2025, Vol.20, No.1

Journal of the Korean Society of Physical Medicine 2025 KCI Impact Factor : 1.09

pISSN : 1975-311X / eISSN : 2287-7215
https://journal.kci.go.kr/kspm

PURPOSE: This study examined the muscle activity and respiratory function of young adults according to the types of sitting posture with crossed legs during smartphone use. METHODS: The subjects were 30 young adults. They performed three types of sitting with crossed-leg posture during smartphone use for 15 minutes: crossed-leg posture in the first week, tailored crossed-leg sitting posture in the second week, and upright sitting posture in the third week. The muscle activity and respiratory function were measured before and after the sitting postures. The muscle activity of six muscles was measured using surface electromyography: external oblique (EO), internal oblique, erector spinae (ES), rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, and tensor fascia latae. The respiratory function was measured using the forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in one second, and maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV). RESULTS: The EO muscle activity in the crossed-leg sitting was significantly higher than in tailored crossed-leg sitting and upright sitting (p = .000). The ES muscle activity in tailored crossed-leg sitting increased significantly after the posture (p = .036). Regarding the respiratory function, the MVV in crossed-leg sitting was significantly lower than in the tailor crossed-leg sitting and upright sitting (p = .000). CONCLUSION: Crossed-leg sitting posture during smartphone use can have a negative effect on the vertebral muscle activity and respiratory function. Maintaining an upright sitting posture during smartphone use is important for body alignment and respiratory function.

PURPOSE: Normal people make relatively symmetrical movements compared to stroke patients suffering from hemiplegia, maintaining good balance and performing movements smoothly. Stroke patients tend to make asymmetrical movements, making them prone to losing balance and inefficient movements. Therefore, this study compared the effects of weight load on the affected side on the balance and gait abilities of stroke patients during sit-to-stand training using sandbags (STSS) and examined the impact of each. METHODS: It targeted 36 stroke patients hospitalized at D Rehabilitation Hospital. The subjects were randomized into experimental group (EG, n = 18) and a control group (CG, n = 18). The EG performed STSS on the affected side ankle. The CG performed sit-to-stand exercise without anything. Pre- and post-intervention, we measured affected side weight distribution, Timed up and go (TUG) test and gait variables. RESULTS: In the intra-group comparisons, weight distribution of the affected side (p < .05), TUG (p < .05), step length of the affected side (p < .05), step length of the unaffected side (p < .05), gait speed (p < .05) and cadence (p < .05) showed significant differences. In the between-group comparison, there were significant differences in weight distribution of the affected side (p < .05), TUG (p < .05), and unaffected side's step length (p < .05). CONCLUSION: The STSS is more effective for the balance and gait ability of stroke patients. Applying exercise STSS on the affected side could be a more effective intervention for patients with hemiplegia due to stroke, enhancing balance and gait abilities.

PURPOSE: This study is to investigate the effect of lumbar stabilization exercise with deep and slow breathing on central sensitization in patients with non-specific chronic back pain. METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trial design. The subjects were randomly assigned to 9 lumbar stabilization exercise with deep and slow breathing (LSEWB) group and 9 lumbar stabilization exercise(LSE) group. Both groups performed exercise twice a week for 8 weeks. Evaluation was conducted before, 4 weeks after, and 8 weeks after exercise. Central sensitization inventory for Korean, monofilament, and conditioned pain modulation were used to evaluate central sensitization. Wilcoxon's signed rank test was used to compare the differences before and after exercise between the two groups, and Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the means of the two groups. Repeated measures of ANOVA was performed to analyze the interaction effect between treatment period and exercise method. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between groups in all tests excepts in the Central sensitization inventory for Korean score that reflects psychosocial factor within the group(p < .05) . There were no significant differences were found between groups(p > .05) in all tests. Also, there were no significant difference in the interaction effect of treatment period and group (p > .05). CONCLUSION: We suggest that LSEWB as well as LSE were useful exercise for the patient with specific low back pain in central sensitization. Also, we suggest that continuous research on effective exercise methods to improve each central sensitivity test in patients with back pain is needed.