CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Muscle activation and electromyography studiesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of real-time ultrasound imaging for biofeedback on trunk muscle contraction in healthy subjects: a preliminary study

Open access
Lin, Shanshan, Zhu, Bo, Zheng, Yiyi, Huang, Guozhi, Zeng, Qing, Wang, Chuhuai·2021·BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
DOI 10.1186/s12891-021-04006-0PMC PMC7863267

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Real-time ultrasound imaging (RUSI) has been increasingly used as a form of biofeedback when instructing and re-training muscle contraction. However, the effectiveness of the RUSI on a single sustained contraction of the lumbar multifidus (LM) and transversus abdominis (TrA) has rarely been reported. This preliminary study aimed to determine if the use of RUSI, as visual biofeedback, could enhance the ability of activation and continuous contraction of the trunk muscles including LM and TrA. Methods: Forty healthy individuals were included and randomly assigned into the experimental group and control group. All subjects performed a preferential activation of the LM and/or TrA (maintained the constraction of LM and/or TrA for 30 s and then relaxed for 2 min), while those in the experimental group also received visual feedback provided by RUSI. The thickness of LM and/or TrA at rest and during contraction (T c-max , T 15s , and T 30s ) were extracted and recorded. The experiment was repeated three times. Results: No significant differences were found in the thickness of LM at rest ( P > 0.999), T c-max (P > 0.999), and T 15s ( P = 0.414) between the two groups. However, the ability to recruit LM muscle contraction differed between groups at T 30s ( P = 0.006), with subjects in the experimental group that received visual ultrasound biofeedback maintaining a relative maximum contraction. Besides, no significant differences were found in the TrA muscle thickness at rest ( P > 0.999) and T c-max ( P > 0.999) between the two groups. However, significant differences of contraction thickness were found at T 15s ( P = 0.031) and T 30s ( P = 0.010) between the two groups during the Abdominal Drawing-in Maneuver (ADIM), with greater TrA muscle contraction thickness in the experimental group. Conclusions: RUSI can be used to provide visual biofeedback, which can promote continuous contraction, and improve the ability to activate the LM and TrA muscles in healthy subjects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12891-021-04006-0

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Thickness of LM monitored under ultrasound. a Changes of the LM thickness of a subject in the Exp group, (b) changes of the LM thickness of a subject in the control group, and (c) changes of the LM thickness in the two groups over time. # Compared with the resting state, P < 0.05; * Compared with the control group, P < 0.05
Fig. 1 Thickness of LM monitored under ultrasound. a Changes of the LM thickness of a subject in the Exp group, (b) changes of the LM thickness of a subject in the control group, and (c) changes of the LM thickness in the two groups over time. # Compared with the resting state, P < 0.05; * Compared with the control group, P < 0.05CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Thickness of TrA monitored under ultrasound. a Changes of the TrA thickness of a subject in the Exp group, (b) changes of the TrA thickness of a subject in the control group, and (c) changes of the TrA thickness in the two groups over time. # Compared with the resting state, P < 0.05; * Compared with the control group, P < 0.05
Fig. 2 Thickness of TrA monitored under ultrasound. a Changes of the TrA thickness of a subject in the Exp group, (b) changes of the TrA thickness of a subject in the control group, and (c) changes of the TrA thickness in the two groups over time. # Compared with the resting state, P < 0.05; * Compared with the control group, P < 0.05CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 20

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lin, S., Zhu, B., Zheng, Y., Huang, G., Zeng, Q., & Wang, C.
Affiliations
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (CN)
  • Zhujiang Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
Wang, Chuhuai
ORCID
Venue
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-02-05
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
142-142
ISSN
1471-2474 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12891-021-04006-0
PMC
PMC7863267
OpenAlex
W3038174144
Cited by
20
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
correction (2021-06-30)
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Guangzhou Science and Technology Program key projects (201704020122)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Myofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Keywords
real-time ultrasound, ultrasound biofeedback, visual feedback, lumbar multifidus, transversus abdominis, muscle activation, sustained contraction, abdominal drawing-in maneuver, muscle thickness
MeSH terms
Abdominal Muscles, Biofeedback, Psychology, Humans, Muscle Contraction, Ultrasonography, Low Back Pain, Healthy Volunteers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review