ArticleSpine surgery and related research2026
Investigation of Differences in the Firing Patterns of Paraspinal Muscle Electromyography in Healthy Subjects.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Limited data exist regarding the contraction and relaxation patterns of paraspinal muscles (PSMs) during dynamic tasks like gait in healthy individuals. Our preliminary findings, as a cross-sectional study, suggested the existence of distinct, highly individualized activation patterns of PSMs. This study aimed to classify these patterns and to investigate their relationships with functional mobility parameters. Methods: A total of 57 healthy volunteers participated in 10-m gait and Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) tests. Paraspinal electromyography (EMG), tri-axial acceleration, and angular velocity were simultaneously recorded using wireless sensors at the lumbar region. Participants were classified into four distinct types (Types A, B, C, and D) based on the synchronization of PSMs EMG with vertical acceleration and EMG amplitude during gait. Functional parameters were compared using analysis of variance and Dunnett's post hoc tests (vs. Type A). Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictability of Type C. Results: Type C (n=20), characterized by extremely weak PSMs EMG firing (≤±1300 μV) during gait, showed several functional impairments compared with Type A: significantly longer TUG completion time (p<0.05), and shallower anteroposterior inclination angle and reduced pitch angular velocity during the sit-to-stand transition (both p<0.05). Logistic regression confirmed that Type C could be reliably distinguished from Type A (area under the curve ≤0.973) using a combination of EMG-root mean square (EMG-RMS) and kinematic parameters. Conclusions: Healthy individuals exhibit characteristic individual differences in PSM activation during walking and rising. The group with extremely weak PSM activation (Type C) showed compromised physical function and altered postural control strategies, suggesting that these neuromuscular patterns may reflect subtle functional variations, potentially acting as preclinical indicators of future functional decline.
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.