Content uploaded by Lee E Brown
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lee E Brown on Oct 21, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Effects of Static, Stationary, and Traveling Trunk Exercises on Muscle Activation
Darien T. Pyka, Pablo B. Costa*, Jared W. Coburn, Lee E. Brown
Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, 800 N. State College Blvd. USA
Corresponding Author: Pablo B. Costa, E-mail: pcosta@fullerton.edu
INTRODUCTION
The advancement in research and application of trunk ex-
ercises has beneted therapists, trainers, and coaches to
improve sports performance, reduce injury risk, and in reha-
bilitation of their athletes or patients (McGill, 2010; Wheel-
er, 2015). Research has shown the most effective and safest
method to train the trunk is a stabilization exercise, where a
neutral spine is maintained against a load (Mendrin, Lynn,
Grifth-Merritt, & Noffal, 2016). This is due to increased
knowledge that the most common function of the trunk is
to prevent motion rather than initiate movement, and the
trunk muscles should be trained as stabilizers rather than
prime movers (McGill, 2010). McGill (2010) describes a
stabilization exercise as any exercise that challenges the
spine stability while enforcing trunk co-activation patterns
that ensure a stable spine (McGill (2010). These exercises
consist of holding the spine in a neutral position while the
trunk is loaded through different strategies, such as moving
upper and lower limbs in several positions or maintaining
the pelvis lifted off the oor against gravity in a hold or
stationary position (Vera-Garcia, Barbado, & Moya, 2014).
A neutral position is referred to as the natural curvature of
Published by Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.
Copyright (c) the author(s). This is an open access article under CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijkss.v.5n.4p.26
the spine and the pelvis without an anterior or posterior tilt
(McGill, 2010).
It is important to have a relatively strong trunk for re-
sistance training and injury prevention (McGill, 2015). In a
strongman study, McGill et al. (2009) concluded that strong
trunk muscles allow force to dissipate distally to farther
areas of the body. A stiff trunk allows power generated from
the hips to be transmitted through the torso to the upper body
or vice versa. It takes a stiff, stable trunk to allow optimal
production, transfer, and control of force during a total body
movement (Okada, Huxel, & Nesser, 2011). Hodges and
Richardson (1997) found the trunk stabilizers to be activated
before any limb movements in a total body exercise, lending
the support to the theory that movement control and stabil-
ity is developed from the trunk to extremity (Okada et al.,
2011). Many movements such as pushing, pulling, lifting,
carrying, and rotation use power generated from the hips to
perform the exercise (McGill, 2010). If a bend in the spine
occurs, known as an “energy leak”, power is compromised
(McGill, 2010).
Chronic disabling low back pain prevalence is 4.2% in
individuals between 24 and 39 years of age and 19.6% in
ARTICLE INFO
Article history
Received: August 11, 2017
Accepted: September 28, 2017
Published: October 31, 2017
Volume: 5 Issue: 4
Conicts of interest: None
Funding: None
ABSTRACT
Background: A new tness trend incorporates stability exercises that challenges trunk
muscles and introduces crawling as an exercise, but has yet to be investigated for muscle
activity. Purpose: To compare the effects of static (STA), stationary (STN), and traveling
(TRV) trunk exercises on muscle activation of the rectus abdominis, rectus femoris, external
oblique, and erector spinae using surface electromyography (EMG). Methods: Seventeen
recreationally active women (mean age ± SD = 22.4 ± 2.4 years, body mass 62.9 ± 6.9 kg,
height 165.1 ± 5.8 cm) and twenty-three men (23.6 ±3.9 years, 83.2 ±17.1 kg, 177.1 ± 9.1 cm)
volunteered to participate in this study. Subjects performed maximal voluntary contractions
for normalization of each muscle’s EMG activity. They then performed the three exercises in
random order for thirty seconds each with a two-minute rest in between. Results: For the rectus
abdominis, STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.003) and TRV (P = 0.001). For the
external oblique, STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.001) and TRV (P = 0.001) and
STN was signicantly greater than TRV (P = 0.009). For the erector spinae and rectus femoris,
STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.001) and TRV (P = 0.001) Conclusions: There
was greater muscle activation in all muscles tested in the stationary and traveling exercises
versus the static. Strength and conditioning coaches and allied health professionals could
potentially use stationary and traveling forms of trunk stabilization exercises as a viable strategy
to increase muscle activation.
Key words: Electromyography, Exercise Therapy, Torso, Muscle Contraction,
Postural Balance, Back Pain
International Journal of Kinesiology & Sports Science
ISSN: 2202-946X
www.ijkss.aiac.org.au
Effects of Static, Stationary, and Traveling Trunk Exercises on Muscle Activation 27
those between 20 and 59 years (Meucci, Fassa, & Faria,
2015). There is a direct link between poor movement pat-
terns and low back injuries. Common injuries are a result of
excessive spinal exion and trunk instability. In planning a
trunk-strengthening program, stability and endurance exer-
cises have been recommended to be rst (McGill, 2010) and
the most important (McGill, 2015). Improving the strength
of the trunk without these two qualities increases the risk
of not performing the exercise correctly with repetition and
thereby increases the risk of injury (McGill, 2010). A train-
ing program focusing on neuromuscular control for trunk
stabilization could be advantageous in a low back injury pre-
vention program (Stevens et al., 2007; Wheeler et al., 2015).
Such exercises include the four point kneeling bird dog with
extension of the contra-lateral limbs and supine bridging
with a single leg extension (Stevens et al., 2007).
Integration core exercises requiring activation of the dis-
tal trunk elicit greater activity of the primary abdominal and
lumbar muscles compared to isolated exercises (Gottschall,
Mills, & Hastings, 2013). In addition, within a trunk stabi-
lization exercise, as instability increases, trunk muscle ac-
tivity increases proportionally (Anderson & Behm, 2005).
Common trunk stabilization exercises that incorporate the
above techniques include variations of the prone bridge,
side-bridge, quadruped bird-dog, and supine curl-up exercis-
es (McGill, 2010). With the rising popularity of trunk stabi-
lization training and the research on the importance for trunk
stability and endurance, there is a new exercise trend known
as movement ows that challenge the trunk in a traveling
form that has yet to be tested for muscle activity. Part of this
trend is the Animal Flow workout, coined by tness trainer
Mike Fitch, which is thought to specically challenge trunk
stability and endurance in a functional manner. In his Ani-
mal Flow Coaching Manual (2013) for his level one Animal
Flow certication, the author describes the most common
position of the Animal Flow workout to be the beast position
or more commonly referred to as a bear crawl. This position
mimics the bird dog by being a quadruped position but with
the knees slightly raised off the ground. The bear position
consists of a progression of a static hold, stationary con-
tra-lateral arm and leg lift, and a traveling crawling move-
ment, with the goal of maintaining a neutral spine in each.
Accordingly, Mendrin et al. (2016) has already reported the
bear crawl as an effective isometric trunk exercise.
In a quadruped position the exercise integrates distal
muscle stabilizers and with the knees raised slightly off the
ground it serves the same purpose as a plank, to maintain the
pelvis position against gravity testing endurance. The exer-
cise loads and challenges trunk coordination, neuromuscular
coordination, and balance with the stationary contra-lateral
limb lift and traveling crawling movement. This quadruped
exercise appears to have the key concepts of a trunk stabili-
zation exercise. However, every trunk exercise studied and
listed is either a static hold or in a stationary position. Thus,
the question remains of how traveling in a trunk exercise af-
fects muscle activity. Therefore, the purpose of the present
investigation was to compare muscle activation of the rec-
tus abdominis, lumbar erector spinae, external oblique, and
rectus femoris among static, stationary, and traveling exercis-
es in the quadruped position using surface electromyography.
METHODS
Subjects
Seventeen recreationally active women (mean
age ± SD = 22.4 ±2.4 years, body mass 62.9 ± 6.9 kg, height
165.1 ± 5.8 cm) and twenty-three men (23.6 ± 3.9 years,
83.2 ± 17.1 kg, 177.1 ± 9.1 cm) volunteered to participate in
this study. An a priori sample size estimate of 28 participants
was determined using G*Power software (version 3.1.9.2,
Dusseldorf, Germany) with an effect size of 0.25 and a
power level set at 0.8. Participants met the inclusion criteria
to participate in the study, which included being free of ill-
ness, injury, or physical disabilities that may inhibit optimal
performance of the tested exercises. They were required to
have a minimum of 3 years of recreational activity and have
met ACSM’s guidelines of 30 minutes of recreational activi-
ty at least 3 days a week for at least 3 months.
Research Design
All data were collected over two visits. The rst session
consisted of reading and signing an informed consent form,
lling out a health status questionnaire, and familiarizing the
participant with the equipment and exercises. This visit last-
ed approximately 30 minutes. Participants were instructed
to shave areas needed for the surface electrodes before the
second session. Areas included the back of their neck, right
thigh, area around their navel, and low back. All participants
were instructed to wear shorts, to not apply any lotion on
their skin prior to the testing session, and women needed to
wear a sports bra and remove any umbilicus piercings. The
second session consisted of skinfold measurements (Lange
Skinfold Caliper, Santa Cruz, CA, USA) on the electrode
sites as well as areas for a three-site body composition anal-
ysis, electromyography (EMG) electrode attachment, maxi-
mal voluntary contractions, and testing of the three exercises
for 30 seconds each in random order. Constant speed was set
with a metronome at a speed of 55 beats per minute for the
stationary and traveling exercise. Data collection for each
participant took approximately 45 minutes.
In the rst session, anthropometrics of each participant
were measured, which consisted of their body mass and
height. Body mass was measured and recorded in kilograms
with a digital scale (Ohaus ES Series scale, Parsippany,
NJ, USA). Height was measured with a stadiometer (Seca
stadiometer, Chino, CA, USA) and recorded in centimeters.
After, the participant practiced the correct form of the three
exercises and became familiar with the cues the researcher
would provide during testing. For the static exercise (STA),
the participant was instructed to start in a quadruped posi-
tion (Figure 1), with wrists placed directly under the shoul-
ders, elbows straight, and knees directly under the navel
with ankles dorsi-exed. Once this position was correct, the
participant was instructed to raise their knees slightly off
the ground such that a neutral spine is maintained. Subjects
28 IJKSS 5(4):26-32
rested once they performed this position correctly for 30
seconds. Throughout the practice and the start of each test-
ing exercise, participants were given corrective instructions
for proper technique. The researcher only provided correc-
tive technique at the start of the testing exercises to assume
the quadruped position and did not provide corrective cues
during testing. Time was tracked via the EMG software.
After they rested, participants were instructed to get back
into the correct static position. When the correct position
was assumed, participants began practicing for the stationary
(STN) by lifting their right hand off the ground by bending
their elbow without losing their trunk position for two sec-
onds. Once this was performed correctly, the participant prac-
ticed lifting their left foot off the ground by further exing
their knee without losing their trunk position for two seconds.
Once this was performed correctly, they practiced raising
their right hand and left foot in the technique they just prac-
ticed simultaneously without losing their trunk position for
two seconds (Figure 2). The same protocol was followed for
the left hand and right foot. When performed correctly, they
practiced alternating contra-lateral limbs off the ground to the
sound at the metronome. Once they performed this correctly
for a total of 30 seconds, they rested for twenty seconds.
After they rested, they practiced the traveling exercise
(TRV). Participants were instructed to get back into the cor-
rect static position. When the correct position was assumed,
participants were instructed to raise their right hand, left
foot off the ground simultaneously to the sound of the met-
ronome, in the technique they performed earlier, and place
them back down on the ground half a hands length from the
stationary hand (Figure 3). They were instructed to raise
their left hand, right foot with the same protocol to create a
forward crawling movement. They crawled for approximate-
ly ve to eight yards in the 30 seconds. Form was lost when
trunk position or a neutral spine was not maintained or one
wrist was not under the shoulder or one of their knees was
not under the navel at all times.
Maximum Voluntary Contraction
In the second session, each participant performed a maxi-
mal voluntary isometric contraction of each measured mus-
cle for normalization. Reproducing techniques from McGill
and Karpowicz (2009), participants were instructed to push
against the manual resistance provided by the research in-
vestigator for 10 seconds. For the abdominal muscles, partic-
ipants assumed a sit-up position and were manually braced at
the elbows. Participants then produced a maximal isometric
exor movement. With a 30-second rest period, it was fol-
lowed by a right twist movement for the external oblique. For
the lumbar erector spinae, participants performed a resisted
maximum extension in the Biering-Sorensen position. The
participant lied prone on a plinth with the upper edge of the
iliac crests aligned with the edge of the table (Demoulin,
Vanderthommen, Duysens, & Crielaard, 2006). A strap was
placed around the knees to anchor the lower body to the table.
With arms folded across the chest, participants were instruct-
ed to forcefully extend while being manually braced by the
research investigator. For the rectus femoris, participants
were positioned in a seated position and attempted an iso-
metric knee extension with a simultaneous hip exion. The
same research investigator performed all the tests. The max-
imal amplitude in any normalizing contraction was used as
the maximum for that muscle (McGill & Karpowicz, 2009).
After performing maximal voluntary contractions, the par-
ticipant rested for two minutes. They then performed each
exercise in random order for 30 seconds with a rest period
of 2 minutes in between exercises to avoid fatigue. Exercises
Figure 1. Static exercise (STA)
Figure 2. Stationary exercise (STN)
Figure 3. Traveling exercise (TRV)
Effects of Static, Stationary, and Traveling Trunk Exercises on Muscle Activation 29
were performed for 30 seconds based on the recommenda-
tion by Mendrin et al. (2016).
All exercises were performed as practiced. If proper form
was not maintained, the test was stopped and repeated until a
full thirty seconds was performed correctly. Exercises were re-
peated if the correct form was not performed based on the in-
vestigator’s (DTP) observations. Examples of incorrect form
included not maintaining a neutral spine, raising hips into the
air, dropping knees to the ground, or bending the elbows.
Electromyography
The participant’s skin was prepared for the use of EMG elec-
trodes prior to their placement, such that the signal was not
distorted by exterior variables such as dead skin and excess
hair. Excess hair at the site of the electrode placement was
shaved and the site cleaned with a swab of isopropyl alcohol.
Four preamplied, bipolar surface EMG electrodes (EL254S;
Biopac Systems Inc., Santa Barbara, CA; gain = 350) with a
xed center-to-center interelectrode distance of 20 mm were
placed in accordance to the SENIAM guidelines (Hermans
et al., 2000) and a previous investigation (McGill & Karpo-
wicz, 2009). Electrodes were placed unilaterally on the right
side of body for the rectus femoris (RF), rectus abdominis
(RA), external oblique (EO), and the lumbar erector spinae
longissimus (ES). The RF electrode was placed midway on
the line from the anterior superior iliac spine to the superior
part of the patella. The RA electrode was placed 1 cm lateral
to the navel. The EO electrode was placed 3 cm lateral to the
linea semilunaris but on the same level of RA electrode. The
ES electrode was placed 3 cm lateral from the spinous pro-
cess of L1. A single pregelled, disposable electrode (EL501,
Biopac Systems Inc., Santa Barbara, CA) was placed on the
spinous process of the seventh cervical vertebrae to serve as
a reference electrode.
The raw EMG signals were recorded simultaneously
with a Biopac data acquisition system (MP150WSW; Bi-
opac Systems Inc., Goleta, CA) interfaced with a laptop
computer (Inspiron 8200; Dell Inc., Round Rock, TX) using
proprietary software (AcqKnowledge version 5.0; Biopac
Systems Inc.). Sampling frequency was set at 1000 Hz and
the amplitude of the signals was expressed as root mean
square (RMS) values. The EMG signals were bandpass l-
tered at 10-500 Hz and then normalized to their respective
MVC. All analyses were performed with a custom program
written with LabVIEW software (version 8.5, National In-
struments, Austin, Texas). The middle 10-second epoch of
the data collection from each exercise was used for analysis.
Statistical Analysis
Four separate two-way mixed factorial ANOVAs (exercise
[static vs. stationary vs. traveling] × sex [men vs. women])
were performed for each muscle. Post-hoc one- way ANO-
VAs were used when appropriate and necessary. An indepen-
dent t- test was performed for body fat percentage between
men and women. Four separate independent t-tests were
performed for skinfold thickness of each site between men
and women. An alpha of P ≤ 0.05 was used to determine sta-
tistical signicance for all comparisons. Data were analyzed
using SPSS version 23 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
RESULTS
Table 1 contains means ± SE for body fat percentage and
skinfold thickness of the four electrode sites for men and
women. There was a signicant difference in body fat per-
centage between men and women (P < 0.001). In addition,
there was a signicant difference in skinfold thickness for
the rectus femoris between men and women (P = 0.017).
No signicant differences in skinfold thickness were found
between men and women for external oblique (P = 0.788),
erector spinae (P = 0.884), or rectus abdominis (P = 0.864).
Table 2 contains means ± SE for normalized EMG am-
plitude values for muscle activation under the three exercise
conditions collapsed across sex. The results are separated by
muscle and their differences in the static (STA), stationary
(STN), and traveling (TRV) exercises. There was no signi-
cant interactions for sex (P > .05); therefore, values are col-
lapsed across sex.
For the rectus abdominis, there was no two-way inter-
action for exercise × sex (P = 0.789). However, there was a
main effect for exercise (P = 0.002). Normalized EMG am-
plitude for STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.003)
and TRV (P = 0.001) (Figure 4). In addition, there was a
main effect for sex (P = 0.001), where women had higher
activation in all three exercises.
For the external oblique, there was no two-way interac-
tion for exercise × sex (P = 0.287). However, there was a
main effect for exercise (P < 0.001). Normalized EMG am-
plitude for STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.001)
and TRV (P = 0.001) and STN was signicantly greater than
TRV ( P = 0.009) (Figure 5). In addition, there was a main ef-
fect for sex (P = 0.012) where women had higher activation
in all three exercises.
For the erector spine, there was no two-way interaction
for exercise × sex (P = 0.713). However, there was a main
effect for exercise (P < 0.001). Normalized EMG amplitude
for STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.001) and
TRV ( P = 0.001) (Figure 6). In addition, there was no main
effect for sex (P = 0.513).
For the rectus femoris, there was no two-way interaction
for exercise × sex (P = 0.169). However, there was a main
effect for exercise (P < 0.001). Normalized EMG amplitude
Table 1. Means±SE for body fat percentage and skinfold
thickness
Variables Men Women
Body fat 12.1±1.1* 21.3±0.8*
RF 15.7±1.5* 20.0±0.8*
AB 16.8±1.4 17.2±1.5
EO 14.7±1.6 14.1±1.6
ES 13.3±1.0 13.1±0.8
RF=Rectus Femoris; AB=Rectus Abdominis; EO=External
Oblique; ES=Erector Spinae, *significant difference between
sexes
30 IJKSS 5(4):26-32
for STA was signicantly lower than STN (P = 0.001) and
TRV ( P = 0.001) (Figure 7). In addition, there was no main
effect for sex (P = 0.886).
DISCUSSION
The results indicated there were differences in muscle ac-
tivation among the static, stationary, and traveling trunk
exercises. Based upon muscle activity, the exercises re-
quiring movement of the upper and lower limbs elicited
greater muscle activity while challenging coordination and
balance. These ndings are in congruence with Gottschall et
al. (2013) who reported integration core exercises requiring
movement of the distal trunk, elicited higher activity of the
primary abdominal and lumbar muscles compared to isola-
tion exercises. The movement of the limbs with stabilization
of the spine challenged postural stability and balance and re-
sulted in greater muscle activation (Hanney, Pabian, Smith,
& Patel, 2013). The current results are also in agreement
with Anderson and Behm (2005) who reported as instability
increases within a trunk stabilization exercise, trunk muscle
activity increases. In addition, women had greater activation
than men in all the exercises for the RA and EO. It is evi-
dent low back pain and injuries are common and on the rise
Table 2. Normalized mean±SE for muscle activation under the three exercise conditions collapsed across sex
Muscle Exercise
STA STN TRV
RF 31.46%±2.05% 50.97%±3.45%* 52.07%±3.67%*
AB 18.31%±2.51% 26.52%±3.43%* 24.30%±2.33%*
EO 95.01%±8.11% 171.28%±15.75%*#139.93%±10.50%*#
ES 6.24%±0.60% 13.18%±1.20%* 12.45%±1.60%*
STA=Static; STN=Stationary; TRV=Traveling, RF=Rectus Femoris; AB=Rectus Abdominis; EO=External Oblique;
ES=Erector Spinae, *significant difference from STA exercise, #significant difference among all exercises
Figure 4. Mean ± SE for normalized EMG amplitude of the rectus
abdominis. STA = Static, STN = Stationary, TRV = Traveling,
*signicant difference from STA
Figure 5. Mean ± SE for normalized EMG amplitude
of the external oblique. STA = Static, STN = Stationary,
TRV = Traveling, *signicant difference from STA
Figure 6. Mean ± SE for normalized EMG amplitude of the
erector spinae. STA = Static, STN = Stationary, TRV = Traveling,
*signicant difference from STA
Figure 7. Mean ± SE for normalized EMG amplitude of the
rectus femoris. STA = Static, STN = Stationary, TRV = Traveling,
*signicant difference from STA
Effects of Static, Stationary, and Traveling Trunk Exercises on Muscle Activation 31
(Hanney et al., 2013). A major contributing factor to this is
trunk instability and lack of trunk muscle endurance (Mc-
Gill, 2010). Exercises focusing on neuromuscular control for
trunk stabilization could be advantageous in a low back inju-
ry prevention program (Stevens et al., 2007; Wheeler et al.,
2015). Such exercises include the four-point kneeling bird
dog with extension of the contra-lateral limbs, which contain
similar elements as the stationary and traveling exercises
tested in the present study.
The progression in muscle activation of static, station-
ary, and traveling exercises was shown to be correct for the
rectus femoris. As for the rectus abdominis and erector spi-
nae, the stationary exercise elicited greater muscle activation
than the traveling exercise, albeit not signicantly. Only the
external oblique; however, showed a signicant difference
between the stationary and traveling exercise. Overall, the
progression in movement from a static to stationary to trav-
eling position did not show the same progression in level of
muscle activity for the majority of the muscles tested. There
was a main effect for sex for the rectus abdominis and the
external oblique muscles. In all three exercises, women had
greater relative muscle activation than men. This may be in
part due to the exercise being relatively more difcult to per-
form for the women compared to the men and because of
more strength-trained men participants than women. There-
fore, the men may have had a stronger trunk and could utilize
their strength more effectively in the exercises. Although in
this case, greater muscle activation could not be explained
by body composition, since women typically have higher
levels of subcutaneous fat that could act as a lter. In the
present study, women had signicantly higher body fat per-
centage than men. Consequently, they had less fat-free mass
and possibly needed greater activation to perform the exer-
cises. Another possibility of women having greater muscle
activation may be due to women adopting different motor
recruitment strategies than men as reported in a study inves-
tigating unanticipated cutting maneuvers where women used
different co-contraction strategies to achieve stabilization at
the knee (Beaulieu, Lamontagne, & Xu, 2008). However, in
regards to muscle activity, no sex differences were found in a
study comparing muscle activity in unilateral weight bearing
tasks (Bouillon et al., 2012), trunk muscle activation during
a squat and a deadlift compared to isometric instability exer-
cises (Hamlyn, Behm, & Young, 2007), and in various pop-
ular trunk exercises (Youdas et al., 2008).
McGill (2010) described that a strong and conditioned
trunk musculature is needed to produce, control, and trans-
fer force in various if not all movements. If the musculature
cannot maintain strength to combat “energy leaks” or sustain
a load over a long duration, the tissue will fatigue with each
repetition and might eventually result in injury (McGill,
2010). Therefore, a compelling reason to strengthen the trunk
musculature for adults or athletes is to decrease the chance of
injury, especially low back and hip injuries as well as pain.
Injury occurs when the applied load exceeds the strength of
the tissue (McGill, 2015). More commonly, the injury re-
sults from the accumulation of repetitive micro-traumas
when the tissue is fatigued (McGill, 2015). Strengthening
the core through stabilization exercises improves postural
control and the ability to land and decelerate the body, which
increases the athlete’s resistance to injury (Sadeghi, Shari-
at, Asadmanesh, & Mosavat, 2013). Thus, it is important to
incorporate exercises that challenge the strength and endur-
ance of the trunk musculature in maintaining a neutral spine
to prevent sub-traumas that will result in injuries. However,
for improving sports performance, exercises targeting the
trunk musculature might not be as benecial and incorporat-
ing compound movements such as the front and back squats
might be enough stress the trunk to improve strength and
endurance (Tyler, Adams, & DeBeliso, 2017). Nevertheless,
for younger and less t athletes, developing a proper foun-
dation of trunk strength and endurance is essential to prevent
future injury.
It has been researched and reported that the safest man-
ner to train the trunk musculature is to maintain the spine
in a neutral position when any load is placed on the body
(Mendrin et al., 2016). Different strategies are used to place
load on the body, including holding the pelvis off the oor
and then moving the limbs in various positions (Vera-Gar-
cia et al., 2014). The static, stationary, and traveling exer-
cises used in this study fullled these loading properties. In
addition, static exercises may be easier to learn and require
less muscle activity. Therefore, static exercises are a good
precursor for younger athletes and patients undergoing re-
habilitation to acquire a foundation for trunk strength and
endurance. Participants were limited to a population of con-
venience, which consisted of college-age participants from
the local university and a strength and conditioning facility.
In addition, no comparisons were made between individuals
who were experienced in different modes of training (e.g.,
resistance, aerobic, etc.). Future studies include examining
chronic effects of training with the exercises used in the
present study and investigating participants already famil-
iar with these exercises. Furthermore, future investigations
may compare potential differences in balance and stability
between static and stationary exercises training programs.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, there was greater muscle activation in the
stationary and traveling exercises compared to the static
exercise. The next progression from a static exercise may
be a stationary or traveling exercise. Other than the exter-
nal oblique, there was no signicance difference in muscle
activity between stationary and traveling modes of trunk ex-
ercises. Due to the signicant differences in muscle activ-
ity from the static mode, personal trainers, sports coaches,
and allied health professionals who are seeking to increase
instability during a trunk exercise, may wish to incorporate
stationary and traveling variations into their training pre-
scription. Stationary and traveling exercises with the move-
ment of the limbs might potentially offer an alternative when
training for trunk stabilization.
REFERENCES
Anderson, K., & Behm, D. G. (2005). The impact of insta-
bility resistance training on balance and stability. Sports
32 IJKSS 5(4):26-32
Medicine, 35(1), 43-53.
Beaulieu, M., Lamontagne, M., & Xu, L. (2008). Gender
differences in time-frequency EMG analysis of unan-
ticipated cutting maneuvers. Medicine Science in Sports
Exercise, 40(10), 1795- 1804.
Bouillon, L. E., Wilhelm, J., Eisel, P., Wiesner, J.,
Rachow, M., & Hatteberg, L. (2012). Electromyograph-
ic assessment of muscle activity between genders during
unilateral weight-bearing tasks using adjusted distances.
International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 7(6),
595-605.
Demoulin, C., Vanderthommen, M., Duysens, C., & Cri-
elaard, J.-M. (2006). Spinal muscle evaluation using the
Sorensen test: a critical appraisal of the literature. Joint
Bone Spine, 73(1), 43-50.
Gottschall, J. S., Mills, J., & Hastings, B. (2013). Integration
core exercises elicit greater muscle activation than isola-
tion exercises. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 27(3), 590-596.
Hamlyn, N., Behm, D. G., & Young, W. B. (2007). Trunk
muscle activation during dynamic weight-training exer-
cises and isometric instability activities. The Journal of
Strength & Conditioning Research, 21(4), 1108-1112.
Hanney, W. J., Pabian, P. S., Smith, M. T., & Patel, C. K.
(2013). Low back pain: movement considerations for
exercise and training. Strength & Conditioning Journal,
35(4), 99-106.
Hermens, H.J., Freriks, B., Disselhorst-Klug, C., Rau, G.
Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors
and sensor placement procedures. J Electromyogr Kine-
siol 2000: 10: 361-374.
Hodges, P. W., & Richardson, C. A. (1997). Contraction of
the abdominal muscles associated with movement of the
lower limb. Physical therapy, 77(2), 132-142.
McGill, S. M. (2010). Core training: evidence translating to
better performance and injury prevention. Strength &
Conditioning Journal, 32(3), 33-46.
McGill, S. M. (2015). Low Back Disorders, 3E: Human Ki-
netics.
McGill, S. M., Grenier, S., Kavcic, N., & Cholewicki, J.
(2003). Coordination of muscle activity to assure sta-
bility of the lumbar spine. Journal of Electromyography
and Kinesiology, 13(4), 353-359.
McGill, S. M., McDermott, A., Fenwick, C. M. (2009).
Comparison of different strongman events: Trunk mus-
cle activation and lumbar spine motion, load and stiff-
ness. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research,
23(4), 1148-1161.
McGill, S. M., & Karpowicz, A. (2009). Exercises for spine
stabilization: motion/motor patterns, stability progres-
sions, and clinical technique. Archives of Physical Med-
icine and Rehabilitation, 90(1), 118-126.
Mendrin, N., Lynn, S. K., Grifth-Merritt, H. K., &
Noffal, G. J. (2016). Progressions of isometric core
training. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 38(4), 50-65.
Meucci, R. D., Fassa, A. G., & Faria, N. M. X. (2015). Prev-
alence of chronic low back pain: systematic review. Re-
vista De Saude Publica, 49, 1-10.
Okada, T., Huxel, K. C., & Nesser, T. W. (2011). Relation-
ship between core stability, functional movement, and
performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 25(1), 252-261.
Sadeghi, H., Shariat, A., Asadmanesh, E., & Mosavat, M.
(2013). The effects of core stability exercise on the dy-
namic balance of volleyball players. International Jour-
nal of Applied Exercise Physiology, 2(2), 1-10.
Stevens, V. K., Coorevits, P. L., Bouche, K. G., Mahieu, N. N.,
Vanderstraeten, G. G., & Danneels, L. A. (2007). The in-
uence of specic training on trunk muscle recruitment
patterns in healthy subjects during stabilization exercis-
es. Manual Therapy, 12(3), 271-279.
Tyler, R., Adams, K. J., & DeBeliso, M. (2017). The rela-
tionship between core stability & squat ratio in resis-
tance-trained males. International Journal of Kinesiolo-
gy & Sports Science, 5(2), 7-15.
Vera-Garcia, F. J., Barbado, D., & Moya, M. (2014). Trunk
stabilization exercises for healthy individuals. Revista
Brasileira de Cineantropometria & Desempenho Hu-
mano, 16(2), 200-211.
Wheeler, R. (2015). Limiting lower back injuries with proper
technique and strengthening. Strength & Conditioning
Journal, 37(1), 18-23.
Youdas, J. W., Guck, B. R., Hebrink, R. C., Rugotzke, J. D.,
Madson, T. J., & Hollman, J. H. (2008). An electro-
myographic analysis of the Ab-Slide exercise, abdom-
inal crunch, supine double leg thrust, and side bridge
in healthy young adults: implications for rehabilitation
professionals. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 22(6), 1939-1946.
