Skip to main content
Log in

Paradoxical variation of strength determinants with different rotation axes in trunk flexion and extension strength tests

  • Published:
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to illustrate the influence of different levels of the fulcrum (the axis of sagittal rotation) on measured trunk flexion and extension strength and compare force and torque as a unit of measure. The isometric trunk strength was measured in 16 healthy female subjects. The dynamometer was kept at the shoulder level and the moment arm was lengthened step by step by moving the fulcrum caudally from the level of the posterior superior iliac spine to the level of the gluteal fold. The moment of force (torque) increased from 117.0 to 208.5 N · m in flexion and from 182.2 to 292.5 N · m in extension,P < 0.0001. An attempt to quantify this change was made. Paradoxically, the measured force remained at a constant level (in flexion) or slightly decreased (in extension). We concluded that torque as a measure of trunk flexion and extension strength is highly dependent on the level of the rotation axis and force appears to be less sensitive for variations with the height of the fulcrum. We would suggest that the observed increase in torque is physiological and reflects to what extent hip flexor or extensor muscles are recruited. The force, on the other hand, may better characterize a person's capability to perform functional tasks. Force and torque should strictly be distinguished from one another.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addison R, Schultz A (1980) Trunk strengths in patients seeking hospitalization for chronic low-back disorders. Spine 5:539–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston W, Carlson KE, Feldman DJ, Grimm Z, Gerontinos E (1966) A quantitative study of muscle factors in the chronic back syndrome. J Am Geriatr Soc 14:1041–1047

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman DG, Gardner MJ (1989) Calculating confidence intervals for means and their differences. In: Gardner MJ, Altman DG (eds) Statistics with confidence. British Medical Journal, London, pp 21–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Biering-Sørensen F (1984) Physical measurements as risk indicators for low-back trouble over a one-year period. Spine 9:106–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson M, Toporek J (1990) Univariate and multivariate analysis of variance and covariance, including repeated measures. In: Dixon WJ, Brown MB, Engelman L, Jennrich RI (eds) BMDP Statistical software manual, vol 2. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 1169–1170

    Google Scholar 

  • Delitto A, Crandell CE, Rose SJ (1989) Peak torque-to-body weight ratios in the trunk: a critical analysis. Phys Ther 69:138–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves JE, Pollock ML, Carpenter DM, Leggett SH, Jones A, MacMillan M, Fulton M (1990) Quantitative assessment of full range-of-motion isometric lumbar extension strength. Spine 15:289–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasue M, Fujiwara M, Kikuchi S (1980) A new method of quantitative measurement of abdominal and back muscle strength. Spine 5:143–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmström E, Moritz U, Andersson M (1992) Trunk muscle strength and back muscle endurance in construction workers with and without low back disorders. Scand J Rehabil Med 24:3–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalil TM, Asfour SS, Martinez LM, Waly SM, Rosomoff RS, Rosomoff HL (1992) Stretching in the rehabilitation of lowback pain patients. Spine 17:311–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein AB, Snyder-Mackler L, Roy SH, DeLuca CJ (1991) Comparison of spinal mobility and isometric trunk extensor forces with electromyographic spectral analysis in identifying low back pain. Phys Ther 71:445–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Langrana NA, Lee CK, Alexander H, Mayott CW (1984) Quantitative assessment of back strength using isokinetic testing. Spine 9:287–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Leino P, Aro S, Hasan J (1987) Trunk muscle function and low back disorders: a ten-year follow-up study. J Chron Dis 40:289–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer L, Greenberg BB (1942) Measurements of the strength of trunk muscles. J Bone Joint Surg 24:842–856

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ (1988) Objective measurement of functional task performance. In: Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ (eds) Functional restoration for spinal disorders: the sports medicine approach. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, pp 162–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer TG, Smith SS, Keeley J, Mooney V (1985) Quantification of lumbar function 2. Sagittal plane trunk strength in chronic low-back pain patients. Spine 10:765–772

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill T, Warwick D, Andersson G, Schultz A (1980) Trunk strengths in attempted flexion, extension, and lateral bending in healthy subjects and patients with low-back disorders. Spine 5:529–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney V (1987) Where is the pain coming from? Spine 12:754–759

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachemson A, Lindh M (1969) Measurement of abdominal and back muscle strength with and without low back spain. Scand J Rehabil Med 1:60–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaisen T, Jørgensen K (1985) Trunk strength, back muscle endurance and low back trouble. Scand J Rehabil Med 17:121–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordgren B, Schéle R, Linroth K (1980) Evaluation and prediction of back pain during military field service. Scand J Rehabil Med 12:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordin M, Kahanovitz N, Verderame R, Parnianpour M, Yabut S, Viola K, Greenidge N, Mulvihill M (1987) Normal trunk muscle strength and endurance in women and the effect of exercises and electrical stimulation 1. Normal endurance and trunk muscle strength in 101 women. Spine 12:105–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch PJ, Burke RK (1978) The body as a lever system. Kinesiology and applied anatomy. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, pp 127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Sipilä S, Viitasalo J, Era P, Suominen H (1991) Muscle strength in male athletes aged 70–81 years and a population sample. Eur J Appl Physiol 63:399–403

    Google Scholar 

  • Smidt G, Herring T, Amundsen L, Rogers M, Russell A, Lehmann T (1983) Assessment of abdominal and back extensor function. A quantitative approach and results for chronic lowback patients. Spine 8:211–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith SS, Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Becker T (1985) Quantification of lumbar function 1. Isometric and multispeed isokinetic trunk strength measures in sagittal and axial planes in normal subjects. Spine 10:757–764

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes IAF, Rush S, Moffroid M, Johnson GB, Haugh LD (1987) Trunk extensor EMG-torque relationship. Spine 12:770–776

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes IAF, Gookin DM, Reid S, Hazard RG (1990) Effects of axis placement on measurement of isokinetic flexion and extension torque in the lumbar spine. J Spinal Disorders 3:114–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorstensson A, Arvidson Å (1982) Trunk muscle strength and low back pain. Scand J Rehabil Med 14:69–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorstensson A, Nilsson J (1982) Trunk muscle strength during constant velocity movements. Scand J Rehabil Med 14:61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Viitasalo JT, Era P, Leskinen A-L, Heikkinen E (1985) Muscular strength profiles and anthropometry in random samples of men aged 31–35, 51–55 and 71–75 years. Ergonomics 28:1563–1574

    Google Scholar 

  • Viljanen T, Viitasalo JT, Kujala UM (1991) Strength characteristics of a healthy urban adult population. Eur J Appl Physiol 63:43–47

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rantanen, P., Airaksinen, O. & Penttinen, E. Paradoxical variation of strength determinants with different rotation axes in trunk flexion and extension strength tests. Europ. J. Appl. Physiol. 68, 322–326 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00571451

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00571451

Key words

Navigation