• Physical Therapy Rehabilitation Science
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.304-310
• /
• 2021

Objective: This study aimed to investigate effective cueing methods for selective muscle activation of gluteus medius muscles. Design: Cross sectional study design. Methods: Using the inclusion criteria for this study, 20 healthy adults, both males and females were selected for the measurement of muscle activation of gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, and tensor fascia latae muscles while performing clamshell exercise, basic movements in leg raise in side-lying, and 3 different cueing methods. Electromyogram was used to measure muscle activation, and both muscle activation and muscle ratio were compared during the basic movements and different cueing methods. Results: Gluteus medius activation was highest using "try not to make your body rotate" (cueing method 2) in both clamshell exercise and leg raise side-lying (F=5.533, p<0.05, F=7.771, p<0.05), and muscle ratio was highest in clamshell exercise using cueing method 2 (p<0.05) and "don't move your tensor fascia late" (cueing method 1) in leg raise side-lying (p<0.05). This study showed that cueing method 1 in leg raise side-lying and cueing method 2 in clamshell exercise were the most effective cueing methods for selective muscle activation of gluteus medius muscle. Conclusions: The results of this study may be used as basic information for future studies on muscle activation and muscle ratio for different cueing methods and different muscles in various exercises.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Physical Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.9-19
• /
• 2019

PURPOSE: This study compared the effects of three different clamshell exercises (CLAM) on the gluteus medius (GMED), quadratus lumborum (QL), anterior hip flexor (AHF), gluteus medius/quadratus lumborum ratio, and gluteus medius/anterior hip flexor ratio by studying the activities of participants with GMED weakness. METHODS: Eleven subjects with weak GMED participated in this study. Subjects performed CLAM under three different conditions (standard, and modified 1 and 2). Surface electromyography was then used to measure the muscle activity and one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to assess the statistical significance of the measured variables. RESULTS: GMED and the QL muscle activities did not differ significantly between the standard CLAM and the modified CLAM with the 2 different foot positions (F=4.74, P=.02; F=4.57, P=.02, respectively). AHF activity was significantly different in the two different foot positions when compared to the standard CLAM (F=11.17, P=.00). However, there was no significant difference between the AHF activities for the two different foot positions (P=.09). Finally, GMED/QL and GMED/AHF ratios were not significantly different between the three different CLAM exercises (F=.63, P=.55; F=.82, P=.45, respectively). CONCLUSION: Modified CLAM can be recommended as a good method to minimize AHF activity while maintaining GMED activity in subjects with weak GMED.