The Effect of Isolated core Training on Lumbo-Pelvic Movements during Running

Hello Everyone!


I hope all is well


Another new post on the blog, this time it is looking at the effect of isolated core training on Lumbo - Pelvic  movements during Running.  This was a biomechanic assignment I did with my two friends of mine and fellow students at the time, Mr Connuagh Pearce and Mr Callum Wilkinson. 

Hope you enjoy reading it


Let me know what you think in the comments!


Like, share and comment!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for 'fair use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use**

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is Good Running Style so Important 

Better posture when running improves biomechanics and performance.

It has been shown that better posture when running does improve biomechanics , which in turn improves performance through more efficient running mechanics as shown from numerous studies(Comereski and Niedzielski, 2004).

Excessive pronation should be eliminated as it can cause problems in maintaining a good running style (Williams, Keith R.; Ziff, Jodi L, 1991)




Risk Factors 

Poor movements of the pelvis are a result of it not being stable and mobile enough. The pelvis creates

stability for the whole body during movement by connecting the torso to the legs. If there is not

enough stability and range of movement it will not rotate correctly and freely, resulting

in pain, tightness and possible injury. 

By keeping the pelvis level and stable, and also engaging the core muscles, it limits the side to side

and front to back motion which reduces the injury risks to the back, knees, ankles and hips. It is

crucial to allow the pelvis to rotate in the direction that the legs swing when walking or running.

Increased lumbar lordosis and anterior pelvic tilt, associated with tightness of the hip flexor musculature, are examples of atypical kinematic patterns that have been alluded to in the literature (Bach et al, 1985; Klein & Roberts, 1976).

Increased anterior tilt of the pelvis during running has been cited as a predisposing factor for hamstring strains (Geraci, 1996; Klein & Roberts, 1976). Increased pelvic obliquity during running has been implicated with iliotibial band friction syndrome (Anderson, 1991) and sacroiliac joint injuries (Lloyd-Smith et al,1985).,

What possible Mechanisms exist with which to Modify these Risk Factors 



It is possible to modify pelvic movements through a core intervention training programme and to
reduce the chance of getting such core/lumbo pelvic injuries (weak gait cycle,
Trendelenburg Gait Pattern and Lordosis). 


The Trendelenburg gait pattern (or gluteus medius lurch) is an abnormal gait (as with walking)
caused by weakness of the abductor muscles of the lower limb, gluteus medius and gluteus minimus.


During the stance phase, the weakened abductor muscles allow the pelvis to tilt down on the opposite
side (shown from picture).

Gait Cycle 




The gait cycle can be defined as the time interval between to successive occurrences of one of the
repetitive events of walking.

Major events of the Gait Cycle:


1/ Initial Contact


2/ Opposite Toe Off


3/ Heel Rise


4/ Opposite Initial Contact


5/ Toe Off


6/ Feet Adjacent


7/ Tibia Vertical



7 events subdivided into 4 sections;


- 1/ Loading response

- 2/ Mid stance

- 3/ Terminal Stance

- 4/ Pre swing

What is Core Training 



The core can be scientifically defined as “the trunk or more specifically the lumbopelvic region of the
body”. J.M.Willardson 2007. 



Core stability means “The ability to control the position and motion of the trunk over the pelvis to
allow optimum production, transfer and control of force and motion to the terminal segment in
integrated athletic activities” Kibler. 2006, Lawrence 2007, Willson JD, Dougherty CP, Ireland ML,
Davis IM 2005.



Core strength can be defined as “the muscles surrounding the spinal column’s ability to maintain
stability while acting on an external perturbation”. Hibbs, AE 2008, Akuthota V, Nadler SF 2004.

How is it possible that Core Training can Influence Pelvic Movements 



Core training can influence pelvic movements in a positive fashion by reducing the chance of injury
by making the lumbopelvic region stronger through specific core exercises.


By increasing the strength of the spinal erectors and deep abdominal muscles, this can help eliminate
pelvic tilt. These pelvic movements can become negative if the core muscles become weak or not
used correctly.


Such lumbopelvic problems include lordosis which is the result of weak hip flexors (figure 1) The
term lordosis refers to the normal inward curvature of the lumbar and cervical regions of the spine
B.Gylys (2005).

What is known and not known about the Effects of Core Training on Pelvic Movements 


Sharrock, C et al believed that researchers should seek to identify a gold standard test or battery of
tests that quantifies core stability as it pertains to athletic performance.



Also, the specific functions of the core, such as stability, strength, or endurance, should be examined
separately to determine the relative importance of each.



It also would be beneficial to examine the relationship between core stability and additional athletic
performance tests. Until the relationship between core stability and athletic performance can be
scientifically demonstrated in the evidence, it will remain hypothetical and theoretical in nature.

Aim 

The aim of this study is to examine the effects of isolated core training on pelvic movements during

treadmill running

Methods 









Kinesiological breakdown of Running 

During running the quadriceps, consisting of the vastus medialis, vastus intermedius, rectus

femoris and vastus lateralis are activated when the lower legs go into knee extension. 

The back of the thighs contain the hamstrings, which includes the semitendinosus,

semimembranosus, and biceps femoris.

These muscles play an important role in running as they flex the knees which causes the lower

legs to swing back toward the gluteus maximus.

The hip flexors also get worked as the thighs move toward the stomach, they consist of the psoas

major, psoas minor and iliacus.

The muscles of the inner and outer thighs, the adductors and abductors, play an important role in

stabilizing the hips and stop the knees from dropping inward or outward, helping to prevent

unnecessary strain on the knees and prevent injury.

The core muscles play a highly important role in running, as they contract and give support when

running, which enables the individual to balance. This is achieved by the rectus abdominus and

oblique muscles which are activated while the individual is running.

Baseline and Follow Up Testing 

Pre intervention the subjects (control and core training subject) both took part in a number of tests to

give baseline data. 

These tests where the following:

• Prone Bridge for time
• Vertical Jump
• Height
• Weight
• Running kinematics (VICON)
• Heel Rotation (pressure plate, RSScan UK)

Results from Pre Test 

Test/Exercise	Control Subject	Core Trained  Subject
Height	1m 88cm	1m 74cm
Weight	72.2kg	92.6kg
Age	25	19
Vertical Jump	28.63cm	36.3cm
Prone Bridge Hold	3 minutes 1 second	3 minutes  37 seconds
Running Mechanics	See video	See video
Heel Rotation	22.5	23.5

Intervention 

The three core exercises to be used for this intervention were chosen on the basis of simplicity,

avoidance of lateral bending of the vertebral column and not requiring additional equipment. 

The exercises chosen were:

Prone-bridge

Erector spinae, rectus abdominus and tranverse abdominus  

Side-bridge

Strengthens the gluteus medius and the abdominal external oblique muscles with activity greater than

60% MVIC in the external oblique (Hibbs et al., 2007) and greater than 45% MVIC in the gluteus

medius (Ekstrom et al., 2007).

Back extension (superman)

Erector spinae muscles, consisiting of the iliocostalis, longissimus, and spinalis.

To minimise the learning effects all participants will be given a familiarisation session. Over the 4

week intervention period, the three core exercises were repeated three times a week. 

Intervention Training Programme (Continued)

Exercise	Progression	Week 1		Week 2 and 3  (add 15 seconds  per week for each set for each exercise)
Prone Bridge	Volume	Reps 30s hold	Sets 3
Side Bridge	Volume	Reps 30 s hold	Sets 3
Back Extension	Volume	Reps 30 s hold	Sets 3

Data Analysis 

Microsoft excel was used to create the plotted graph data and to obtain the averages of axis data.

Basic trigonometry was applied in order to obtain the degrees of pelvic motion.

Graphs show Pre and Post test results for both walk and run on both subjects based on a

correspondence of Y and Z axis data.

In the graphs the peaks/rages of lines were assessed to see if there was any improvement in core

stability.

Results

Graphs - Walking 

AB06 PreTest Walk 

AB06 Post Test Intervention Walk 

AB05 PreTest Walk 

AB05 Post Test Intervention Walk 

Graphs - Running 

AB06 PreTest Intervention 

AB06 Post Intervention 

AB05 PreTest Intervention 

AB05 Post Intervention

Graph Results 

These results show the ranges of degree motion form the graphs presented above. 

We can see a vast improvement from subject AB06 on the walk and run. The peaks are closer together showing more controlled movement. The peaks of degrees are smaller in post tests showing the range of motion is smaller. 

This shows the core training has improved core stability.

•Walk Ranges- AB06 Post, 2.921707 to -3.21937

•Walk Ranges- AB06 Pre,  5.368061 to  0.081681

•Walk Ranges- AB05 Post, 10.92838 to -9.67098

•Walk Ranges- AB05 Pre, 4.56287 to -3.9881

•Run Ranges- AB06 Post,  3.03845 to -4.27515

•Run Ranges- AB06 Pre,  4.80025 to -0.3251

•Run Ranges- AB05 Post, 8.10326 to -9.0946

•Run Ranges- AB05 Pre, 4.56287 to -3.98814

Effect of the Intervention 

Test/Exercise	Control Subject	Core Trained  Subject
Height	1m 88cm	1m 75cm
Weight	72.2kg	94.9kg
Age	25	19
Vertical Jump	31.5 cm	34.0 cm
Prone Bridge Hold	3 minutes 10 second	3 minutes 42  seconds
Running Mechanics	See video	See video
Heel Rotation	30	28.5

Discussion

Summary of Results 

Core training programme helped to improve core stability over a three week period as can be seen on the post results with the prone bridge on both the control and intervention subjects.

In the control subject the vertical jump improved, with the intervention subject jump test decreasing. The possible reason for this being that the intervention subject performed heavy squats the day before.

Comparison with Previous Work 

From the core intervention training programme the test subject improved his time on the bridge.

A study conducted by J. Comereski, and M. Niedzielski, “The Effects of Posture on Running Performance: A Case Study used a core intervention training programme to facilitate a runners performance’’.

Athlete performed breathing, gluteal, hamstring and abdominal exercises over 8 visits in a 5 week period. The athlete set 5 personal bests improving his 1 mile run by 14 seconds and 800m by 6 seconds. His posture, flexibility and mobility improved post test

Mechanisms 

From the core intervention programme involving side/prone bridges, superman's and my own training

programme, which involved squats, deadlifts, front squats and cleans etc.

This required me to load  the core muscles through different planes of motion, engaging all the

muscles.

The muscles that adapted were the spinal erectors, oblique's, hip flexors, glutes (medius, mimimus

and maximus), diaphragm and deep abdominal muscles.

This resulted in the noticeable improvements pre and post for the walk and run. However on the pre

test (second day of testing) due to training the day before which subject was fatigued.

Future Research 

Have a core training programme that lasts 10 weeks. Longer programme means more physical

improvements leads to better performance than a 3 week programme.

Programme will be implemented on male and female subjects (20 male 20 female). More subjects

improves test reliability and validity.

Exercises used will be more than 3 and include, squats, deadlifts, kettle bell swings, bridges etc.

These new exercises will activate the core more than doing just isolation specific exercises

Training programme will split into two groups, some subjects doing exercises in strength rep range

others in the endurance range to compare and contrast results. This is to see which is better for sports

performance. All subjects will be of same age, sport background, not previous injuries etc.

Limitations

•One training intervention subject, more will be needed to increase the reliability of the study (M.K. Willam, Trochim 2006).

•No female subjects, this reduces the reliability and introduces an element of bias as only one gender was used. This is a sample bias as no females where present in the sample (L. Willams, Wilkins 2006).

•Short time frame (3 weeks). Training programmes need to be longer than 3 weeks to see the physiological adaptions, 3 weeks would only show minimal changes. A longer time frame would increase the accuracy of the results.

•Limited number of exercises. If there were more “core exercises” this will encourage a faster positive physiological stress so the body can become stronger.

•Choice of core exercises; it can be debated that the choice of the exercises were not most effective. Some may argue that Squats and Deadlifts are a better stimulus for the core and the lumbo-pelvic region than the bridge exercises.

•Difference in pre and post test results may be due to the subjects putting more effort in as their peers where watching them - this is described as the Hawthorn Effect. This is known as “Participant’s performance changes when attention is paid to them, which is likely to reduce the ability to generalize the results” (Thomas, Nelson, Silverman, 2011).

References 

1. Akuthota V, Nadler SF. (2004) “Core strengthening”. American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; 85 (3 Suppl. 1): S86-92
2. Comereski.S.J, Niedzielski. M. (2004) “The Effects of Posture on Running Performance: A Case Study”. American Medical Athletic Association Journal Spring 2004
3. D.K Bach, D.S Green, G.M Jensen, E Savinar A comparison of muscular tightness in runners and nonrunners and the relation of muscular tightness to low back pain in runners Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 6 (1985), pp. 315–323
4. Gylys, Barbara A. and Mary Ellen Wedding.(2005), ‘Medical Terminology Systems’, F.A. Davis Company
5. G.S Anderson ‘Iliotibial band friction syndrome’ Australian Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 23 (1991), pp. 81–83
6. Geraci, M. C., Jr. (1996). ‘Overuse injuries of the hip and pelvis’. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 6, 5–19
7. Hibbs AE, Thompson, K. G., French, D., Wrigley, A., Spears, I. (2008) “Optimizing performance by improving core stability and core strength”. Sports Medicine, 38(12):995-1008.
8. J.M.Willardson (2007) “Core Stability Training: Applications to Sports Conditioning Programs”. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 21 (3) 979-985
9. Kibler, W., Press. J, Sciascia. A (2006). “The Role of Core Stability in Athletic Function”. Sports Medicine, 36(3): 189-198.
10. Klein and Roberts, 1976 K.K Klein, C.A Roberts ‘Mechanical problems of marathoners and joggers’: Cause and solution American Corrective Therapy Journal, 30 (1976), pp. 187–191
11. Lawerence, M. (2007). Core Stability.  2nd Edition.  , London, A&C Black Publishers Ltd.
12. Willson JD, Dougherty CP, Ireland ML, Davis IM. (2005) “Core Stability and its Relationship to Lower Extremity Function and Injury”. Journal of American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 13(5):316-25. 
13. Thomas. J, Nelson. J, Silverman. S (2011) Research Methods in Physical Activity. 6th Edition. Stanningley: Human Kinetics p335 
14. L. Willams, Wilkins. (2006) Stedman's Medical Dictionary. Medilexcon. Retreived on May 22, 2014.
15. M.K. Willam, Trochim. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Web Centre four Social Research Methods. Retrieved on May 22, 2014.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Richardson, Founder of Strength is Never a Weakness Blog

I have a BSc (Hons) in Applied Sport Science and a Merit in my MSc in Sport and Exercise Science and I passed my PGCE at Teesside University. 

Now I will be commencing my PhD into "Investigating Sedentary Lifestyles of the Tees Valley" this October 2019. 

I am employed by Teesside University Sport and WellBeing Department as a PT/Fitness Instructor.  

My long term goal is to become a Sport Science and/or Sport and Exercise Lecturer. I am also keen to contribute to academia via continued research in a quest for new knowledge.

My most recent publications: 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1752928X19300216

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1752928X19301076 

My passion is for Sport Science which has led to additional interests incorporating Sports Psychology, Body Dysmorphia, AAS, Doping and Strength and Conditioning. 

Within these respective fields, I have a passion for Strength Training, Fitness Testing, Periodisation and Tapering. 

I write for numerous websites across the UK and Ireland including my own blog Strength is Never a Weakness. 

I had my own business for providing training plans for teams and athletes. 

I was one of the Irish National Coaches for Powerlifting, and have attained two 3rd places at the first World University Championships, 

in Belarus in July 2016.Feel free to email me or call me as I am always looking for the next challenge. 

Contact details below; 

Facebook: Andrew Richardson (search for)

Facebook Page: @StrengthisNeveraWeakness

Twitter: @arichie17 

Instagram: @arichiepowerlifting

Snapchat: @andypowerlifter 

Email: a.s.richardson@tees.ac.uk

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-richardson-b0039278 

Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Andrew_Richardson7