Electromyography activity of selected trunk muscles during cardiopulmonary resuscitation - 06/03/14
![](/templates/common/images/mail.png)
![](/templates/common/images/mail.png)
Abstract |
Background |
Understanding trunk muscle activity during chest compression may improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training strategies of CPR or prevent low back pain. This study investigates the trunk muscle activity pattern of chest compression in health care providers to determine the pattern alternation during chest compression.
Methods |
Thirty-one experienced health care providers performed CPR for 5 minutes at a frequency of 100 compressions per minute. An electromyography (EMG) system was used to record muscle activity in the first minute, the third minute, and the fifth minute. Electrodes were placed bilaterally over the pectoralis major, latissimus dorsi, rectus abdominis, erector spinae, and gluteus maximus. We calculated the root mean square (RMS) value and maximal amplitude of the EMG activity, median frequency, and delivered force.
Results |
The maximal amplitude of EMG of the pectoralis major, erector spinae, and rectus abdominis showed large muscle activity above 45% of maximal voluntary contraction under chest compression. There were no significant differences in the RMS value of one chest compression cycle (RMS100%) and median frequency for all muscles at the first, third, and fifth minutes. Only gluteus maximus showed significant imbalance. The EMG ratios (erector spinae/rectus abdominis; erector spinae/gluteus maximus) increased significantly over time. The delivered force, compression depth, and number of correct depth decreased significantly over time.
Conclusion |
We suggest that the muscle power training for the pectoralis major, erector spinae, and rectus abdominis could be helpful for health care providers. Keeping muscle activity balance of bilateral gluteus maximus and maintaining the same level of EMG ratios might be the keys to prevent low back pain while performing CPR.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
☆ | Conflict of interest statement: none. |
Vol 32 - N° 3
P. 216-220 - mars 2014 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?