@article{MuellerStollMuelleretal.2017,
  author    = {M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Stoll, Josefine and Mueller, Juliane and Cassel, Michael and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Trunk Muscle Activity during Drop Jump Performance in Adolescent Athletes with Back Pain},
  series = {Frontiers in physiology},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {Frontiers in physiology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-042X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fphys.2017.00274},
  pages     = {124 -- 132},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In the context of back pain, great emphasis has been placed on the importance of trunk stability, especially in situations requiring compensation of repetitive, intense loading induced during high-performance activities, e.g., jumping or landing. This study aims to evaluate trunk muscle activity during drop jump in adolescent athletes with back pain (BP) compared to athletes without back pain (NBP). Eleven adolescent athletes suffering back pain (BP: m/f: n = 4/7; 15.9 +/- 1.3 y; 176 +/- 11 cm; 68 +/- 11 kg; 12.4 +/- 10.5 h/we training) and 11 matched athletes without back pain (NBP: m/f: n = 4/7; 15.5 +/- 1.3 y; 174 +/- 7 cm; 67 +/- 8 kg; 14.9 +/- 9.5 h/we training) were evaluated. Subjects conducted 3 drop jumps onto a force plate (ground reaction force). Bilateral 12-lead SEMG (surface Electromyography) was applied to assess trunk muscle activity. Ground contact time [ms], maximum vertical jump force [N], jump time [ms] and the jump performance index [m/s] were calculated for drop jumps. SEMG amplitudes (RMS: root mean square [\%]) for all 12 single muscles were normalized toMIVC (maximum isometric voluntary contraction) and analyzed in 4 time windows (100 ms pre- and 200 ms post-initial ground contact, 100 ms pre- and 200 ms post-landing) as outcome variables. In addition, muscles were grouped and analyzed in ventral and dorsal muscles, as well as straight and transverse trunk muscles. Drop jump ground reaction force variables did not differ between NBP and BP (p > 0.05). Mm obliquus externus and internus abdominis presented higher SEMG amplitudes (1.3-1.9-fold) for BP (p < 0.05). Mm rectus abdominis, erector spinae thoracic/lumbar and latissimus dorsi did not differ (p > 0.05). The muscle group analysis over the whole jumping cycle showed statistically significantly higher SEMG amplitudes for BP in the ventral (p = 0.031) and transverse muscles (p = 0.020) compared to NBP. Higher activity of transverse, but not straight, trunk muscles might indicate a specific compensation strategy to support trunk stability in athletes with back pain during drop jumps. Therefore, exercises favoring the transverse trunk muscles could be recommended for back pain treatment.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MuellerStollCasseletal.2017,
  author    = {M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Stoll, Josefine and Cassel, Michael and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Trunk Muscle Activity during Drop Jump Performance in Adolescent Athletes with Back Pain},
  series = {Frontiers in physiology},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {Frontiers in physiology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-042X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fphys.2017.00274},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In the context of back pain, great emphasis has been placed on the importance of trunk stability, especially in situations requiring compensation of repetitive, intense loading induced during high-performance activities, e.g., jumping or landing. This study aims to evaluate trunk muscle activity during drop jump in adolescent athletes with back pain (BP) compared to athletes without back pain (NBP). Eleven adolescent athletes suffering back pain (BP: m/f: n = 4/7; 15.9 ± 1.3 y; 176 ± 11 cm; 68 ± 11 kg; 12.4 ± 10.5 h/we training) and 11 matched athletes without back pain (NBP: m/f: n = 4/7; 15.5 ± 1.3 y; 174 ± 7 cm; 67 ± 8 kg; 14.9 ± 9.5 h/we training) were evaluated. Subjects conducted 3 drop jumps onto a force plate (ground reaction force). Bilateral 12-lead SEMG (surface Electromyography) was applied to assess trunk muscle activity. Ground contact time [ms], maximum vertical jump force [N], jump time [ms] and the jump performance index [m/s] were calculated for drop jumps. SEMG amplitudes (RMS: root mean square [\%]) for all 12 single muscles were normalized to MIVC (maximum isometric voluntary contraction) and analyzed in 4 time windows (100 ms pre- and 200 ms post-initial ground contact, 100 ms pre- and 200 ms post-landing) as outcome variables. In addition, muscles were grouped and analyzed in ventral and dorsal muscles, as well as straight and transverse trunk muscles. Drop jump ground reaction force variables did not differ between NBP and BP (p > 0.05). Mm obliquus externus and internus abdominis presented higher SEMG amplitudes (1.3-1.9-fold) for BP (p < 0.05). Mm rectus abdominis, erector spinae thoracic/lumbar and latissimus dorsi did not differ (p > 0.05). The muscle group analysis over the whole jumping cycle showed statistically significantly higher SEMG amplitudes for BP in the ventral (p = 0.031) and transverse muscles (p = 0.020) compared to NBP. Higher activity of transverse, but not straight, trunk muscles might indicate a specific compensation strategy to support trunk stability in athletes with back pain during drop jumps. Therefore, exercises favoring the transverse trunk muscles could be recommended for back pain treatment.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MuellerMayerBauretal.2011,
  author    = {M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Mayer, Patrizia and Baur, Heiner and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Higher velocities in isokinetic dynamometry a pilot study of new test mode with active compensation of inertia},
  series = {Isokinetics and exercise science : official journal of the European Isokinetic Society},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Isokinetics and exercise science : official journal of the European Isokinetic Society},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {IOS Press},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0959-3020},
  doi       = {10.3233/IES-2011-0398},
  pages     = {63 -- 70},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Isokinetic dynamometry is a standard technique for strength testing and training. Nevertheless reliability and validity is limited due to inertia effects, especially for high velocities. Therefore in a first methodological approach the purpose was to evaluate a new isokinetic measurement mode including inertia compensation compared to a classic isokinetic measurement mode for single and multijoint movements at different velocities. Isokinetic maximum strength measurements were carried out in 26 healthy active subjects. Tests were performed using classic isokinetic and new isokinetic mode in random order. Maximum torque/force, maximum movement velocity and time for acceleration were calculated. For inter-instrument agreement Bland and Altman analysis, systematic and random error was quantified. Differences between both methods were assessed (ANOVA alpha = 0.05). Bland and Altman analysis showed the highest agreement between the two modes for strength and velocity measurements (bias: < +/- 1.1\%; LOA: < 14.2\%) in knee flexion/extension at slow isokinetic velocity (60 degrees/s). Least agreement (range: bias: -67.6\% +/- 119.0\%; LOA: 53.4\% 69.3\%) was observed for shoulder/arm test at high isokinetic velocity (360 degrees/s). The Isokin(new) mode showed higher maximum movement velocities (p < 0.05). For low isokinetic velocities the new mode agrees with the classic mode. Especially at high isokinetic velocities the new isokinetic mode shows relevant benefits coupled with a possible trade-off with the force/torque measurement. In conclusion, this study offers for the first time a comparison between the 'classical' and inertia-compensated isokinetic dynamometers indicating the advantages and disadvantages associated with each individual approach, particularly as they relate to medium or high velocities in testing and training.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MuellerStollMuelleretal.2012,
  author    = {M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Stoll, Josefine and M{\"u}ller, Juliane and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Validity of isokinetic trunk measurements with respect to healthy adults, athletes and low back pain patients},
  series = {Isokinetics and exercise science : official journal of the European Isokinetic Society},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {Isokinetics and exercise science : official journal of the European Isokinetic Society},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {IOS Press},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0959-3020},
  doi       = {10.3233/IES-2012-00482},
  pages     = {255 -- 266},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Background: Isokinetic measurements are widely used to assess strength capacity in a clinical or research context. Nevertheless, the validity of isokinetic measures for identifying strength deficits and the evaluation of therapeutic process regarding different pathologies is yet to be established. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to evaluate the validity of isokinetic measures in a specific case: that of muscular capacity in low back pain (LBP). Methods: A literature search (PubMed; ISI Web of Knowledge; The Cochrane Library) covering the last 10 years was performed. Relevant papers regarding isokinetic trunk strength measures in healthy and patients with low back pain (PLBP) were searched. Peak torque values [Nm] and peak torque normalized to body weight [Nm/kg BW] were extracted for healthy and PLBP. Ranked mean values across studies were calculated for the concentric peak torque at 60 degrees/s as well as the flexion/extension (F/E) ratio. Results: 34 publications (31 flexion/extension; 3 rotation) were suitable for reporting detailed isokinetic strength measures in healthy or LBP (untrained adults, adolescents, athletes). Adolescents and athletes were different compared to normal adults in terms of absolute trunk strength values and the F/E ratio. Furthermore, isokinetic measures evaluating therapeutic process and isokinetic rehabilitation training were infrequent in literature (8 studies). Conclusion: Isokinetic measurements are valid for measuring trunk flexion/extension strength and F/E ratio in athletes, adolescents and (untrained) adults with/without LBP. The validity of trunk rotation is questionable due to a very small number of publications whereas no reliable source regarding lateral flexion could be traced. Therefore, isokinetic dynamometry may be utilized for identifying trunk strength deficits in healthy adults and PLBP.},
  language  = {en}
}