Observational Screening Guidelines and Smartphone Accelerometer Thresholds to Establish the Intensity of Some of the Most Popular Core Stability Exercises

5Citations
Citations of this article
50Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The lack of training load control, mainly exercise intensity, is one of the main limitations of core stability (CS) programs, which makes the training individualization and the analysis of the dose-response relationship difficult. The objectives of this study were to assess the inter-and intra-rater agreement when using new observational screening guidelines to decide if a core stability exercise represents an adequate training intensity level for a given participant. Besides, the relationship between experts' ratings based on these criteria and pelvic accelerations recorded with a smartphone accelerometer was also analyzed. Ten healthy physically active participants with a smartphone accelerometer placed on their pelvis were video-taped while performing a progression of seven variations of the front bridge, back bridge, side bridge and bird-dog exercises. Two expert and four non-expert raters watched the videos and used the observational screening guidelines to decide for each exercise variation if it represented an adequate training intensity level or not. In order to analyze the inter-and intra-rater agreement, several Kappa (κ) statistics were used. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to explore if the accelerometry allowed to establish pelvic acceleration thresholds representing the minimum level of exercise intensity for CS training. Cut-off acceleration values were calculated balancing sensitivity (Se) and 1-specifity (1-Sp) indexes (i.e., Youden index) or minimizing 1-Sp. The intra-and inter-rater analysis showed a substantial-high level of agreement with a prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted Kappa > 0.69. The ROC curves showed that the acceleration thresholds for the bridging exercises were very similar, with global cut-off values of 0.35 m/s2 (Se = 82%; 1-Sp = 15%) when using the Youden Index and of 0.50 m/s2 when minimizing 1-Sp (Se = 31%), whilst the bird-dog exercise showed lower cut-off values (Youden Index: 0.21 m/s2, Se = 90%, 1-Sp = 16%; minimizing 1-Sp: 0.32 m/s2, Se = 40%). Overall, this study provides observational screening guidelines and smartphone accelerometer thresholds to facilitate the decision-making process when setting the intensity of some of the most popular core stability exercises in young physically active individuals.

References Powered by Scopus

The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data

60280Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Low back loads over a variety of abdominal exercises: Searching for the safest abdominal challenge

206Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Interrater reliability of videotaped observational gait-analysis assessments

200Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Are trunk stability and endurance determinant factors for whole-body dynamic balance in physically active young males? A multidimensional analysis

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Exercise Intensity Progressions and Criteria to Prescribe Core Stability Exercises in Young Physically Active Men: A Smartphone Accelerometer-Based Study

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Smartphone accelerometry for quantifying core stability and developing exercise training progressions in people with multiple sclerosis

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Heredia-Elvar, J. R., Juan-Recio, C., Prat-Luri, A., Barbado, D., & Vera-Garcia, F. J. (2021). Observational Screening Guidelines and Smartphone Accelerometer Thresholds to Establish the Intensity of Some of the Most Popular Core Stability Exercises. Frontiers in Physiology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2021.751569

Readers over time

‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2505101520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 9

64%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

14%

Researcher 2

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 5

33%

Sports and Recreations 5

33%

Nursing and Health Professions 3

20%

Engineering 2

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0