and non-athletes with LBP showed the same deconditioning of the lumbar extensor muscles and developed similar strategies to ensure spine stability after sudden perturbations to protect the spine from pain and damage. The findings highlight that specific training interventions for the trunk muscles are not only crucial for individuals of the general population, but also for well-trained athletes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 170 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Master 20 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 10%
Researcher 14 8%
Student > Postgraduate 13 8%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 53 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 35 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 12%
Engineering 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 57 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 124. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#361,321
of 26,526,880 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#155
of 11,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,431
of 344,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,526,880 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,917 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,874 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.