ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Activity of upper-limb muscles during therapeutic climbing: a cross-sectional comparison between fractured and healthy individuals.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTherapeutic climbing (TC) is an emerging physical therapy with demonstrated benefits for musculoskeletal rehabilitation, but its impact on upper-limb muscle activity remains unclear. Existing research predominantly focuses on healthy individuals, leaving muscle recruitment strategies in patients with upper-limb injuries largely unexplored. This study aims to investigate upper-limb muscle activity in patients with unilateral upper-limb injuries and healthy individuals across six TC exercises.
methodsEleven patients with right upper-limb fractures and 15 healthy controls were recruited. The electromyographic temporal patterns, activation intensity, bilateral symmetry, and synergy patterns of anterior deltoid (AD), posterior deltoid (PD), biceps brachii (BB), triceps brachii (TB), pronator teres (PT), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and flexor carpi ulnaris (FCU) were assessed during elbow and knee flexion-extension exercises and four sequential climbing exercises.
resultsAD, BB, and PT exhibited greater activation during climbing, while TB was more active in elbow flexion-extension (p < 0.05). Climbing showed lower similarity ([Formula: see text] = 0.72, lag = -3.40%) than flexion-extension (0.80, 1.36%), which was influenced by climbing sequences: starting with the injured side resulted in 0.85 similarity and 1.71% delay, while starting with the uninjured side reduced similarity to 0.6 and increased delay to 7%. Patients exhibited lower activation intensity than controls in AD (p = 0.048), BB (p = 0.017), TB (p = 0.006), and PT (p < 0.01), and greater asymmetry, especially in PT (p < 0.01). Two synergy patterns explained the > 94% variance in both groups. Patients showed altered synergy patterns with increased AD and reduced forearm activation intensity during climbing (p < 0.05).
conclusionsPatients exhibited delayed muscle activation, decreased activation similarity and intensity, as well as specific compensatory patterns, which were related to both the injury locations and the types of exercises performed. Flexion-extension exercises are more suitable for early rehabilitation. Climbing exercises require greater muscle activation, with climbing starting from the injured side being more suitable for advanced rehabilitation stages. However, injury-induced compensation must be carefully considered in program design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.