Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Importance of Sensory-Motor Control in Providing Core Stability

Implications for Measurement and Training

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Sports Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although the hip musculature is found to be very important in connecting the core to the lower extremities and in transferring forces from and to the core, it is proposed to leave the hip musculature out of consideration when talking about the concept of core stability. A low level of co-contraction of the trunk muscles is important for core stability. It provides a level of stiffness, which gives sufficient stability against minor perturbations. Next to this stiffness, direction-specific muscle reflex responses are also important in providing core stability, particularly when encountering sudden perturbations.

It appears that most trunk muscles, both the local and global stabilization system, must work coherently to achieve core stability. The contributions of the various trunk muscles depend on the task being performed. In the search for a precise balance between the amount of stability and mobility, the role of sensory-motor control is much more important than the role of strength or endurance of the trunk muscles. The CNS creates a stable foundation for movement of the extremities through co-contraction of particular muscles. Appropriate muscle recruitment and timing is extremely important in providing core stability.

No clear evidence has been found for a positive relationship between core stability and physical performance and more research in this area is needed. On the other hand, with respect to the relationship between core stability and injury, several studies have found an association between a decreased stability and a higher risk of sustaining a low back or knee injury. Subjects with such injuries have been shown to demonstrate impaired postural control, delayed muscle reflex responses following sudden trunk unloading and abnormal trunk muscle recruitment patterns. In addition, various relationships have been demonstrated between core stability, balance performance and activation characteristics of the trunk muscles. Most importantly, a significant correlation was found between poor balance performance in a sitting balance task and delayed firing of the trunk muscles during sudden perturbation. It was suggested that both phenomena are caused by proprioceptive deficits.

The importance of sensory-motor control has implications for the development of measurement and training protocols. It has been shown that challenging propriocepsis during training activities, for example, by making use of unstable surfaces, leads to increased demands on trunk muscles, thereby improving core stability and balance. Various tests to directly or indirectly measure neuromuscular control and coordination have been developed and are discussed in the present article. Sitting balance performance and trunk muscle response times may be good indicators of core stability. In light of this, it would be interesting to quantify core stability using a sitting balance task, for example by making use of accelerometry. Further research is required to develop training programmes and evaluation methods that are suitable for various target groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liemohn WP, Baumgartner TA, Gagnon LH. Measuring core stability. J Strength Cond Res 2005; 19 (3): 583–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Akuthota V, Nadler SF. Core strengthening. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85 (3 Suppl. 1): 86–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kibler WB, Press J, Sciascia A. The role of core stability in athletic function. Sports Med 2006; 36 (3): 189–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zazulak BT, Hewett TE, Reeves NP, et al. The effects of core proprioception on knee injury: a prospective biomechanical-epidemiological study. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35 (3): 368–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Panjabi MM. The stabilizing system of the spine, part 1: function, dysfunction, adaptation, and enhancement. J Spinal Disord 1992; 5 (4): 383–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Leetun DT, Ireland ML, Willson JD, et al. Core stability measures as risk factors for lower extremity injury inathletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36 (6): 926–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. McGill SM, Cholewicki J. Biomechanical basis for stability: an explanation to enhance clinical utility. J OrthopSports Phys Ther 2001; 31 (2): 96–100

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bergmark A. Stability of the lumbar spine: a study in mechanical engineering. Acta Orthop Scand 1989; 230Suppl.: 1–54

    Google Scholar 

  9. McGill SM. Low back stability: from formal description to issues for performance and rehabilitation. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2001; 29 (1): 26–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zazulak BT, Hewett TE, Reeves NP, et al. Deficits in neuromuscular control of the trunk predict knee injury risk:a prospective biomechanical-epidemiologic Study. Am JSports Med 2007; 35 (7): 1123–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cholewicki J, Simons AP, Radebold A. Effects of external trunk loads on lumbar spine stability. J Biomech 2000; 33 (11): 1377–85

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ebenbichler GR, Oddson LI, Kollmitzer J, et al. Sensorymotor control of the lower back: implications for rehabilitation. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33 (11): 1889–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Van Dieën JH, Cholewicki J, Radebold A. Trunk muscle recruitment patterns in patients with low back pain enhancethe stability of the lumbar spine. Spine 2003; 28 (8): 834–41

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Arokoski J, Valta T, Airaksinen O, et al. Back and abdominal muscle function during stabilization exercises. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82 (8): 1089–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Contraction of the abdominal muscles associated with movement of the lower limb. Phys Ther 1997; 77 (2): 132–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kavcic N, Grenier S, McGill SM. Determining the stabilizing role of individual torso muscles during rehabilitationexercises. Spine 2004; 29 (11): 1254–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cholewicki J, McGill SM. Mechanical stability of the in vivo lumbar spine: implications for injury and chronic lowback pain. Clin Biomech 1996; 11 (1): 1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cholewicki J, Van Vliet JJ 4th. Relative contribution of trunk muscles to the stability of the lumbar spine duringisometric exertions. Clin Biomech 2002; 17 (2): 99–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Comerford MJ, Mottram SL. Functional stability re-training: principles and strategies for managing mechanicaldysfunction. Man Ther 2001; 6 (1): 3–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Crisco JJ, Panjabi MM. The intersegmental and multisegmental muscles of the lumbar spine.A bio mechanical model comparing lateral stabilizing potential. Spine 1991; 16 (7): 793–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Anderson K, Behm DG. The impact of instability resistance training on balance and stability. Sports Med 2005; 35 (1): 43–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cresswell AG, Oddsson L, Thorstensson A. The influence of sudden perturbations on trunk muscle activity and intraabdominalpressure while standing. Exp Brain Res 1994;98 (2): 336–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. McGill SM. Low back disorders: evidence-based prevention and rehabilitation. Champaign (IL): HumanKinetics, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  24. Comerford MJ, Mottram SL. Movement and stability dysfunction: contemporary developments. Man Ther 2001; 6 (1): 15–26

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Gandevia SC, McCloskey DI, Burke D. Kinaesthetic signals and muscle contraction. Trends Neurosci 1992; 15 (2): 62–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Radebold A, Cholewicki J, Polzhofer GK, et al. Impaired postural control of the lumbar spine is associated withdelayed muscle response times in patients with chronicidiopathic low back pain. Spine 2001; 26 (7): 724–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Stanton R, Reaburn PR, Humphries B. The effect of shortterm Swiss ball training on core stability and running economy. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18 (3): 522–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tse MA, McManus AM, Masters RSW. Development and validation of a core endurance intervention program:implications for performance in college-age rowers. JStrength Cond Res 2005; 19 (3): 547–52

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ireland ML. The female ACL: why is it more prone to injury? Orthop Clin North Am 2002; 33 (4): 637–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nadler SF, Wu KD, Galski T, et al. Low back pain in college athletes: a prospective study correlating lower extremityoveruse or acquired ligamentous laxity with low backpain. Spine 1998; 23 (7): 828–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Nadler SF, Malanga GA, Bartoli LA, et al. Hip muscle imbalance and low back pain in athletes: influence of core strengthening. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002; 34 (1)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Cholewicki J, Greene HS, Polzhofer GK, et al. Neuromuscular function in athletes following recovery from a recentacute low back injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2002; 32 (11): 568–75

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Renkawitz T, Boluki D, Grifka J. The association of low back pain, neuromuscular imbalance, and trunk extensionstrength in athletes. Spine J 2006; 6 (6): 673–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gill KP, Callaghan MJ. The measurement of proprioception in individuals with and without low back pain. Spine 1998; 23 (3): 371–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McGill SM, Grenier S, Kavcic N, et al. Coordination of muscle activity to assure stability of the lumbar spine. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2003; 13 (4): 353–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Inefficient muscular stabilization of the lumbar spine associated with low back pain:a motor control evaluation of transversus abdominis. Spine 1996; 21 (22): 2640–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Hides JA, Richardson CA, Jull GA. Multifidus muscle recovery is not automatic after resolution of acute, firstepisodelow back pain. Spine 1996; 21 (23): 2763–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Panjabi MM. The stabilizing system of the spine, part 2: neutral zone and instability hypothesis. J Spinal Disord 1992; 5 (4): 390–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Barr KP, Griggs M, Cadby T. Lumbar stabilization: a review of core concepts and current literature, part 2. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 86 (1): 72–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Brown SH, McGill SM. Muscle force-stiffness characteristics influence joint stability: a spine example. Clin Biomech 2005; 20 (9): 917–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cholewicki J, Silfies SP, Shah RA, et al. Delayed trunk muscle reflex responses increase the risk of low backinjuries. Spine 2005; 30 (23): 2614–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Radebold A, Cholewicki J, Panjabi MM, et al. Muscle response pattern to sudden trunk loading in healthy individualsand in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine 2000; 25 (8): 947–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Kornecki S, Kebel A, Siemienski A. Muscular cooperation during joint stabilization, as reflected by EMG. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 85 (5): 453–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Slijper H, Latash M. The effects of instability and additional hand support on anticipatory postural adjustments in leg,trunk, and arm muscles during standing. Exp Brain Res 2000; 135 (1): 81–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Mok NW, Brauer SG, Hodget PW. Hip strategy for balance control in quiet standing is reduced in people with lowback pain. Spine 2004; 29 (6): 107–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. O’sullivan PB, Burnett A, Floyd AN, et al. Lumbar repositioning deficit in a specific low back pain population. Spine 2003; 28 (10): 1074–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cosio-Lima LM, Reynolds KL, Winter C, et al. Effects of physioball and conventional floor exercises on early phase adaptations in back and abdominal core stabilityand balance in women. J Strength Cond Res 2003; 17 (4):721–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hewett TE, Paterno MV, Myer GD. Strategies for enhancing proprioception and neuromuscular control of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; 402: 76–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Caraffa A, Cerulli G, Projetti M, et al. Prevention of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in soccer: a prospectivecontrolled study of proprioceptive training. Knee SurgSports Traumatol Arthrosc 1996; 4 (1): 19–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Wilder D, Aleksiev A, Magnusson M, et al. Muscular response to sudden load: a tool to evaluate fatigue and rehabilitation. Spine 1996; 21 (22): 2628–39

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Hides JA, Jull GA, Richardson CA. Long-term effects of specific stabilizing exercises for first-episode low backpain. Spine 2001; 26 (11): 243–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Marshall PW, Murphy BA. Core stability exercises on and off a Swiss ball. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86 (2): 242–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Behm DG, Leonard A, Young W, et al. Trunk muscle EMG activity with unstable and unilateral exercises. J Strength Cond Res 2003; 19 (1): 193–201

    Google Scholar 

  54. Kavcic N, Grenier S, McGill SM. Quantifying tissue loads and spine stability while performing commonly prescribed low back stabilization exercises. Spine 2004;29 (20): 2319–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, A. Deusinglaan 1, Groningen, 9713 AV, The Netherlands

    Jan Borghuis &  Koen A. P. M. Lemmink

  2. School of Sports Studies, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, the Netherlands

    At L. Hof &  Koen A. P. M. Lemmink

Authors
  1. Jan Borghuis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. At L. Hof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Koen A. P. M. Lemmink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Koen A. P. M. Lemmink.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Borghuis, J., Hof, A.L. & Lemmink, K.A.P.M. The Importance of Sensory-Motor Control in Providing Core Stability. Sports Med 38, 893–916 (2008). https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200838110-00002

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200838110-00002

Keywords

Search

Navigation