Abstract
Background and Purpose:
While the popularity of instability resistance training (resistance training that involves the use of unstable surfaces and devices: IRT) is evident in fitness training facilities, its effectiveness for optimal sport performance training has been questioned. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to explore the resistance training literature, which implements the use of unstable surfaces and devices to determine the suitability of IRT for rehabilitation.
Description of Topic and Related Evidence:
The criticism of IRT for athletic conditioning is based on the findings of impaired kinetic measures such as force, power and movement velocity during a bout of IRT compared to traditional resistance training with more stable surfaces or devices. However, these deficits occur concurrently with minimal changes or in some cases increases in trunk and limb muscle activation. Compared to the kinetic deficits that are reported during unstable resistance exercises, the relatively greater trunk muscle activation indicates a greater stabilizing function for the muscles. IRT exercises can also provide training adaptations for coordination and other motor control issues, which may be more important for low back pain rehabilitation than strength or power enhancements.
Relation to Clinical Practice:
Improvements in postural stability from balance training without resistance can improve force output which can then lead to a training progression involving an amalgamation of balance and IRT leading to higher load traditional resistance training.
Keywords: low back pain, injuries, strength training, balance, injury recovery, injury prevention
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Instability resistance training (IRT) devices are very popular in current training facilities. IRT involves resistance exercises either with body mass as a resistance or external loads (e.g. dumbbells, barbells) that are performed on an unstable surface or using unstable devices. It would be difficult to find a fitness facility without some sort of instability device such as Swiss balls, BOSU® balls (definition: BOth Sides Up, description; a hemispherical inflated ball that is flat on one side and convex on the other), foam rollers, wobble boards, suspended chains, ropes, or other devices. Interestingly, Swiss balls which derived their name from Swiss physical therapists, who were purportedly the first to incorporate these balls (prior to World War II) are not called Swiss balls by Swiss physical therapists. The Swiss use the term physioballs, while the Germans call them pezzi balls. No matter what these balls are labeled, balls and other instability devices presently permeate the fitness and rehabilitation environment. However popularity is not always equated with effectiveness.
The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) position stand1 on the use of instability to train the core or trunk musculature does not fully endorse instability training for athletic or sport performance training. They state, “ground based free weights are highly recommended for athletic conditioning of the core musculature as they can provide the moderately unstable environments to augment core and limb muscle activation while still providing maximal or near maximal force and power outputs”.1,p. 111 However, they balance that statement by indicating, “Individuals who are involved with rehabilitation, health‐related fitness pursuits or cannot access or are less interested in the training stresses associated with ground based free weight lifts, can also receive beneficial resistance training (RT) adaptations with instability devices and exercises to achieve functional health benefits”.1,p. 111 Thus it is necessary to examine the literature to determine why such delineation is recommended between trained, health enthusiasts and the previously injured recovering population.
The purpose of this clinical commentary is to investigate the resistance training literature that examines the utilization of unstable surfaces and devices when performing resistance exercises either with body mass (callisthenic exercises) or with external loads (e.g. barbells and dumbells) to determine the role of IRT for rehabilitation. Much of the literature has investigated the acute and chronic responses to instability training with healthy, young individuals. Thus, the second purpose of this commentary is to apply these findings regarding the use of IRT to injury prevention and rehabilitation.
EFFECT OF IRT ON FUNCTIONAL PERFORMANCE AND MUSCLE ACTIVATION
The primary basis for the CSEP position stand's advocacy of traditional ground based free weights (e.g. squats, dead lifts, Olympic lifts) over IRT (performing resistance exercises either on an unstable platform or using an unstable implement) for athletes is associated with the predominant literature that demonstrates significant force reductions when performing force or power actions under unstable versus stable conditions. Table 1 illustrates from a sample of instability studies that investigate force or power output during exercises performed under unstable conditions compared to the same exercises performed under stable conditions. Force or power, on average, decreases 29.3% with an effect size2 of 2.1 indicating a large magnitude of change. As an example, to highlight particular studies, the performance of resistance exercises while sitting or lying on a physioball resulted in decreased force output during leg extension (↓70%)3, plantar flexion (↓20%)3, and isometric chest press (↓60%).4 Whereas isometric force tends to be reduced, 1RM isokinetic bench press strength on a physioball compared to a stable bench press was maintained.5,6 Koshida et al7 suggested that the statistically significant yet minor deficits in force, power and velocity (6‐10%) with a dynamic bench press performed on a physioball may not compromise the training response. Since, Koshida and colleagues7 used 50% of 1 RM, the possible training effects may be more applicable to power and endurance rather than maximal and hypertrophic strength training. In addition to instability‐induced force and power deficits, instability exercises have been shown to adversely affect movement velocity and range of motion when performing a squat.8 Hence the ability to exert force, power or move at high velocity is strongly related to an individual's balance and stability when performing the task. For example, Behm et al9 reported a significant correlation of 0.65 between a static balance measure (number of contacts with the floor while balancing on a wobble board) and maximum skating speed with young hockey players. In other words, if an individual can improve their balance and stability then strength and power may increase as well.
Table 1.
Sample of Force and Performance Data Comparing Stable to Unstable Conditions.
Authors(s)/Year | n | Intervention | % change | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Kornecki and Zschorlich 199496 | 12 | Pushing action with varying degrees of freedom (force) | −20% | 1.93 |
Pushing action with varying degrees of freedom (power) | −40% | 2.22 | ||
Behm et al. 200222 | 8 | Leg extension MVC force under stable versus unstable conditions | −70.50% | 5.6 |
Plantar flexion MVC force under stable versus unstable conditions | −20.20% | 1.6 | ||
Anderson and Behm 200497 | 10 | Bench press under stable versus unstable conditions | −59.60% | 5.2 |
McBride et al. 200698 | 9 | Isometric squat peak force output in stable vs. unstable conditions | −83.80% | 2.48 |
MVC squat force output in stable vs. unstable | −82.90% | 3.9 | ||
Sparkes and Behm 201015 | 18 | Bench press under stable versus unstable conditions | −42% | 1.7 |
Drink water et al. 200799 | 14 | Squat power under stable and unstable conditions | −24% | 3.8 |
Squat concentric force under stable and unstable conditions | −18% | 3.8 | ||
Cowlcy ct al. 200799 | 14 | Work capacity of barbell chest press on stable versus unstable ball pre-training | −12% | 0.5 |
Work capacity of barbell chest press on stable versus unstable ball post-training | −3.70% | 0.01 | ||
Strength of barbell chest press on stable versus unstable ball pre-training | 2% | 0.5 | ||
Strength of barbell chest press on stable versus unstable ball post-training | 0.70% | 0.16 | ||
Koshida et al. 2008100 | 20 | Peak power during dynamic bench press under stable vs. unstable conditions | −12.50% | 0.61 |
Force during dynamic bench press under stable vs. unstable conditions | −6.20% | 0.23 | ||
Velocity during dynamic bench press under stable vs. unstable conditions | −11% | 0.62 | ||
Goodman et al. 2008101 | 13 | Bench press 1 RM strength under stable versus unstable conditions | −0.50% | 0.06 |
Kohler et al. 2010102 | 30 | 10 RM shoulder press strength under stable load/stable surface vs. unstable load/unstable surface | −30% | 0.72 |
Chulvi-Medrano et al. 2010103 | 31 | Deadlift force differences under stable vs. unstable conditions | −52.60% | 7.46 |
Total | 179 | Mean | −29.3% | 2.155 |
Adhering to the concept of training specificity,10 balance only training studies (without resistance) have generally been very successful at improving measures of balance and proprioception. Table 2 demonstrates from a sample of balance only training studies (without resistance) that balance and proprioception measures improved by 105% with an effect size of 1.2 indicating a large magnitude of change. Improvements in balance and proprioception not only provide positive benefits for reducing the incidence of accidents such as falls but also improve functional performance measures such as strength, power, running, and other activities. Table 3 results demonstrate that balance training alone with no strength, power, or functional training on average improved measures of functional performance by 31% with an effect size of 0.58 indicating a moderate magnitude of change. Thus, just by improving balance or postural stability without concomitant RT, functional performance can be enhanced. These findings are of particular importance to the field of rehabilitation when musculoskeletal injuries such as ankle sprains can impede balance and impact functional performance. Furthermore, it is common that early in the rehabilitation process force and power production can be hampered by inflammation, pain, and stiffness and thus a balance only training program may be an important initial phase to ameliorate an individual's strength and power. A balance‐training program is a safe and productive first step in the rehabilitation plan, which can then be followed by progressive levels of resistance on unstable surfaces or with unstable devices (IRT).
Table 2.
Sample of Studies Examining the Effect of Balance Training on Balance and Stability.
Authors(s)/Year | n | Intervention | % change | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Tsang et al. 200384 | 42 | Comparison of static standing and limits of stability tests for maximum excursion between elderly control and Tai Chi subjects | 13% | 1.09 |
Stanton et al. 2004104 | 18 | Swill ball training (6 weeks) on Sarhmann test of core stability | 450% | 2.88 |
Bruhn et al. 2004105 | 33 | Sensorimotor training on postural stabilisation | 6.8% | 0.1 |
Li et al. 2004106 | 188 | Functional balance measures on the Berg balance scale with 12 month study period | 7.90% | − |
Gioftsidou et al. 2006107 | 13 | Balance training (12 weeks) on Instability index | 51% | 1.11 |
Kean et al. 2006108 | 24 | Static balance time with fixed foot balance training | 9.50% | 0.57 |
Yaggie et al. 2006109 | 36 | Balance training effects on balance | 68.5% | 1.43 |
Nagy et al. 2007110 | 19 | 8 week balance training on anteroposterior path of elderly | 1.30% | 0.18 |
8 week training on mediolateral sway path of elderly | 30.00% | 4.17 | ||
Spennewyn 2008111 | 30 | Balance outcomes in fixed resistance equipment | 49% | − |
Balance outcomes in free form resistance equipment | 245% | − | ||
Panics et al. 2008112 | 20 | Pproprioception training on knee joint position | 170.90% | − |
Sato et al. 2009113 | 20 | Core Strength training on Star Excursion balance | 11 | 0.82 |
Schilling et al. 2009114 | 19 | Comparisons of activity-specific balance confidence pre and post intervention | 4.10% | 0.96 |
Kibele & Behm 200914 | 40 | 7 weeks of instability training and traditional resistance training on balance testing on a wobble board: static balance | 4.40% | 1.5 |
Kibele & Behm 200914 | 40 | 7 weeks of instability training and traditional resistance training on balance testing on a balance beam: dynamic balance | 14.70% | 0.67 |
Granacher et al. 2011115 | 30 | Balance training on postural sway in 6-7 year olds | 7.80% | 0.21 |
Balance training on CMJ with 6-7 year olds | 5.90% | 0.32 | ||
Granacher et al. 2011116 | 32 | Combined balance & strength training on center of pressure displacement in middle-aged adults | 11.70% | 0.42 |
Ogaya et al. 2011117 | 23 | Wobble board training (9 weeks) in the elderly: standing on the wobble board | 113% | 1.17 |
Muelbauer et al. 2011118 | 20 | Center of pressure: Firm ground, eyes open vs foam ground, eyes open for two-legged stance | 65.20% | 2.71 |
Center of pressure: Firm ground, eyes open vs foam, eyes open for step stance condition | 32.10% | 1.71 | ||
Center of pressure: Firm ground, eyes open vs foam, eyes open for tandem stance condition | 26.30% | 1.2 | ||
Center of pressure: Firm ground, eyes open vs foam, eyes open for one-legged stance condition | 28.60% | 1.64 | ||
Total | 647 | Means | 105% | 1.243 |
Table 3.
Sample of Studies Examining the Effect of Balance Training on Functional Measures.
Authors(s)/Year | n | Intervention | % change | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Myer et al. 2006119 | 11 | Dynamic stabilization and balance training on vertical jump | 9.30% | 0.75 |
Dynamic stabilization and balance training on hamstrings torque | 17.40% | 0.89 | ||
Kean et al. 2006108 | 7 | Fixed foot balance training on CMJ height | 9.50% | 0.57 |
Yaggie et al. 2006109 | 36 | Balance training effects on vertical jump | −0.05% | 0.02 |
Balance training effects on shuttle run time | 3% | 0.27 | ||
Taube et al. 2007120 | 23 | Vertical ground reaction force following sensorimotor training | 14.9% | 1.01 |
Oliver et al. 2009121 | 8 | Functional balance training in collegiate women volleyball athletes on single leg squats (right) | 80.9% | − |
Functional balance training in collegiate women volleyball athletes on single leg squats (left) | 141.7% | − | ||
Functional balance training in collegiate women soccer athletes on single leg squats (right) | 32.8% | − | ||
Functional balance training in collegiate women soccer athletes on single leg squats (left) | 4.7% | − | ||
Total | 85 | Means | 31.43% | 0.585 |
The question would arise as to whether the subsequent step would be to implement separate balance and stable RT exercises programs or to attempt to incorporate both balance (stability) and resistance into the same exercises (IRT). Based on the predominant instability‐induced decreases in force, power and velocity (Table 1) when compared to traditional stable RT exercises, it has been suggested that trained athletes need a greater adaptive stimuli (force, velocity, and rate of force production)11,12 which may not achieve the training threshold when performed on unstable devices.13 However, a number of IRT studies have reported substantial training gains that in some cases were comparable to those achieved with traditional stable RT programs. Table 4 demonstrates that IRT programs achieved on average 22% gains in functional performance measures with an effect size of 0.98 indicating a large magnitude of change with 4‐10 weeks of training. For example, untrained individuals involved in seven14 or eight weeks15 of either traditional stable or IRT found no differences in force, static balance, or functional performance between the groups. All measures improved over time for both the unstable and stable trained groups. In the Sparkes and Behm study,15 there was a trend (p=0.08) for the unstable training group to increase unstable forces to a greater extent. In other words, the instability‐trained subjects could exert greater forces when experiencing an unstable environment. Since in the every day environment, unstable situations can arise such as slipping on an icy sidewalk, wet grass or a muddy patch, the ability to respond with higher forces could preclude or minimize chances for injury. However, if when performing unstable exercises there is a considerable decrease in force and power output compared to traditional stable exercises, how is it possible that prolonged IRT programs could provide similar strength training enhancements in the short term (i.e. 7‐8 weeks) as compared to traditional stable RT programs?
Table 4.
Sample of Studies Examining the Effect of Instability Training on Performance Measures.
Authors(s)/Year | n | Intervention | % change | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Stanforth et al. 1998122 | 20 | 10 week resistaball training study on double leg lowering | 49.60% | 1.17 |
10 week resistaball training study on cybex back extension | 156.20% | 1.98 | ||
10 week resistaball training study on cybex abdominal | 94.80% | 1.09 | ||
Bruhn et al. 2004105 | 33 | Sensorimotor training on MVC | 6.7% | 0.21 |
Sensorimotor training on squat jump height | 4.6% | 0.21 | ||
Tsimaras et al. 2004123 | 15 | Muscle strength and dynamic balance ability training at 300 deg/s | 20% | 0.68 |
Muscle strength and dynamic balance ability training at 60 deg/s | 13.60% | 0.41 | ||
Brahn et al. 2006124 | 18 | Strength training & sensorimotor training on muscle strength on development of bilateral 1 RM | 37.00% | 1.11 |
Carter et al. 200640 | 20 | Stability ball training on static back endurance | 30.30% | 0.7 |
Stability ball training on side bridge test | 5.70% | 0.52 | ||
Gruber et al. 2007125 | 33 | Sensorimotor training on MVC | 0.53% | 0.05 |
Cowley et al. 200799 | 14 | Instability training using stability ball platform on 1RM strength during barbell chest press exercise | 15.50% | 3.1 |
Instability training using flat bench platform on 1RM strength during barbell chest press exercise | 17.40% | 3.8 | ||
Thompson et al. 2007126 | 18 | Club Head speed results in older golfers after functional training | 4.90% | 0.53 |
Cressey et al. 2007127 | 19 | 10 weeks lower body unstable surface training on Bounce drop jump power | 0.8% | 0.11 |
10 weeks of lower body unstable surface training on CMJ power | 0.0% | 0 | ||
10 weeks of lower body unstable surface training on 40 yard sprint time | 1.8% | 0.82 | ||
10 weeks of lower body unstable surface training on T-test times | 2.9% | 1.33 | ||
Cowley et al. 200799 | 14 | Instability resistance training on 1 RM strength during barbell chest-press on a stability ball | 15% | 3.06 |
Instability resistance training work capacity during barbell chest-press on a stability ball | 27% | 3.02 | ||
Kibele et al. 200914 | 40 | 7 weeks of instability training and traditional resistance training on strength during leg extension | 9.50% | 0.32 |
7 weeks of instability training and traditional resistance training on shuttle run time | 20% | 0.2 | ||
Sekendiz et al. 2010128 | 21 | Swiss ball core strength training on trunk flexor strength | 28.50% | 1.19 |
Swiss ball core strength training on trunk extensor strength | 23.60% | 0.92 | ||
Swiss ball core strength training on lower limb extensor strength | 8.50% | 0.44 | ||
Swiss ball core strength training on lower limb flexor strength | 36.50% | 1.66 | ||
Sparkes & Behm 201015 | 18 | Instability resistance training (8 weeks) on MVIC unstable / stable force ratio | 21% | 1 |
Instability resistance training (8 weeks) on CMJ | 5.7% | 1 | ||
Instability resistance training program (8 weeks) on MVIC forces | 23.6% | 0.44 | ||
Saeterbakken et al. 2011129 | 24 | Core stability training on throwing velocity in female handball players | 4.90% | 0.2 |
Granacher et al. 2011116 | 32 | Combined balance & strength training on CMJ in middle-aged adults | 4.10% | 0.22 |
Combined balance & strength training on plantar flexors MVC in middle-aged adults | 19.30% | 0.59 | ||
Combined balance & strength training on plantar flexors isokinetic force in middle-aged adults | 16.50% | 0.49 | ||
Total | 339 | Means | 22.0% | 0.98 |
The common finding of instability‐induced de‐creased force or power compared to traditional RT exercises is not always accompanied by a similar impediment in muscle activation. Whether muscle activation is substantially reduced depends on the severity of the unstable condition. Many of the studies in the literature report that the demands of lifting while supported on an unstable surface cause an increase in core muscle activation, in order to maintain control.16 Increased core muscle activation when performing the same exercises under moderately unstable versus stable conditions has been shown when performing chest press,4,17,18 push‐ups,19 and squats.20 Table 5 highlights a sample of studies that examined trunk stabilizer muscle activation when performing exercises under stable and unstable conditions. On average, trunk muscle activation increased by 47.3% with an effect size of 2.48 indicating a large magnitude of change. It should be noted that there is a substantial degree of variability between these studies. For example, Martins et al21 reported serratus anterior muscle activation deficits ranging from 27‐106% when performing push‐ups under unstable versus stable conditions.
Table 5.
Sample of Studies Examining EMG Data Under Stable versus Unstable Conditions - Trunk Stabilizer Muscle Activity.
Authors(s)/Year | n | Intervention | % change | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Vera-Garcia et al. 2000130 | 8 | External oblique muscle performing a curl up on a stable bench vs. moderate instability | 101.80% | - |
External oblique muscle performing a curl up on a stable bench vs. extreme instability | −15.50% | - | ||
Behm et al. 200590 | 11 | EMG for lumbosacral erector spinae during stable exercises vs. unstable exercises | 4.70% | 0.59 |
EMG for lower abdominal stabilizers during stable exercises vs. unstable exercises | 27.90% | 0.82 | ||
Anderson & Behm 2005131 | 14 | EMG activity of the abdominal stabilizer muscles during the smith machine squat vs. unstable squat | 29.60% | 2.8 |
EMG activity of the abdominal stabilizer muscles during the free squat vs. unstable squat | 18.60% | 2.7 | ||
EMG of the lumbo-sacral erector spinae during the free squat vs. unstable squat | 22.90% | 4.7 | ||
EMG of the lumbo-sacral erector spinae during the smith machine squat vs. unstable squat | 20.00% | 6.7 | ||
EMG of the upper lumbar erector spinae during the smith machine squat vs. unstable squat | 33.80% | − | ||
EMG of the upper lumbar erector spinae during the free squat vs. unstable squat | 22.90% | − | ||
EMG of the soleus during the smith machine squat vs. unstable squat | 73.10% | 16.3 | ||
EMG of the soleus during the free squat vs. unstable squat | 58.50% | 10.7 | ||
Marshall et al. 2006132 | 12 | Transversus abdominus during squats performed with a stable surface vs. Swiss ball | −56.70% | 0.35 |
Marshall et al. 2006133 | 14 | Transversus abdominus with a swiss ball vs. stable surfaces | −57.10% | 0.48 |
Freeman et al. 2006134 | 10 | Right erector spinae during push-up: no legs vs. standard | 4.50% | 0.04 |
Left erector spinae during push-up: no legs vs. standard | −85.20% | 2.3 | ||
Norwood et al. 2007135 | 15 | Latissimus dorsi under stable and dual instability conditions | 180.50% | 0.98 |
Erector spinae under stable and dual instability conditions | 875.90% | 1.9 | ||
Sternlicht et al. 2007136 | 41 | Stability ball crunch with a traditional crunch on upper rectus muscle | −30.70% | 0.44 |
Bressel et al. 2009137 | 12 | 50% of 1RM vs. BOSU trainer with free weight squat exercise on transversus/internal oblique | −12.70% | 0.28 |
50% of 1RM vs BOSU trainer with the free weight squat exercise on erector spinae | 10.70% | 0.21 | ||
Willardson et al. 200926 | 12 | Transverse abdominus/internal oblique activity for Back Squat stable 50% of 1RM vs. BOSU 50% of 1RM | −26.90% | 0.64 |
Erector spinae activity for Back Squat stable 50% of 1RM vs. BOSU 50% of 1RM | 14.50% | 0.34 | ||
Schwanbeck et al. 2009138 | 6 | Erector spinae with a free weight squat to smith machine squat | −45.50% | 0.59 |
Kohler et al. 2010102 | 30 | Lower erector spinae with a shoulder press under unstable load/unstable surface vs. stable load/stable surface conditions | 24% | 0.24 |
Upper erector spinae with a shoulder press under unstable load/unstable surface vs. stable load/stable surface conditions | 37% | 0.49 | ||
Total | 185 | Means | 47.33% | 2.48 |
A rationale for these discrepancies is the extent of instability. Studies that implement a higher degree of instability can result in a decrease in muscle activation. For example, Behm et al22 had subjects perform either a leg extension or plantar flexion resistance exercise while seated on a stable bench or an unstable physioball. When performing the leg extensions, there was only one point of stable contact with the floor making this exercise more unstable compared to the plantar flexion exercise where both feet were in contact with the floor resulting in only moderate instability. Compared to the stable control condition, the more unstable leg extension exercise resulted in a 70.5% drop in leg extension force whereas the less or moderately unstable plantar flexion exercise caused a 20.2% decrease in force. Whereas quadriceps activation diminished 40.3% (highly unstable), plantar flexor activation remained relatively stable with an insignificant decrease of 2.9% (moderately unstable). Therefore, to achieve or maintain a sufficient extent of muscle activation, the degree of instability should be moderate rather than high. For example, while standing on a physioball may be an impressive feat of balance, attempting to perform resistance exercises at the same time would result in low muscle activation levels.
Contrary to studies that report greater core muscle activation when comparing similar unstable exercises to stable exercises with similar absolute resistance, there is compelling evidence that traditional RT exercises such as squats and dead lifts with typical strength training resistance (i.e. 70‐80% of 1 RM) produced greater activation of the erector spinae muscles versus unstable callisthenic exercises.23,24,25 Willardson et al26 reported greater rectus abdominis and transversus abdominis/internal oblique activity and no significant differences for the external obliques and erector spinae when performing an overhead press with 75% of 1RM under stable conditions versus 50% of 1‐RM on a hemispherical BOSU® ball. In summary, Willardson and colleagues26 did not report any advantage for core activation when training with a hemispherical BOSU® ball. However, it is sometimes difficult to entice re‐creational or novice fitness enthusiasts or persons involved in rehabilitation to consistently train with loads equal to 75‐80% or more of their 1 RM. For these individuals, the lower force and comparable EMG activity under unstable conditions may help in their motivation to adhere to a training program.
Based on the near linear force‐EMG relationship, muscle activation correlates well with force output.27 If with moderate instability, force is depressed but activation is not substantially affected; according to the force‐EMG relation, there must be a force component missing. The similar extent of muscle activation accompanied by decreased force with instability exercises when compared to traditional RT exercises suggests that the dynamic motive forces of the muscles (the ability to apply external force) may be transferred into greater stabilizing functions (greater emphasis on isometric contractions).4 Again this would be beneficial for rehabilitation purposes as it is inadvisable to force a recuperating weaker muscle to exert extremely high forces. However, according to the orderly recruitment of motoneuron concept,28 low intensity contractions tend to predominantly activate the lower threshold, slow twitch, type I fibres. For rehabilitation purposes, it may be more productive if a greater spectrum of muscle fibers could be activated and subjected to healthy stress to accelerate the recovery process. The use of a moderately unstable environment would allow the combination of lower external forces to be placed on the recuperating muscles albeit with a relatively higher degree of activation, which through both motive and stabilizing functions would provide positive training adaptations for a wider range of muscle fibers.29 These positive training adaptations may apply to the prevention and recuperation of both core (trunk) and limb injuries and in cases of degeneration.
EFFECT OF INSTABILITY ON CO‐CONTRACTIONS
Generally, co‐contractile activity increases when training on unstable support surfaces.22 The role of the antagonist under unstable or uncertain conditions would primarily be to control the position of the limb when producing force. Antagonist activity is reported to increase when uncertainty exists in the task.30,31 Increased antagonist activity may also be present to increase joint stiffness32 and hence stability.33 Furthermore, co‐contractions are important for joint protection34 in order to safeguard joints from excessive forces.35
While increased antagonist activity could be utilized for joint and muscle protection, to improve motor control, balance,36 and mechanical impedance (opposition to a disruptive force),33 it would also contribute to force deficits during unstable conditions by providing greater resistance to the intended motion. However, continued training may result in less co‐activations.37 The instability‐induced higher muscle activation and co‐contractions while exerting lower force which could be an advantage for rehabilitating injuries such as sprains and strains, might not be as appropriate for some other conditions such as osteoarthritis. Based on the assumption of near linear force‐EMG relations,27 the high muscle activation should produce similar amounts of internal force production. In conjunction with instability‐induced greater co‐contractions, internal muscle and joint tension could be high which could lead to compressional pain with an arthritic joint. Hence, caution should be used if recommending IRT in a rehabilitation setting for those with osteoarthritis, as internal muscle tension may remain high.
LOW BACK PAIN (LBP)
A strong trunk or core provides a base for the torques generated by the limbs when performing daily and athletic activities.29 Reeves and colleagues38 explained that training the core musculature improves the robustness of the stabilizing system, potentially protecting against low back injuries. Durall et al39 indicated that there were no new incidences of low back pain (LBP) reported in collegiate gymnasts that participated in a 10‐week core muscle‐training program that incorporated progressive manual loading of the side bridge and prone back extension exercises in addition to their normal trunk flexion exercises. The progressive application of IRT exercises may play a strategic role with the prevention and treatment of LBP.39,40 Specific training to ameliorate the stabilizing functions of spinal muscles is an important factor in the rehabilitation of LBP.41 Increased strength of low back muscles is not the most important consideration for the prevention of LBP.42–44 However, increased strength can provide some protection when higher torques are generated with certain athletic skills or work‐related tasks.45–47 Factors that are more highly correlated with LBP are decreased muscular endurance48,49 and impaired neuromuscular coordination.50–52 To ensure spinal stability, there must be coordinated activation of the core musculature. Hubley‐Kozey et al53 noted greater consistency with the activation sequences of abdominal wall muscles during a supine bilateral leg‐raising task among individuals that were better able to control lumbopelvic motion. This finding was especially apparent during phases of the task in which the hips and knees were extended, creating greater resistive torque.
This coordinated muscle stabilization is vital since the ligaments have limited potential to stabilize the vertebral column. Lumbar spine ligaments have been reported to fail under compressive loads of approximately 90N,54 whereas the mass of the body in a standing position exceeds 10,000N during dynamic lifting tasks.55 Clearly, the ability to withstand these large forces is dependent on additional muscular stabilization. The muscles most responsible for the local stabilization are provided by the local abdominal (e.g. transversus abdominus, internal obliques) and paraspinal (e.g. multifidus) muscles, which increase the stiffness of the spine to enhance stability. These muscles transfer torques and angular momentum during performance of integrated kinetic chain activities such as throwing or kicking.56–58
Panjabi proposed that an active neural subsystem controls the recruitment of the core musculature with feed‐forward and feedback mechanisms.54,59 Feed‐forward mechanisms are pre‐planned motor programs in preparation for movement, whereas feedback mechanisms are utilized to fine tune motor programs as skills are performed with greater efficiency over time. The objective of IRT is to stress the feed‐forward and feedback systems to reprogram them for healthy and efficient functioning. Hence, the prevention of LBP and in some cases limb and joint injuries can be based on the ability of the core muscles to anticipate and respond to movement in order to stabilize the vertebral system.41,60
Since the stiffness of a vertebral joint can be achieved with contractions as low as 25% of MVC56 and the efficiency of the multifidus can be improved with training loads of 30‐40% of MVC,61 it is unnecessary to use excessive loads. Furthermore, since type I (slow twitch) fibers comprise the majority (>80%) of the erector spinae,62 multifidus, and longissimus thoracis63 muscles in healthy males and females, lower loads with higher repetitions should be the most appropriate training stress for the prevention or rehabilitation of low back problems. Even with the instability‐induced lower forces outputs (compared to similar stable exercises); the higher instability‐induced muscle activation,13,29 and the use of higher repetitions will ensure an increase in muscle fiber recruitment and eventual activation of higher threshold motor units (type II; fast twitch).64 Therefore, the low back stabilizing musculature can respond positively to multiple sets that involve high repetitions (e.g. >15 per set) especially under unstable conditions.1,13 Supporting the body on an unstable surface will elicit an increase in core muscle activation to maintain postural equilibrium during a given exercise.65 Jorgensen et al66 demonstrated moderate to high activation levels (i.e. 60‐80% MVC) of the rectus abdominis, external oblique abdominis, erector spinae, and trapezius in untrained women that performed progressively more difficult versions of the supine bridge, quadruped, side bridge, and prone plank. These findings suggest that for untrained individuals, the utilization of body mass and manipulation of resistive torque via postural adjustments can sufficiently load the core musculature to increase strength and localize muscular endurance.
EFFECTS OF MOTOR CONTROL ON LOW BACK PAIN (LBP)
Appropriate coordination or motor control of the core muscles may be as or more important than the extent of trunk muscle activation or strengthening in patients with LBP.50 There are numerous studies that report motor control deficits of the core muscles with patients with LBP.51,52,67 Deep trunk stabilizers (i.e. transversus abdominus and multifidus) respond with anticipatory postural adjustments (APA) to movements of the upper or lower limbs.51,52,68 In healthy individuals, the activation of stabilizing muscles precedes the instant of force application.69,70 Individuals with LBP tend to display delays or disruptions in this protective APA.51,52 A delayed reflex response of trunk muscles is reported to be a risk factor for low back injuries in athletes.71 Furthermore, Radebold et al72 reported that the antagonist muscle group was delayed in contracting while the agonist was delayed in relaxing during quick trunk flexion and extension with chronic LBP. Chronic LBP has also been associated with early or over recruitment of certain stabilizing muscles. Ferguson et al73 found that the erector spinae with chronic LBP subjects contracted earlier and longer during lifting tasks compared to healthy controls. Exercises that can re‐program appropriate anticipatory, concomitant postural adjustments as well as appropriate motor coordination to deactivate the appropriate muscles upon movement completion would be important for the prevention and rehabilitation of LBP.
Furthermore, the sensitivity of afferent feedback pathways can be improved with balance and motor skill training,67 resulting in quicker onset times of stabilizing muscles.74 For example, a back extensor rehabilitation‐training program of two weeks duration reduced reaction times in patients with LBP to a similar time as that of healthy controls.75 IRT may promote agonist‐antagonist co‐contractions with shorter latency periods that allow for rapid stiffening and protection of joint complexes.13 Thus, exercises that can improve the coordination50,67,76 and extent40,77 of core muscular activation potentially enhance the prevention and rehabilitation of LBP as well as accompanying extremity injuries. Traditional RT can accomplish the same muscle activation goals but may necessitate the use of greater resistances. On the other hand, compared to traditional RT exercises, instability‐based exercise programs appear to require more complex and difficult movements for ongoing progression.29 Thus neither stable nor unstable resistance training should be considered as an overall panacea.
PREVENTION OF INJURIES TO THE EXTREMITIES
Neuromuscular control problems can increase the chances for lower back and extremity injuries.78–81 The incidence of ankle sprains in a group of volleyball players was reduced with balance training,82 which may be related to the improved discrimination of ankle inversion movements found with wobble board training.83 Similarly, the use of Tai Chi has been reported to improve knee joint proprioception84 and functional balance85 in elderly individuals. IRT exercises have been reported to be effective in decreasing the incidence of LBP and improving the sensory efficiency of soft tissues that stabilize the knee and ankle joints.40,76,86 The APA used to pre‐stiffen joints prior to movement is not unique to the spine and has been shown to occur in peripheral joints as well.87 The contraction of the upper trapezius, biceps and rotator cuff of the shoulder complex87 has been shown to occur in anticipation of movement in healthy subjects. Therefore, IRT of the upper body may help to improve stability of the shoulder joint. IRT may improve both muscular balance and strength which may be useful in prevention of sports injuries and also aid in the recuperation of individuals who cannot withstand heavier loads or high resistance.
UNILATERAL TRAINING AS A FORM OF INSTABILITY
Instability can also be achieved without unstable devices such as balls, wobble boards and foam rollers. Typically, resistance exercises are more often bilateral using either a barbell or a pair of dumbbells. However the majority of activities of daily living, occupational tasks and sport actions are unilateral (e.g. tennis, squash, baseball),88 and thus unilateral exercises may be more beneficial because they adhere to the principle of training specificity.89 Behm et al90 reported greater erector spinae activation during the unilateral shoulder press and greater transversus abdominus and internal oblique activity with the unilateral chest press. Rather than using an unstable device, unilateral resisted actions may provide a disruptive torque to the body, thus providing another type of unstable condition. Hence, an effective strategy to activate the spinal stabilizers while training the upper limbs would be to use one dumbbell during the action.91 Unilateral contractions can also stimulate neural activity in the contralateral but inactive limb, referred to as cross education.92 Other studies have reported crossover fatigue effects from a unilateral exercise to the same contralateral limb with the leg extensors,93 biceps brachii,94 and dorsal interosseus (minor effects).95 Therefore, by training the contralateral healthy limb, the injured limb will receive neural stimulation and may maintain greater strength, while also stimulating activation of the core muscles.
CONCLUSIONS
Some of the characteristics of IRT exercises that are not conducive to optimal strength or power training for athletes, may be favorable for rehabilitation. The instability‐induced deficits in force compared to traditional stable RT exercises, which dampen the strength training stimuli in trained individuals, can be of sufficient intensity for a recuperating muscle. While, these lower external forces exert less, but healthy stress on a more injury‐susceptible joint, the less dramatic changes or even increases in trunk and limb muscle activation provide greater stabilizing functions to protect recovering muscles and articulations. Greater coordination training challenges with instability exercises should promote motor control adaptations (i.e. co‐activations, anticipatory postural adjustments) that are especially important with LBP conditions. Physical therapists should consider IRT as a progressive component in the rehabilitation training program that may begin with solely balance training (no load), progressing to balance challenges with resistance (IRT) to traditional ground based RT with greater loads and intensities.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Ms. Carrie Ryan in compiling the summary data for the tables within this manuscript.
References
- 1.Behm DG, Drinkwater EJ, Willardson JM, Cowley PM. Canadian Society for Exercise Phytsiology Position Stand: The use of instability to train the core in athletic and non-athletic conditioning. Applied Physiology Nutrition Metabolism. 2010;35:11–14 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillside N.J.: L. Erbraum Associates; 1988 [Google Scholar]
- 3.Behm DG, Button D, Power KE, Anderson KG, Connors M. Relative muscle activation with ice hockey actions. Can. J. Appl. Physiol. 2002;27:S4. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Anderson K, Behm DG. Maintenance of EMG activity and loss of force output with instability. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2004;18:637–640 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Cowley PM, Sforzo GA, Swensen T. Efficacy of instability resistance training. Int. J. Sports Med. 2007;10:829–835 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Goodman CA, Pearce AJ, Nicholes CJ, Gatt BM, Fairweater IH. No difference in 1RM strength and muscle activation during the barbell chest press on a stable and unstable surface. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008;22(88–94). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Koshida S, Urabe Y, Miyashita K, Iwai K, Kagimori A. Muscular outputs during dynamic bench press under stable versus unstable conditions. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008;22:1584–1588 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Drinkwater E, Pritchett E, Behm DG. Effect of Instability and Resistance on Unintentional Squat Lifting Kinetics. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2007;2:400–413 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Behm DG, Wahl MJ, Button DC, Power KE, Anderson KG. Relationship between hockey skating speed and selected performance measures. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2005;19(2):326–331 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Behm DG. Neuromuscular implications and applications of resistance training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 1995;9(4):264–274 [Google Scholar]
- 11.Baechle TR, Earle RW, Wathen D. Resistance training. In: Baechle TR, Earle RW, eds. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2008:381–411 [Google Scholar]
- 12.Kraemer WJ, Adams K, Cafarelli E, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2002;34:364–380 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Behm DG, Drinkwater EJ, Willardson JM, Cowley PM. The use of instability to train the core musculature. Applied Physiology Nutrition Metabolism. 2010;35:5–23 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kibele A, Behm DG. Seven weeks of instability and traditional resistance training effects on strength, balance and functional performance. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2009;23(9):2443–2450 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Sparkes R, Behm DG. Training adaptations associated with an 8 week instability resistance training program with recreationally active individuals. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2010;24(7):1917–1924 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Grenier SG, Vera-Garcia FJ, McGill SM. Abdominal response during curl-ups on both stable and labile surfaces. Phys. Ther. 2000;86:564–569 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Arjmand N, Shirazi-Adl A. Biomechanics of changes in lumbar posture in static lifting. Spine. 2005;30:2637–2648 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Vera-Garcia FJ, Elvira JL, Brown SH, McGill SM. Effects of abdominal stabilization maneuvers on the control of spine motion and stability against sudden trunk perturbations. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2007;17:556–567 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Holtzmann M, Gaetz M, Anderson G. EMG activity of trunk stabilizers during stable and unstable push-ups. Can. J. Appl. Physiol. 2004;29:S55 [Google Scholar]
- 20.Marshall P, Murphy BA. Changes in muscle activity and perceived exertion during exercises performed on a Swiss ball. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2006;31: 376–383 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Martins J, Tucci HT, Andrade R, Araujo RC, Bevilaqua-Grossi D, Oliveira AS. Electromyographic amplitude ratio of serratus anterior and upper trapezius muscles during modified push-ups and bench press exercises. J Strength Cond Res. Mar 2008;22(2):477–484 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Behm DG, Anderson K, Curnew RS. Muscle force and activation under stable and unstable conditions. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2002;16(3):416–422 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Hamlyn N, Behm DG, Young WB. Trunk muscle activation during dynamic weight training exercises and isometric instability activities. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2007;21(4):1108–1112 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Nuzzo JL, McCaulley GO, Cormie P, Cavill MJ, McBride JM. Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(1):95–102 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Colado JC, Pablos C, Chulvi-Medrano I, Garcia-Masso X, Flandez J, Behm DG. The progression of paraspinal muscle recruitment intensity in localized and global strength training exercises is not based on instability alone. Arch Physical Med Rehab. Nov 2011;92(11):1875–1883 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Willardson JM, Fontana FE, Bressel E. Effect of surface stability on core muscle activity for dynamic resistance exercises. Int.J.Sports Physiol Perform. 2009;4(1):97–109 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Alkner BA, Tesch PA, Berg HE. Quadriceps EMG/force relationship in knee extension and leg press. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2000;32(2):459–463 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Henneman E, Clamann HP, Gillies JD, Skinner RD. Rank order of motoneurons within a pool: Law of combination. Journal Of Neurophysiology. 1974;37:1338–1348 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Behm DGD E.J., Willardson J.M., Cowley P.M. The role of instability rehabilitative resistance training for the core musculature. Strength and Conditioning Journal. 2011;33(3):72–81 [Google Scholar]
- 30.De Luca CJ, Mambrito B. Voluntary control of motor units in human antagonist muscles: Coactivation and reciprocal activation. Journal Of Neurophysiology. 1987;58(3):525–542 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Marsden CD, Obeso JA, Rothwell JC. The function of the antagonist muscle during fast limb movements in man. Journal of Physiology. 1983;335:1–13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Karst GM, Hasan Z. Antagonist muscle activity during human forearm movements under varying kinematic and loading conditions. Experimental Brain Research. 1987;67:391–401 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Hogan N. Adaptive control of mechanical impedance by coactivation of antagonist muscles. International Electrical Engineering Journal. 1984;29:681–690 [Google Scholar]
- 34.Baratta R, Solomonow M, Zhou BH, Letson D, Chuinard R, D'Ambrosia R. Muscular coactivation The role of the antagonist musculature in maintaining knee stability. The American of Sports Medicine. 1988;16(2):113–122 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Tyler AE, Hutton RS. Was Sherrington right about co-contractions? Brain Research. 1986;370:171–175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Engelhorn R. Agonist and antagonist muscle EMG activity pattern changes with skill acquisition. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1983;54(4):315–323 [Google Scholar]
- 37.Carolan BJ, Cafarelli E. Antagonist activity during quadriceps contraction. Behm. 1999;22(2):S117 [Google Scholar]
- 38.Reeves NP, Narendra KS, Cholewicki J. Spine stability: the six blind men and the elephant. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.). 2007;22(3):266–274 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Durall CJ, Udermann BE, Johansen DR, Gibson B, Reineke DM, Reuteman P. The effects of preseason trunk muscle training on low-back pain occurrence in women collegiate gymnasts. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2009;23(1):86–92 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Carter JM, Beam WC, McMahan SG, Barr ML, Brown LE. The effects of stability ball training on spinal stability in sedentary individuals. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2006;20(2):429–435 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Abenhaim L, Rossignol M, Valat JP, et al. The role of activity in the therapeutic management of back pain. Report of the International Paris Task Force on Pain. Spine. 2000;25(4):1S–33S [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Nadler SF, Malanga GA, Bartoli LA, Feinberg JH, Prybicen M, Deprince M. Hip muscle imbalance and low back pain in athletes: influence of core strengthening. Medicine Science in Sports and Exercise. 2002;34(1):9–16 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Nadler SF, Malanga GA, Deprince M, Stitik TP, Feinberg JH. The relationship between lower extremity injury, low back pain, and hip muscle strength in male and female collegiate athletes. Clin.J.Sport Med. 2000;10(2):89–97 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Nadler SF, Malanga GA, Feinberg JH, Prybicien M, Stitik TP, Deprince M. Relationship between hip muscle imbalance and occurrence of low back pain in collegiate athletes: a prospective study. Am.J.Phys.Med.Rehabil. 2001;80(8):572–577 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Cady LD, Bischoff DP, O'Connell ER. Strength and fitness and subsequent back injuries in fire fighters. Journal of Occupational Medicine. 1979;21:269–272 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Cairns MC, Foster NE, Wright C. Randomized controlled trial of specific spinal stabilization exercises and conventional physiotherapy for recurrent low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976.). 2006;31(19):E670–E681 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Caldwell JS, McNair PJ, Williams M. The effects of repetitive motion on lumbar flexion and erector spinae muscle activity in rowers. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.). 2003;18(8):704–711 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.McGill SM. Low back stability: from formal description to issues for performance and rehabilitation. Exerc.Sport Sci.Rev. 2001;29(1):26–31 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Nourbakhsh MR, Arab AM. Relationship between mechanical factors and incidence of low back pain. Journal of Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy. 2002;32(9):447–460 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Akuthota V, Nadler SF. Core strengthening 6. Archive Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2004;85(3 Suppl 1):S86–S92 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Inefficient muscular stabilization of the lumbar spine associated with low back pain. Spine. 1996;21(22):2640–2650 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Delayed postural contraction of transversus abdominis in low back pain associated with movement of the lower limb. J.Spinal Disord. 1998;11(1):46–56 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Hubley-Kozey CL, Hatfield GL, Davidson KC. Temporal coactivation of abdominal muscles during dynamic stability exercises. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2010;24(5):1246–1255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Panjabi MM. The stabilizing system of the spine. Part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis. J.Spinal Disord. 1992;5(4):390–396 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Cholewicki J, McGill SM, Norman RW. Lumbar spine loads during the lifting of extremely heavy weights. Med.Sci.Sports Exerc. 1991;23(10):1179–1186 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Cresswell AG, Thorstensson A. Changes in intra-abdominal pressure, trunk muscle activation and force during isokinetic lifting and lowering. Eur.J.Appl.Physiol Occup.Physiol. 1994;68(4):315–321 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Kibler WB, Press J, Sciascia A. The role of core stability in athletic function. Sports Med. 2006;36(3):189–198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Willardson JM. Core stability training: applications to sports conditioning programs. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2007;21(3):979–985 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Panjabi MM. The stabilizing system of the spine. Part I. Function, dysfunction, adaptation, and enhancement. J.Spinal Disord. 1992;5(4): 383–389 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Carpenter MG, Frank JS, Silcher CP, Peysar GW. The influence of postural threat on the control of upright stance. Exp.Brain Res. 2001;138(2):210–218 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Cholewicki J, McGill SM. Mechanical stability of the in vivo lumbar spine: implications for injury and chronic low back pain. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.). 1996;11(1):1–15 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Mannion AF, Dumas GA, Cooper RG, Espinosa FJ, Faris MW, Stevenson JM. Muscle fiber size and type distribution in thoracic and lumbar regions of erector spinae in healthy subjects without low back pain: normal values and sex differences. J Anatomy. 1997;190:505–513 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Thorstensson A, Carlson H. Fibre types in human lumbar back muscles. Acta Physiol Scand. 1987;131(2):195–202 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Sale DG. Influence of Exercise and Training on Motor Unit Activation 1987:95–151 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Grenier SG, Vera-Garcia FJ, McGill SM. Abdominal response during curl-ups on both stable and labile surfaces. Physical Therapy. 2000;86(6):564–569 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Jorgensen MB, Andersen LL, Kirk N, Pedersen MT, Sogaard K, Holtermann A. Muscle activity during functional coordination training: implications for strength gain and rehabilitation. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2010;24(7):1732–1739 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Borghuis J, Hof AL, Lemmink KA. The importance of sensory-motor control in providing core stability: implications for measurement and training. Sports Med. 2008;38(11):893–916 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Relationship between limb movement speed and associated contraction of the trunk muscles. Ergonomics. 1997;40(11):1220–1230 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Kornecki S, Kebel A, Siemienski A. Muscular cooperation during joint stabilization, as reflected by EMG. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2001;85(5):453–461 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Slijper H, Latash M. The effects of instability and additional hand support on anticipatory postural adjustments in leg, trunk, and arm muscles during standing. Exp.Brain Res. 2000;135(1):81–93 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Zazulak BT, Hewett TE, Reeves NP, Goldberg B, Cholewicki J. Deficits in neuromuscular control of the trunk predict knee injury risk: a prospective biomechanical-epidemiologic study. Am.J.Sports Med. 2007;35(7):1123–1130 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Radebold A, Cholewicki J, Polzhofer GK, Greene HS. Impaired postural control of the lumbar spine is associated with delayed muscle response times in patients with chronic idiopathic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976.). 2001;26(7):724–730 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Ferguson SA, Marras WS, Burr DL, Davis KG, Gupta P. Differences in motor recruitment and resulting kinematics between low back pain patients and asymptomatic participants during lifting exertions. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.). 2004;19(10):992–999 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Anderson K, Behm DG. The impact of instability resistance training on balance and stability. Sports Medicine. 2005;35(1):43–53 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Wilder DG, Aleksiev AR, Magnusson ML, Pope MH, Spratt KF, Goel VK. Muscular response to sudden load. A tool to evaluate fatigue and rehabilitation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976.). 1996;21(22):2628–2639 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Caraffa A, Cerulli G, Projetti M, Aisa G, Rizzo A. Prevention of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in soccer. A prospective controlled study of proprioceptive training 40. Knee.Surg.Sports Traumatol.Arthrosc. 1996;4(1):19–21 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Cosio-Lima LM, Reynolds KL, Winter C, Paolone V, Jones MT. Effects of physioball and conventional floor exercises on early phase adaptations in back and abdominal core stability and balance in women. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2003;17(4):721–725 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Fredericson M, Cookingham CL, Chaudhari AM, Dowdell BC, Oestreicher N, Sahrmann SA. Hip abductor weakness in distance runners with iliotibial band syndrome. Clin.J.Sport Med. 2000;10(3):169–175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Ireland ML, Willson JD, Ballantyne BT, Davis IM. Hip strength in females with and without patellofemoral pain. J.Orthop.Sports Phys.Ther. 2003;33(11):671–676 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Jacobs CA, Uhl TL, Mattacola CG, Shapiro R, Rayens WS. Hip abductor function and lower extremity landing kinematics: sex differences. J.Athl.Train. 2007;42(1):76–83 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Leetun DT, Ireland ML, Willson JD, Ballantyne BT, Davis IM. Core stability measures as risk factors for lower extremity injury in athletes. Med.Sci.Sports Exerc. 2004;36(6):926–934 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Verhagen EA, van TM, van der Beek AJ, Bouter LM, van MW. An economic evaluation of a proprioceptive balance board training programme for the prevention of ankle sprains in volleyball 31. Br.J.Sports Med. 2005;39(2):111–115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Waddington G, Seward H, Wrigley T, Lacey N, Adams R. Comparing wobble board and jump-landing training effects on knee and ankle movement discrimination. J.Sci.Med.Sport. 2000;3(4):449–459 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Tsang W, Hui-Chan C. Effects of tai chi on joint proprioception and stability limits in elderly subjects. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2003;35(12):1962–1971 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Fuzhong L, Harmer P, Fisher KJ, McAuley E. Tai Chi: Improving Functional Balance and Predicting Subsequent Falls in Older Persons. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2004;36(12): 2046–2052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Vera-Garcia FJ, Elvira JL, Brown SH, McGill SM. Effects of abdominal stabilization maneuvers on the control of spine motion and stability against sudden trunk perturbations. J.Electromyogr.Kinesiol. 2007;17(5):556–567 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Comerford MJ, Mottram SL. Functional stability re-training: principles and strategies for managing mechanical dysfunction. Manual Therapy. 2001;6(1):3–14 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.McCurdy K, Conner C. Unilateral support resistance training incorporating the hip and knee. National Strength and Conditioning Association Journal. 2003;25(2):45–51 [Google Scholar]
- 89.Sale DG. Neural adaptation to resistance training. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1988;20(5):135–145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Behm DG, Leonard A, Young W, Bonsey A, MacKinnon S. Trunk Muscle EMG Activity With Unstable and Unilateral Exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2005;19(1):193–201 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Behm DG, Power KE, Drinkwater EJ. Muscle activation is enhanced with multi- and uni-articular bilateral versus unilateral contractions. Can.J.Appl.Physiol. 2003;28(1):38–52 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Kannus P, Alosa D, Cook L, et al. Effect of one-legged exercise on the strength, power and endurance of the contralateral leg. A randomized, controlled study using isometric and concentric isokinetic training. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology. 1992;64:117–126 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Martin PG, Rattey J. Central fatigue explains sex differences in muscle fatigue and contralateral cross-over effects of maximal contractions. Pflugers Arch. Sep 2007;454(6):957–969 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Todd G, Petersen NT, Taylor JL, Gandevia SC. The effect of a contralateral contraction on maximal voluntary activation and central fatigue in elbow flexor muscles. Experimental brain research. Experimentelle Hirnforschung. Experimentation cerebrale. Jun 2003;150(3):308–313 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Zijdewind I, Zwarts MJ, Kernell D. Influence of a voluntary fatigue test on the contralateral homologous muscle in humans? Neuroscience Letters. Aug 28 1998;253(1):41–44 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Kornecki S, Zschorlich V. The nature of stabilizing functions of skeletal muscles. Journal of Biomechanics. 1994;27(2):215–225 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Anderson K, Behm D. Maintenance of EMG Activity and Loss of Force Output With Instability. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2004;18(3):637–640 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.McBride J, Cormie P, Deane R. Isometric squat force output and muscle activity in stable and unstable conditions 285. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2006;20(4):915–918 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.Cowley PM, Swensen T, Sforzo GA. Efficacy of instability resistance training. Int.J.Sports Med. 2007;28(10):829–835 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Koshida S, Urabe Y, Miyashita K, Iwai K, Kagimori A. Muscular outputs during dynamic bench press under stable versus unstable conditions. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(5):1584–1588 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Goodman CA, Pearce AJ, Nicholes CJ, Gatt BM, Fairweather IH. No difference in 1 RM strength and muscle activation during the barbell chest press on a stable and unstable surface. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(1):88–94 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Kohler JM, Flanagan SP, Whiting WC. Muscle activation patterns while lifting stable and unstable loads on stable and unstable surfaces. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2010;24(2):313–321 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Chulvi-Medrano I, Garcia-Masso X, Colado JC, Pablos C, de Moraes JA, Fuster MA. Deadlift muscle force and activation under stable and unstable conditions. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2010;24(10):2723–2730 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Stanton R, Reaburn PR, Humphries B. The effect of short-term Swiss ball training on core stability and running economy. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2004;18(3):522–528 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Bruhn S, Kullmann N, Gollhofer A. The effects of a sensorimotor training and a strength training on postural stabilisation, maximum isometric contraction and jump performance. International journal of sports medicine. Jan 2004;25(1):56–60 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Li F, Harmer P, Fisher KJ, McAuley E. Tai Chi: improving functional balance and predicting subsequent falls in older persons. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. Dec 2004;36(12):2046–2052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Gioftsidou A, Malliou P, Pafis G, Beneka A, Godolias AG, Maganaris CN. The effects of soccer training and timing of balance training on balance ability. 95. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2006;96:659–664 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Kean CO, Behm DG, Young WB. Fixed foot balance training increases rectus femoris activation during landing and jump height in recreationally active women. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. 2006;5:138–148 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Yaggie JA, Campbell BM. Effects of balance training on selected skills. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2006;20(2):422–428 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Nagy E, Feher-Kiss A, Barnai M, Domjan-Preszner A, Angyan L, Horvath G. Postural control in elderly subjects participating in balance training. European Journal of Applied Physiology. May 2007;100(1):97–104 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111.Spennewyn KC. Strength outcomes in fixed versus free-form resistance equipment. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(1):75–81 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112.Panics G, Tallay A, Pavlik A, Berkes I. Effect of proprioception training on knee joint position sense in female team handball players. British Journal of Sports Medicine. Jun 2008;42(6):472–476 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113.Sato K, Mokha M. Does core strength training influence running kinetics, lower-extremity stability, and 5000-M performance in runners? J.Strength Cond.Res. 2009;23(1):133–140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Schilling BK, Falvo MJ, Karlage RE, Weiss LW, Lohnes CA, Chiu LZ. Effects of unstable surface training on measures of balance in older adults. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2009;23(4):1211–1216 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Granacher UM, T., Maestrini L., Zahner L., Gollhofer A. Can Balance Training Promote Balance and Strength in Prepubertal Children? Journal of Strength and Condtioning Research. June 2011 2011;25(6):1759–1766 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116.Granacher U, Wick C, Rueck N, Esposito C, Roth R, Zahner L. Promoting balance and strength in the middle-aged workforce. International journal of sports medicine. Jan 2011;32(1):35–44 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117.Ogaya S, Ikezoe T, Soda N, Ichihashi N. Effects of balance training using wobble boards in the elderly. J Strength Cond Res. Sep 2011;25(9):2616–2622 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118.Muehlbauer T, Roth R, Mueller S, Granacher U. Intra and intersession reliability of balance measures during one-leg standing in young adults. J Strength Cond Res. Aug 2011;25(8):2228–2234 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Myer GD, Ford KR, Brent JL, Hewett TE. The effects of plyometric vs. dynamic stabilization and balance training on power, balance, and landing force in female athletes. 24. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2006;20(2):345–353 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.Taube W, Kullmann N, Leukel C, Kurz O, Amtage F, Gollhofer A. Differential reflex adaptations following sensorimotor and strength training in young elite athletes. Int.J.Sports Med. 2007;28(12):999–1005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121.Oliver GD, Di BR. Functional balance training in collegiate women athletes. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2009;23(7):2124–2129 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Stanforth D, Stanforth PR, Hahn SR, Phillips A. A 10 week training study comparing resistaball and traditional trunk training. Journal of Dance Medicine and Science. 1998;2(4):134–140 [Google Scholar]
- 123.Tsimaras VK, Fotiadou EG. Effect of training on the muscle strength and dynamic balance ability of adults with Down Syndrome. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2004;18(2):343–347 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124.Bruhn S, Kullmann N, Gollhofer A. Combinatory effects of high-intensity-strength training and sensorimotor training on muscle strength. International journal of sports medicine. May 2006;27(5):401–406 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125.Gruber M, Gruber SB, Taube W, Schubert M, Beck SC, Gollhofer A. Differential effects of ballistic versus sensorimotor training on rate of force development and neural activation in humans 175. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2007;21(1):274–282 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Thompson CJ, Cobb KM, Blackwell J. Functional training improves club head speed and functional fitness in older golfers. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2007;21(1):131–137 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127.Cressey EM, West CA, Tiberio DP, Kraemer WJ, Maresh CM. The effects of ten weeks of lower-body unstable surface training on markers of athletic performance. J.Strength Cond.Res. 2007;21(2):561–567 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128.Sekendiz B, Cug M, Korkusuz F. Effects of Swiss-ball core strength training on strength, endurance, flexibility, and balance in sedentary women. J Strength Cond Res. Nov 2010;24(11):3032–3040 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Saeterbakken AH, van den Tillaar R, Seiler S. Effect of core stability training on throwing velocity in female handball players. J Strength Cond Res. Mar 2011;25(3):712–718 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Vera-Garcia FJ, Grenier SG, McGill SM. Abdominal muscle response during curl-ups on both stable and labile surfaces. Physical Therapy. Jun 2000;80(6):564–569 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Anderson K, Behm DG. Trunk Muscle Activity Increases with Unstable Squat Movements. Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology. 2005;30(1):33–45 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132.Marshall P, Murphy B. Changes in muscle activity and perceived exertion during exercises performed on a swiss ball 186. Appl.Physiol Nutr.Metab. 2006;31(4):376–383 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Marshall PW, Murphy BA. Increased deltoid and abdominal muscle activity during Swiss ball bench press 275. J.Strength.Cond.Res. 2006;20(4):745–750 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Freeman S, Karpowicz A, Gray J, McGill S. Quantifying muscle patterns and spine load during various forms of the push-up 231. Med.Sci.Sports Exerc. 2006;38(3):570–577 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135.Norwood JT, Anderson GS, Gaetz MB, Twist PW. Electromyographic activity of the trunk stabilizers during stable and unstable bench press. J Strength Cond Res. May 2007;21(2):343–347 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136.Sternlicht E, Rugg S, Fujii LL, Tomomitsu KF, Seki MM. Electromyographic comparison of a stability ball crunch with a traditional crunch. J Strength Cond Res. May 2007;21(2):506–509 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137.Bressel E, Willardson JM, Thompson B, Fontana FE. Effect of instruction, surface stability, and load intensity on trunk muscle activity. J.Electromyogr.Kinesiol. 2009;19(6):e500–e504 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138.Schwanbeck S, Chilibeck PD, Binsted G. A comparison of free weight squat to Smith machine squat using electromyography. J Strength Cond Res. Dec 2009;23(9):2588–2591 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]