McGill S M, Kavcic N S, Harvey E
Clinical Biomechanics, Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Ont., Canada.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2006 May;21(4):353-60. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.11.006. Epub 2006 Jan 10.
Prolonged sitting is recognized as a risk factor for the reporting of low back troubles. Despite the use of exercise balls in replacement of the office chair, little quantitative evidence exists to support this practice and hence motivated this research. Given the potential for several biological effects and mechanisms this study was approached with several layers of instrumentation to quantify differences in muscle activation, spine posture, spine compression and stability while sitting on an exercise ball versus a stable seat surface. Also, differences in the pressure distribution at the seat-user interface were quantified for the different seat surfaces to provide an objective perspective on the mechanism influencing perceived comfort levels.
Eight male subjects volunteered to sit for 30 min on an exercise ball and on a wooden stool. Muscle activity and spine position were used to model spine load and stability. An additional seven sat on an exercise ball and chair to examine pressure distribution over the contact area.
There was no difference in muscle activation profiles of each of the 14 muscles between sitting on the stool and ball. Calculated stability and compression values showed sitting on the ball made no difference in mean response values. The contact area of the seat-user interface was greatest on the exercise ball.
The results of this study suggest that prolonged sitting on a dynamic, unstable seat surface does not significantly affect the magnitudes of muscle activation, spine posture, spine loads or overall spine stability. Sitting on a ball appears to spread out the contact area possibly resulting in uncomfortable soft tissue compression perhaps explaining the reported discomfort.
长时间坐着被认为是导致下背部问题的一个风险因素。尽管有人使用健身球来替代办公椅,但几乎没有定量证据支持这种做法,因此激发了本研究。鉴于可能存在多种生物学效应和机制,本研究采用了多层仪器来量化坐在健身球和稳定座椅表面时肌肉激活、脊柱姿势、脊柱压缩和稳定性的差异。此外,还对不同座椅表面在座椅与使用者界面处的压力分布差异进行了量化,以便从影响感知舒适度的机制方面提供客观的观点。
八名男性受试者自愿分别在健身球和木凳上坐30分钟。利用肌肉活动和脊柱位置来模拟脊柱负荷和稳定性。另外七名受试者分别坐在健身球和椅子上,以检查接触区域的压力分布。
坐在凳子和健身球上时,14块肌肉中每块肌肉的激活情况均无差异。计算得出的稳定性和压缩值表明,坐在健身球上时平均反应值没有差异。座椅与使用者界面的接触面积在健身球上最大。
本研究结果表明长时间坐在动态、不稳定的座椅表面不会显著影响肌肉激活程度、脊柱姿势、脊柱负荷或整体脊柱稳定性。坐在健身球上似乎会扩大接触面积,可能导致软组织受压不适,这或许可以解释所报告的不适感。