Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?
Identifieur interne : 000498 ( Main/Corpus ); précédent : 000497; suivant : 000499Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?
Auteurs : J. Bernard ; J. Beldame ; S. Van Driessche ; H. Brunel ; T. Poirier ; P. Guiffault ; J. Matsoukis ; F. BilluartSource :
- Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR [ 1877-0568 ] ; 2017.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adolescent (MeSH), Adult (MeSH), Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip (methods), Electromyography (MeSH), Female (MeSH), Gait (MeSH), Healthy Volunteers (MeSH), Hip (physiology), Hip Joint (physiology), Humans (MeSH), Learning Curve (MeSH), Male (MeSH), Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures (MeSH), Muscle Contraction (physiology), Muscle, Skeletal (physiology), Patient Positioning (MeSH), Postural Balance (MeSH), Prospective Studies (MeSH), Recovery of Function (MeSH), Young Adult (MeSH).
- MESH :
- methods : Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip.
- physiology : Hip, Hip Joint, Muscle Contraction, Muscle, Skeletal.
- Adolescent, Adult, Electromyography, Female, Gait, Healthy Volunteers, Humans, Learning Curve, Male, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures, Patient Positioning, Postural Balance, Prospective Studies, Recovery of Function, Young Adult.
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (THA) is presumed to provide functional and clinical benefits, whereas in fact the literature reveals that gait and posturographic parameters following THA do not recover values found in the general population. There is a significant disturbance of postural sway in THA patients, regardless of the surgical approach, although with some differences between approaches compared to controls: the anterior and anterolateral minimally invasive approaches seem to be more disruptive of postural parameters than the posterior approach. Electromyographic (EMG) study of the hip muscles involved in surgery [gluteus maximus (GMax), gluteus medius (GMed), tensor fasciae latae (TFL), and sartorius (S)] could shed light, the relevant literature involves discordant methodologies. We developed a methodology to assess EMG activity during maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of the GMax, GMed, TFL and sartorius muscles as a reference for normalization. A prospective study aimed to assess whether hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect the EMG signal during a maximal voluntary contraction.
HYPOTHESIS
Hip positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S.
METHODS
Thirty young asymptomatic subjects participated in the study. Each performed 8 hip muscle MVCs in various joint positions recorded with surface EMG sensors. Each MVC was performed 3 times in 1 week, with the same schedule every day, controlling for activity levels in the preceding 24h. EMG activity during MVC was expressed as a ratio of EMG activity during unipedal stance. Non-parametric tests were applied.
RESULTS
Statistical analysis showed no difference according to hip position for abductors or flexors in assessing EMG signal during MVC over the 3 sessions. Hip abductors showed no difference between abduction in lateral decubitus with hip straight versus hip flexed: GMax (19.8±13.7 vs. 14.5±7.8, P=0.78), GMed (13.4±9.0 vs. 9.9±6.6, P=0.21) and TFL (69.5±61.7 vs. 65.9±51.3, P=0.50). Flexors showed no difference between hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine or sitting position: TFL (70.6±45.9 vs. 61.6±45.8, P=0.22) and S (101.1±67.9 vs. 72.6±44.6, P=0.21). The most effective tests to assess EMG signal during MVC were for the hip abductors: hip abduction performed in lateral decubitus (36.7% for GMax, 76.7% for GMed), and for hip flexors: hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine decubitus (50% for TFL, 76.7% for S).
DISCUSSION
The study hypothesis was not confirmed, since hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test did not affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S muscles. Therefore, a single session and one specific test is enough to assess MVC in hip abductors (abduction in lateral decubitus) and flexors (hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation in supine position). This method could be applied to assess muscle function after THA, and particularly to compare different approaches.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
III, case-matched study.
DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2017.07.009
PubMed: 28789998
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:28789998Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?</title><author><name sortKey="Bernard, J" sort="Bernard, J" uniqKey="Bernard J" first="J" last="Bernard">J. Bernard</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Beldame, J" sort="Beldame, J" uniqKey="Beldame J" first="J" last="Beldame">J. Beldame</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Clinique Mégival, 1328, avenue de la Maison-Blanche, 76550 Saint-Aubin-sur-Scie, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Driessche, S" sort="Van Driessche, S" uniqKey="Van Driessche S" first="S" last="Van Driessche">S. Van Driessche</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Clinique de Montargis, 46, rue de la Quintaine, 45200 Montargis, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brunel, H" sort="Brunel, H" uniqKey="Brunel H" first="H" last="Brunel">H. Brunel</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Poirier, T" sort="Poirier, T" uniqKey="Poirier T" first="T" last="Poirier">T. Poirier</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Guiffault, P" sort="Guiffault, P" uniqKey="Guiffault P" first="P" last="Guiffault">P. Guiffault</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Matsoukis, J" sort="Matsoukis, J" uniqKey="Matsoukis J" first="J" last="Matsoukis">J. Matsoukis</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Billuart, F" sort="Billuart, F" uniqKey="Billuart F" first="F" last="Billuart">F. Billuart</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France. Electronic address: fbilluart@gmail.com.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2017">2017</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:28789998</idno><idno type="pmid">28789998</idno><idno type="doi">10.1016/j.otsr.2017.07.009</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">000498</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000498</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?</title><author><name sortKey="Bernard, J" sort="Bernard, J" uniqKey="Bernard J" first="J" last="Bernard">J. Bernard</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Beldame, J" sort="Beldame, J" uniqKey="Beldame J" first="J" last="Beldame">J. Beldame</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Clinique Mégival, 1328, avenue de la Maison-Blanche, 76550 Saint-Aubin-sur-Scie, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Driessche, S" sort="Van Driessche, S" uniqKey="Van Driessche S" first="S" last="Van Driessche">S. Van Driessche</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Clinique de Montargis, 46, rue de la Quintaine, 45200 Montargis, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brunel, H" sort="Brunel, H" uniqKey="Brunel H" first="H" last="Brunel">H. Brunel</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Poirier, T" sort="Poirier, T" uniqKey="Poirier T" first="T" last="Poirier">T. Poirier</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Guiffault, P" sort="Guiffault, P" uniqKey="Guiffault P" first="P" last="Guiffault">P. Guiffault</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Matsoukis, J" sort="Matsoukis, J" uniqKey="Matsoukis J" first="J" last="Matsoukis">J. Matsoukis</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Billuart, F" sort="Billuart, F" uniqKey="Billuart F" first="F" last="Billuart">F. Billuart</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France. Electronic address: fbilluart@gmail.com.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR</title><idno type="eISSN">1877-0568</idno><imprint><date when="2017" type="published">2017</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adolescent (MeSH)</term><term>Adult (MeSH)</term><term>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip (methods)</term><term>Electromyography (MeSH)</term><term>Female (MeSH)</term><term>Gait (MeSH)</term><term>Healthy Volunteers (MeSH)</term><term>Hip (physiology)</term><term>Hip Joint (physiology)</term><term>Humans (MeSH)</term><term>Learning Curve (MeSH)</term><term>Male (MeSH)</term><term>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures (MeSH)</term><term>Muscle Contraction (physiology)</term><term>Muscle, Skeletal (physiology)</term><term>Patient Positioning (MeSH)</term><term>Postural Balance (MeSH)</term><term>Prospective Studies (MeSH)</term><term>Recovery of Function (MeSH)</term><term>Young Adult (MeSH)</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="methods" xml:lang="en"><term>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiology" xml:lang="en"><term>Hip</term><term>Hip Joint</term><term>Muscle Contraction</term><term>Muscle, Skeletal</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adolescent</term><term>Adult</term><term>Electromyography</term><term>Female</term><term>Gait</term><term>Healthy Volunteers</term><term>Humans</term><term>Learning Curve</term><term>Male</term><term>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures</term><term>Patient Positioning</term><term>Postural Balance</term><term>Prospective Studies</term><term>Recovery of Function</term><term>Young Adult</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>BACKGROUND</b></p><p>Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (THA) is presumed to provide functional and clinical benefits, whereas in fact the literature reveals that gait and posturographic parameters following THA do not recover values found in the general population. There is a significant disturbance of postural sway in THA patients, regardless of the surgical approach, although with some differences between approaches compared to controls: the anterior and anterolateral minimally invasive approaches seem to be more disruptive of postural parameters than the posterior approach. Electromyographic (EMG) study of the hip muscles involved in surgery [gluteus maximus (GMax), gluteus medius (GMed), tensor fasciae latae (TFL), and sartorius (S)] could shed light, the relevant literature involves discordant methodologies. We developed a methodology to assess EMG activity during maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of the GMax, GMed, TFL and sartorius muscles as a reference for normalization. A prospective study aimed to assess whether hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect the EMG signal during a maximal voluntary contraction.</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>HYPOTHESIS</b></p><p>Hip positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S.</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>METHODS</b></p><p>Thirty young asymptomatic subjects participated in the study. Each performed 8 hip muscle MVCs in various joint positions recorded with surface EMG sensors. Each MVC was performed 3 times in 1 week, with the same schedule every day, controlling for activity levels in the preceding 24h. EMG activity during MVC was expressed as a ratio of EMG activity during unipedal stance. Non-parametric tests were applied.</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>RESULTS</b></p><p>Statistical analysis showed no difference according to hip position for abductors or flexors in assessing EMG signal during MVC over the 3 sessions. Hip abductors showed no difference between abduction in lateral decubitus with hip straight versus hip flexed: GMax (19.8±13.7 vs. 14.5±7.8, P=0.78), GMed (13.4±9.0 vs. 9.9±6.6, P=0.21) and TFL (69.5±61.7 vs. 65.9±51.3, P=0.50). Flexors showed no difference between hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine or sitting position: TFL (70.6±45.9 vs. 61.6±45.8, P=0.22) and S (101.1±67.9 vs. 72.6±44.6, P=0.21). The most effective tests to assess EMG signal during MVC were for the hip abductors: hip abduction performed in lateral decubitus (36.7% for GMax, 76.7% for GMed), and for hip flexors: hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine decubitus (50% for TFL, 76.7% for S).</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>DISCUSSION</b></p><p>The study hypothesis was not confirmed, since hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test did not affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S muscles. Therefore, a single session and one specific test is enough to assess MVC in hip abductors (abduction in lateral decubitus) and flexors (hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation in supine position). This method could be applied to assess muscle function after THA, and particularly to compare different approaches.</p></div><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><b>LEVEL OF EVIDENCE</b></p><p>III, case-matched study.</p></div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" IndexingMethod="Curated" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">28789998</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2018</Year><Month>05</Month><Day>18</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2018</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>02</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print-Electronic"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1877-0568</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>103</Volume><Issue>7</Issue><PubDate><Year>2017</Year><Month>11</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Orthop Traumatol Surg Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>999-1004</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="pii" ValidYN="Y">S1877-0568(17)30216-5</ELocationID><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1016/j.otsr.2017.07.009</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText Label="BACKGROUND">Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (THA) is presumed to provide functional and clinical benefits, whereas in fact the literature reveals that gait and posturographic parameters following THA do not recover values found in the general population. There is a significant disturbance of postural sway in THA patients, regardless of the surgical approach, although with some differences between approaches compared to controls: the anterior and anterolateral minimally invasive approaches seem to be more disruptive of postural parameters than the posterior approach. Electromyographic (EMG) study of the hip muscles involved in surgery [gluteus maximus (GMax), gluteus medius (GMed), tensor fasciae latae (TFL), and sartorius (S)] could shed light, the relevant literature involves discordant methodologies. We developed a methodology to assess EMG activity during maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of the GMax, GMed, TFL and sartorius muscles as a reference for normalization. A prospective study aimed to assess whether hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect the EMG signal during a maximal voluntary contraction.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="HYPOTHESIS">Hip positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="METHODS">Thirty young asymptomatic subjects participated in the study. Each performed 8 hip muscle MVCs in various joint positions recorded with surface EMG sensors. Each MVC was performed 3 times in 1 week, with the same schedule every day, controlling for activity levels in the preceding 24h. EMG activity during MVC was expressed as a ratio of EMG activity during unipedal stance. Non-parametric tests were applied.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="RESULTS">Statistical analysis showed no difference according to hip position for abductors or flexors in assessing EMG signal during MVC over the 3 sessions. Hip abductors showed no difference between abduction in lateral decubitus with hip straight versus hip flexed: GMax (19.8±13.7 vs. 14.5±7.8, P=0.78), GMed (13.4±9.0 vs. 9.9±6.6, P=0.21) and TFL (69.5±61.7 vs. 65.9±51.3, P=0.50). Flexors showed no difference between hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine or sitting position: TFL (70.6±45.9 vs. 61.6±45.8, P=0.22) and S (101.1±67.9 vs. 72.6±44.6, P=0.21). The most effective tests to assess EMG signal during MVC were for the hip abductors: hip abduction performed in lateral decubitus (36.7% for GMax, 76.7% for GMed), and for hip flexors: hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation performed in supine decubitus (50% for TFL, 76.7% for S).</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="DISCUSSION">The study hypothesis was not confirmed, since hip joint positioning and the learning curve on an MVC test did not affect EMG signal during MVC of GMax, GMed, TFL and S muscles. Therefore, a single session and one specific test is enough to assess MVC in hip abductors (abduction in lateral decubitus) and flexors (hip flexion/abduction/lateral rotation in supine position). This method could be applied to assess muscle function after THA, and particularly to compare different approaches.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="LEVEL OF EVIDENCE">III, case-matched study.</AbstractText><CopyrightInformation>Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.</CopyrightInformation></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Bernard</LastName><ForeName>J</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Beldame</LastName><ForeName>J</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Clinique Mégival, 1328, avenue de la Maison-Blanche, 76550 Saint-Aubin-sur-Scie, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Van Driessche</LastName><ForeName>S</ForeName><Initials>S</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Clinique de Montargis, 46, rue de la Quintaine, 45200 Montargis, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Brunel</LastName><ForeName>H</ForeName><Initials>H</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Poirier</LastName><ForeName>T</ForeName><Initials>T</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Guiffault</LastName><ForeName>P</ForeName><Initials>P</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Matsoukis</LastName><ForeName>J</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Département de chirurgie orthopédique, groupe hospitalier du Havre, BP 24, 76083 Le Havre cedex, France.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Billuart</LastName><ForeName>F</ForeName><Initials>F</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Laboratoire d'analyse du mouvement, Institut de formation en masso-kinésithérapie « Saint-Michel », 68, rue du Commerce, 75015 Paris, France. Electronic address: fbilluart@gmail.com.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016430">Clinical Trial</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList><ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2017</Year><Month>08</Month><Day>05</Day></ArticleDate></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>France</Country><MedlineTA>Orthop Traumatol Surg Res</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>101494830</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>1877-0568</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000293" MajorTopicYN="N">Adolescent</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000328" MajorTopicYN="N">Adult</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019644" MajorTopicYN="Y">Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="N">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D004576" MajorTopicYN="Y">Electromyography</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005684" MajorTopicYN="N">Gait</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D064368" MajorTopicYN="N">Healthy Volunteers</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006615" MajorTopicYN="N">Hip</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="N">physiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006621" MajorTopicYN="N">Hip Joint</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="Y">physiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D059032" MajorTopicYN="Y">Learning Curve</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019060" MajorTopicYN="N">Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D009119" MajorTopicYN="N">Muscle Contraction</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="Y">physiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018482" MajorTopicYN="N">Muscle, Skeletal</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="Y">physiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D056888" MajorTopicYN="Y">Patient Positioning</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D004856" MajorTopicYN="N">Postural Balance</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011446" MajorTopicYN="N">Prospective Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D020127" MajorTopicYN="N">Recovery of Function</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D055815" MajorTopicYN="N">Young Adult</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList><KeywordList Owner="NOTNLM"><Keyword MajorTopicYN="Y">Electromyography</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="Y">Hip</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="Y">Minimally invasive hip approaches</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="Y">Muscle testing</Keyword></KeywordList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="received"><Year>2017</Year><Month>04</Month><Day>22</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="revised"><Year>2017</Year><Month>07</Month><Day>03</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="accepted"><Year>2017</Year><Month>07</Month><Day>10</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2017</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>10</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2018</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>19</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2017</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>10</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">28789998</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">S1877-0568(17)30216-5</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1016/j.otsr.2017.07.009</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Sante/explor/PosturoV1/Data/Main/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000498 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000498 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Sante
|area= PosturoV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:28789998
|texte= Does hip joint positioning affect maximal voluntary contraction in the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, tensor fasciae latae and sartorius muscles?
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:28789998" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a PosturoV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.37. |  |