Short-term effects of 90/90 breathing with ball and balloon on core stability

• Main Author: Alverdes, Lukas
• Format: Others
• Language: English
• Published: Högskolan i Halmstad, Akademin för ekonomi, teknik och naturvetenskap 2018
• Subjects: Medical and Health Sciences; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Sport and Fitness Sciences; Idrottsvetenskap
• Online Access: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-36919

Background Breathing is a life preserving mechanism that can influence muscles of the core and its stabilizing mechanisms, especially by the function of the diaphragm and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) build-up. The 90/90 bridge with ball and balloon (90/90 breathing) is one technique doing so, thereby affecting the core and core stability (CS). Both have been shown to influence injury, and in some studies performance, and are therefore deemed important. In the Functional Training branch exercises that influence CS are used as core activations in the warm-up to increase performance in the short-term, but scientific proof for that is lacking. Objective The aim of this study was therefore to investigate if a core activation in the form of the 90/90 breathing can increase the short-term CS. Methods To test this an intervention trial was designed where the subjects were divided into a control group (CG) and a breathing group (BG). Three CS-tests were done to assess the CS at two times, Pre and Post. The double-leg-lowering (DLL), the unilateral-hip-bridge (UHB) and the single-leg-stand (SLS). The BG did the 90/90 breathing in between Pre and Post, whereas the CG did nothing. The data was checked for group differences at Pre and Post as well as the difference in the performance change from Pre to Post between groups using Independent t-test and Mann-Whitney U test. Improvements from Pre to Post within groups were calculated with Pared Samples t-test and Wilcoxon tests. Results No consistent effect of the intervention was found. The DLL showed the most positive results with a performance improvement in the BG and a greater performance change for the BG than for the CG. The UHB showed mixed results with a better performance at Post for the BG in both legs but only an improvement for the non-dominant leg in the BG. The SLS showed no improvement for the BG in any test. Conclusion The inconsistent results show no general positive effect of the 90/90 breathing on CS. However, the positive effects in the DLL make a position and task specific effect of the 90/90 breathing on CS possible. Practitioners and coaches should consider this task specificity when planning warm-ups. Future research should also choose CS tests and training exercises more task specific to the studied objectives to obtain more distinct results. More research on the short-term effects of CS interventions is needed for a clearer understanding of the subject.