An injury suffered to the lower back may result in pain and the inability to function effectively which may ultimately affect overall performance especially for athletes. Core stabilization training is an effective therapy to such lower back injuries as it restores an individual’s ability to control and co-ordinate movement at the joints with little or no compensation (Pavin & Goncalves, 2010).
Some of the current trends in core stabilization include mechanical modeling to determine the optimal physical conditions (load factor) necessary for spine stability (Pavin & Goncalves, 2010). It is meant to increase prevention and effective management of lumbopelvic dysfunction. Mechanical modeling emphasizes on two rehabilitation and training strategies; global muscle control and local muscle control. The strategies are based on the categories of muscles as either local or global as determined by Bergmark (Wilk, Meister, & Andrews, 2002). Rectus abdominis, the erector spinae and quadratus lumborum are categorized as global muscles while multifidi and transverses abdominis are categorized as local muscles.
The rationale for the global muscle control strategy is that the local muscle system cannot deal global muscle dysfunction. The training involves regular contractions of the posterior chain achieved through an extension to the back against gravity. It also involves activation of the lateral muscle into a side position as well as activation of the flexor anterior area. The latter is attained through flexor endurance tests. The second bio-mechanical strategy is the local muscle control. The rationale for the strategy being that local muscles are better placed to address the control of load factors as opposed to global muscles. The underlying common factor to both approaches is that they are both tailored to raise the level of muscle endurance (Wilk, Meister, & Andrews, 2002). Contrary to beliefs in the past that pre-participation screening could help in predicting risk of injury or even prevent injury to the lower back, there is no concrete evidence to support this assumption.
References
Pavin, L & Goncalves, C (2010). Principles of core stability in the training and in the
rehabilitation: Literature review. Health science institute 28 (1): 53-5 Retrieved July 13, 2016 from http://www.unip.br/comunicacao/publicacoes/ics/edicoes/2010/01_jan-mar/V28_n1_2010_p53-58.pdf
The literature review gives an overview of the various global and local muscles and how each of the muscles can have tailored exercises meant to improve their endurance. It achieves this by addressing the load factor for each of the muscles. It also addresses the testing and rehabilitation strategies for local and global muscles in the event of lower back pathology.
Wilk, K., Meister, K., & Andrews, J (2002). Current Concepts in the Rehabilitation of the
Overhead Throwing Athlete. The American journal of sports medicine, Vol. 30 (1) Retrieved July 13, 2016 from http://www.csuchico.edu/~sbarker/pdf/throwingrehab.pdf
The article addresses specific concerns for overhead throwing athletes with regard to the prevention and treatment of lower back injury. It addresses the high level stress placed on the shoulder joint for such athletes and how the balance between mobility and functionality affects the muscle tissue. It also has an overview of the treatment and rehabilitation courses.
