The effects of exercise type and elbow angle on vertical ground reaction force and muscle activity during a push-up plus exercise
Background Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the ef...
Saved in:
| Published in | BMC musculoskeletal disorders Vol. 16; no. 1; p. 23 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors | , , , |
| Format | Journal Article |
| Language | English |
| Published |
London
BioMed Central
10.02.2015
BioMed Central Ltd |
| Subjects | |
| Online Access | Get full text |
| ISSN | 1471-2474 1471-2474 |
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-015-0486-5 |
Cover
| Abstract | Background
Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction.
Methods
A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected.
Results
The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (
P
< .05) and vertical ground reaction force (
P
< .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (
P
< .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise.
Conclusion
The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction. A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected. The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise. The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55[degrees] of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. Background Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction. Methods A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected. Results The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise. Conclusion The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55[degrees] of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. Keywords: Scapula, Rehabilitation, Muscle recruitment, Shoulder Background Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction. Methods A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected. Results The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested ( P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force ( P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus ( P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise. Conclusion The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction. A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected. The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise. The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. BACKGROUND: Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction. METHODS: A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected. RESULTS: The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise. CONCLUSION: The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction.BACKGROUNDProper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is considered as one of the best exercise to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the scapula. The purpose of the study is to examine the effects of push-up plus variants and elbow position on vertical ground reaction force and electromyographical activity of four shoulder muscles during concentric contraction.A total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected.METHODSA total of 22 healthy subjects volunteered for the study. Each of the subjects performed both modified and traditional push-up plus. Modified push-up plus was performed with both knees and hands touching the ground while the traditional push-up plus was executed with hands and feet contacting the ground. Electromyography (EMG) of the upper trapezius (UT), lower trapezius (LT), infraspinatus (INFRA), and serratus anterior (SA), and vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) were collected.The traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise.RESULTSThe traditional push-up plus exhibited higher EMG activity in all muscles tested (P < .05) and vertical ground reaction force (P < .001) compared to modified push-up plus. The highest difference in EMG activity between the two exercises was observed with the Serratus Anterior muscle (22%). Additionally, the traditional push-up plus presented a higher vGRF compared to the modified push-up plus (P < .001) by 17%. The SA had the greatest EMG activity compared to the other muscles tested during the concentric phase of the traditional push-up plus, and this did not occur during the plus phase of the exercise.The highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior.CONCLUSIONThe highest activity of the serratus anterior occurred at 55° of elbow extension during the concentric phase of the traditional PUP and not at the plus phase of the exercise. This suggests that when prescribing an exercise to target the serratus anterior, a traditional push-up is adequate and the plus-phase is not necessary. However, for patients that cannot perform a traditional push-up, the modified push-up plus would be a great alternative to strengthen their serratus anterior. |
| ArticleNumber | 23 |
| Audience | Academic |
| Author | Roach, Sean M San Juan, Jun G Lyda, Marc Suprak, David N |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Jun G surname: San Juan fullname: San Juan, Jun G email: jun.sanjuan@gmail.com organization: Department of Physical Education, Health and Recreation, Western Washington University – sequence: 2 givenname: David N surname: Suprak fullname: Suprak, David N organization: Department of Physical Education, Health and Recreation, Western Washington University – sequence: 3 givenname: Sean M surname: Roach fullname: Roach, Sean M organization: Western Institute of Neuromechanics – sequence: 4 givenname: Marc surname: Lyda fullname: Lyda, Marc organization: Western Institute of Neuromechanics |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25881172$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kktv3CAUha0qVfNof0A3FVI33TgFjAFvKkVp-pAidZOuEcbXHiLbuGAmnWX_ebCcjjJVGrEAcb9zeNxzmh2NboQse0vwOSGSfwyEyorkmJQ5ZpLn5YvshDBBcsoEO3q0Ps5OQ7jFmAhZVK-yY1pKSYigJ9mfmw0gaFswc0CuRfAbvLEB0LybAOmxQdDX7i6tuh6QG9EW_GyN7lHnXUxlD9rMNhVa582qGGIwCV72t3beoSZ6O3ZIoymGTR4nNPUx7E96nb1sdR_gzcN8lv38cnVz-S2__vH1--XFdV6XAs-5kbyta1yRivC2kpyCwLxpDJUlrqraVFAIznjFC9AYZA2slrogRcloY6SgxVn2afWdYj1AY2Ccve7V5O2g_U45bdVhZbQb1bmtYgUVEuNk8Hk1qK37j8FhxbhBrS1SqUVqaZEqk82Hh3t49ytCmNVgg4G-1yO4GBThglFSEL6g71e00z0oO7Yu-ZoFVxclI4wyVspEnT9BpdHAYE1KTGvT_oHg3eOf2L_gbyoSQFbAeBeCh3aPEKyW5D35LPGPxthZL8lIt7H9s0q6KsO05AS8unXRjykLz4juAVjW7hk |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_4085_1062_6050_237_18 crossref_primary_10_3389_fphys_2023_1296279 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jbiomech_2016_04_036 crossref_primary_10_1519_JSC_0000000000001953 crossref_primary_10_26862_jkpts_2022_09_29_3_48 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13102_021_00330_z crossref_primary_10_24332_aospt_2017_13_2_05 crossref_primary_10_1123_jab_2017_0063 crossref_primary_10_1123_jab_2024_0012 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_xrrt_2023_02_007 crossref_primary_10_1080_14763141_2018_1512149 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1093/ptj/80.3.276 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31820c8587 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bde2cf 10.1177/036354659202000206 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc23b0 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f8d24 10.4085/1062-6050-48.5.08 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.002 10.1016/0268-0033(94)90057-4 10.1177/03635465990270061601 10.1016/S0268-0033(01)00008-0 10.1016/j.math.2013.04.002 10.4103/0973-6042.40456 10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.09.009 10.1589/jpts.26.1275 10.1139/h06-006 10.1589/jpts.26.937 10.1589/jpts.23.365 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.03.008 10.1016/j.jse.2009.06.003 10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00127-8 10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00047-0 10.4085/1062-6050-43.5.464 10.1123/jab.29.4.371 10.2519/jospt.2009.2808 10.1016/j.jse.2009.09.007 10.1589/jpts.26.805 10.1002/ca.22128 10.2106/00004623-200006000-00012 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.07.010 10.2519/jospt.2009.2788 10.1177/0363546503258911 10.1016/S0268-0033(02)00136-5 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.10.005 10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.07.001 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.7.385 10.1186/1476-5918-5-7 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | San Juan et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 COPYRIGHT 2015 BioMed Central Ltd. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: San Juan et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 – notice: COPYRIGHT 2015 BioMed Central Ltd. |
| DBID | C6C AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 5PM |
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-015-0486-5 |
| DatabaseName | Springer Nature OA Free Journals CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: C6C name: Springer Nature OA Free Journals url: http://www.springeropen.com/ sourceTypes: Publisher – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine Anatomy & Physiology |
| EISSN | 1471-2474 |
| EndPage | 23 |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC4327800 oai_biomedcentral_com_s12891_015_0486_5 A541424458 25881172 10_1186_s12891_015_0486_5 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | --- 0R~ 23N 2WC 4.4 53G 5VS 6J9 6PF 7RV 7X7 88E 8FI 8FJ AAFWJ AAJSJ AASML AAWTL ABDBF ABUWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIHN ACPRK ACUHS ADBBV ADRAZ ADUKV AEAQA AENEX AFKRA AFPKN AHBYD AHMBA AHSBF AHYZX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMTXH AOIJS BAPOH BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BFQNJ BMC BPHCQ BVXVI C6C CCPQU CS3 DIK DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EAS EBD EBLON EBS EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX F5P FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 H13 HMCUK HYE IAO IHR INH INR ITC KQ8 M1P M48 M~E NAPCQ O5R O5S OK1 OVT P2P PGMZT PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PPXIY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PUEGO RBZ RNS ROL RPM RSV SMD SOJ SV3 TR2 TUS U2A UKHRP W2D WOQ WOW XSB AAYXX ALIPV CITATION -A0 3V. ACRMQ ADINQ C24 CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM PMFND 7X8 ABVAZ AFGXO AFNRJ 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-b570t-c86fbb091916f9862e706ddc285099bc9e37646963ea0e8be4b8a313542dc8723 |
| IEDL.DBID | M48 |
| ISSN | 1471-2474 |
| IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 18:38:51 EDT 2025 Wed May 22 07:12:51 EDT 2024 Thu Sep 04 17:11:25 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 17 22:05:14 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 10 21:09:44 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:22:21 EST 2025 Tue Jul 01 00:46:04 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:02:06 EDT 2025 Sat Sep 06 07:22:20 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 1 |
| Keywords | Muscle recruitment Scapula Rehabilitation Shoulder |
| Language | English |
| License | This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-b570t-c86fbb091916f9862e706ddc285099bc9e37646963ea0e8be4b8a313542dc8723 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| OpenAccessLink | http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.1186/s12891-015-0486-5 |
| PMID | 25881172 |
| PQID | 1674213165 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| PageCount | 1 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4327800 biomedcentral_primary_oai_biomedcentral_com_s12891_015_0486_5 proquest_miscellaneous_1674213165 gale_infotracmisc_A541424458 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A541424458 pubmed_primary_25881172 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12891_015_0486_5 crossref_citationtrail_10_1186_s12891_015_0486_5 springer_journals_10_1186_s12891_015_0486_5 |
| ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2015-02-10 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2015-02-10 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2015 text: 2015-02-10 day: 10 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | London |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: London – name: England |
| PublicationTitle | BMC musculoskeletal disorders |
| PublicationTitleAbbrev | BMC Musculoskelet Disord |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | BMC Musculoskelet Disord |
| PublicationYear | 2015 |
| Publisher | BioMed Central BioMed Central Ltd |
| Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central – name: BioMed Central Ltd |
| References | WS Tucker (486_CR30) 2008; 43 JD Borstad (486_CR2) 2002; 17 T Amasay (486_CR4) 2009; 39 A Sciascia (486_CR32) 2012; 2012 AS Oliveira de (486_CR17) 2008; 18 DT Tardo (486_CR36) 2012; 26 MM Reinold (486_CR39) 2004; 34 SP McCully (486_CR29) 2007; 40 PJ Royer (486_CR6) 2009; 18 SY Jeong (486_CR13) 2014; 26 CH Andersen (486_CR20) 2012; 26 WP Ebben (486_CR40) 2011; 25 JB Lunden (486_CR21) 2010; 19 G Johnson (486_CR34) 1994; 9 Y Yano (486_CR3) 2010; 19 SB Lee (486_CR37) 2000; 82 PM Ludewig (486_CR5) 2000; 80 MJ Decker (486_CR14) 1999; 27 JB Kim (486_CR31) 2011; 23 SY Park (486_CR22) 2011; 21 PM Ludewig (486_CR7) 2009; 39 JG San Juan (486_CR38) 2013; 29 PM Ludewig (486_CR8) 2004; 32 GJ Lehman (486_CR10) 2006; 5 LA Michener (486_CR18) 2003; 18 JW Youdas (486_CR23) 2010; 24 S Lou (486_CR26) 2001; 16 JR Cram (486_CR28) 1998 SY Park (486_CR9) 2013; 18 DN Suprak (486_CR16) 2011; 25 JB Moseley Jr (486_CR19) 1992; 20 JS Sandhu (486_CR12) 2008; 2 SY Park (486_CR15) 2014; 26 NT Tsai (486_CR1) 2003; 84 ER Kim (486_CR24) 2014; 26 DN Suprak (486_CR27) 2013; 48 GR Johnson (486_CR33) 2005; 20 DD Ebaugh (486_CR35) 2005; 20 P Marshall (486_CR11) 2006; 31 MK Gouvali (486_CR25) 2005; 19 23952043 - J Athl Train. 2013 Nov-Dec;48(6):826-35 15935534 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Aug;20(7):700-9 19427234 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009 Nov-Dec;18(6):968-75 19194022 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Feb;39(2):90-104 22927503 - J Appl Biomech. 2013 Aug;29(4):371-9 11390048 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2001 Jun;16(5):408-14 19733487 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Mar;19(2):216-23 23916077 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1994 Jan;9(1):44-50 23669437 - Man Ther. 2013 Dec;18(6):512-8 22919499 - Rehabil Res Pract. 2012;2012:783824 18833308 - J Athl Train. 2008 Sep-Oct;43(5):464-9 10859105 - J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Jun;82(6):849-57 25013271 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Jun;26(6):805-6 15621319 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Feb;20(2):155-61 12763431 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003 Jun;18(5):369-79 12881824 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Jul;84(7):1000-5 12446161 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2002 Nov-Dec;17(9-10):650-9 10569366 - Am J Sports Med. 1999 Nov-Dec;27(6):784-91 21807535 - J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011 Oct;21(5):861-7 17218116 - J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008 Jun;18(3):472-9 14977678 - Am J Sports Med. 2004 Mar;32(2):484-93 19995681 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Mar;19(2):209-15 10696154 - Phys Ther. 2000 Mar;80(3):276-91 15705025 - J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):146-51 19648720 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Aug;39(8):618-27 25013300 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Jun;26(6):937-9 20300308 - Int J Shoulder Surg. 2008 Apr;2(2):30-5 15296366 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004 Jul;34(7):385-94 16900226 - Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2006 Aug;31(4):376-83 1558238 - Am J Sports Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;20(2):128-34 22836526 - Clin Anat. 2013 Mar;26(2):236-43 20664364 - J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Dec;24(12):3352-62 22076101 - J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Sep;26(9):2408-16 16762080 - Dyn Med. 2006 Jun 09;5:7 20179649 - J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Feb;25(2):497-503 25202195 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Aug;26(8):1275-6 17034796 - J Biomech. 2007;40(8):1839-46 21873902 - J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Oct;25(10):2891-4 |
| References_xml | – volume: 80 start-page: 276 year: 2000 ident: 486_CR5 publication-title: Phys Ther doi: 10.1093/ptj/80.3.276 – volume: 25 start-page: 2891 year: 2011 ident: 486_CR40 publication-title: J Strength Cond Res doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31820c8587 – volume: 25 start-page: 497 year: 2011 ident: 486_CR16 publication-title: J Strength Cond Res doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bde2cf – volume: 20 start-page: 128 year: 1992 ident: 486_CR19 publication-title: Am J Sports Med doi: 10.1177/036354659202000206 – volume: 24 start-page: 3352 year: 2010 ident: 486_CR23 publication-title: J Strength Cond Res doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc23b0 – volume: 26 start-page: 2408 year: 2012 ident: 486_CR20 publication-title: J Strength Cond Res doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f8d24 – volume: 48 start-page: 826 year: 2013 ident: 486_CR27 publication-title: J Athl Train doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-48.5.08 – volume: 2012 start-page: 783824 year: 2012 ident: 486_CR32 publication-title: Rehabil Res Pract – volume: 18 start-page: 968 year: 2009 ident: 486_CR6 publication-title: J Shoulder Elbow Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.002 – volume: 9 start-page: 44 year: 1994 ident: 486_CR34 publication-title: Clinical Biomechanics doi: 10.1016/0268-0033(94)90057-4 – volume: 27 start-page: 784 year: 1999 ident: 486_CR14 publication-title: Am J Sports Med doi: 10.1177/03635465990270061601 – volume: 16 start-page: 408 year: 2001 ident: 486_CR26 publication-title: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(01)00008-0 – volume: 18 start-page: 512 year: 2013 ident: 486_CR9 publication-title: Man Ther doi: 10.1016/j.math.2013.04.002 – volume: 2 start-page: 30 year: 2008 ident: 486_CR12 publication-title: Int J Shoulder Surg doi: 10.4103/0973-6042.40456 – volume: 18 start-page: 472 year: 2008 ident: 486_CR17 publication-title: J Electromyogr Kinesiol doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.09.009 – volume: 26 start-page: 1275 year: 2014 ident: 486_CR24 publication-title: J Phys Ther Sci doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.1275 – volume: 31 start-page: 376 year: 2006 ident: 486_CR11 publication-title: Appl Physiol Nutr Metab doi: 10.1139/h06-006 – volume: 26 start-page: 937 year: 2014 ident: 486_CR13 publication-title: J Phys Ther Sci doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.937 – volume: 23 start-page: 365 year: 2011 ident: 486_CR31 publication-title: J Phys Ther Sci doi: 10.1589/jpts.23.365 – volume: 20 start-page: 700 year: 2005 ident: 486_CR35 publication-title: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.03.008 – volume-title: Introduction to surface electromyography year: 1998 ident: 486_CR28 – volume: 19 start-page: 216 year: 2010 ident: 486_CR21 publication-title: J Shoulder Elbow Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.06.003 – volume: 19 start-page: 146 year: 2005 ident: 486_CR25 publication-title: J Strength Cond Res – volume: 84 start-page: 1000 year: 2003 ident: 486_CR1 publication-title: Arch Phys Med Rehabil doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00127-8 – volume: 18 start-page: 369 year: 2003 ident: 486_CR18 publication-title: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00047-0 – volume: 43 start-page: 464 year: 2008 ident: 486_CR30 publication-title: J Athl Train doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-43.5.464 – volume: 29 start-page: 371 year: 2013 ident: 486_CR38 publication-title: J Appl Biomech doi: 10.1123/jab.29.4.371 – volume: 39 start-page: 90 year: 2009 ident: 486_CR7 publication-title: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther doi: 10.2519/jospt.2009.2808 – volume: 19 start-page: 209 year: 2010 ident: 486_CR3 publication-title: J Shoulder Elbow Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.09.007 – volume: 26 start-page: 805 year: 2014 ident: 486_CR15 publication-title: J Phys Ther Sci doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.805 – volume: 26 start-page: 236 year: 2012 ident: 486_CR36 publication-title: Clin Anat doi: 10.1002/ca.22128 – volume: 82 start-page: 849 year: 2000 ident: 486_CR37 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Am doi: 10.2106/00004623-200006000-00012 – volume: 40 start-page: 1839 year: 2007 ident: 486_CR29 publication-title: J Biomech doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.07.010 – volume: 39 start-page: 618 year: 2009 ident: 486_CR4 publication-title: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther doi: 10.2519/jospt.2009.2788 – volume: 32 start-page: 484 year: 2004 ident: 486_CR8 publication-title: Am J Sports Med doi: 10.1177/0363546503258911 – volume: 17 start-page: 650 year: 2002 ident: 486_CR2 publication-title: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(02)00136-5 – volume: 20 start-page: 155 year: 2005 ident: 486_CR33 publication-title: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.10.005 – volume: 21 start-page: 861 year: 2011 ident: 486_CR22 publication-title: J Electromyogr Kinesiol doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.07.001 – volume: 34 start-page: 385 year: 2004 ident: 486_CR39 publication-title: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther doi: 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.7.385 – volume: 5 start-page: 7 year: 2006 ident: 486_CR10 publication-title: Dyn Med doi: 10.1186/1476-5918-5-7 – reference: 1558238 - Am J Sports Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;20(2):128-34 – reference: 22076101 - J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Sep;26(9):2408-16 – reference: 19194022 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Feb;39(2):90-104 – reference: 23952043 - J Athl Train. 2013 Nov-Dec;48(6):826-35 – reference: 16762080 - Dyn Med. 2006 Jun 09;5:7 – reference: 19995681 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Mar;19(2):209-15 – reference: 19427234 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009 Nov-Dec;18(6):968-75 – reference: 21807535 - J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011 Oct;21(5):861-7 – reference: 15296366 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004 Jul;34(7):385-94 – reference: 20300308 - Int J Shoulder Surg. 2008 Apr;2(2):30-5 – reference: 22927503 - J Appl Biomech. 2013 Aug;29(4):371-9 – reference: 17034796 - J Biomech. 2007;40(8):1839-46 – reference: 23669437 - Man Ther. 2013 Dec;18(6):512-8 – reference: 19733487 - J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Mar;19(2):216-23 – reference: 12881824 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Jul;84(7):1000-5 – reference: 19648720 - J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Aug;39(8):618-27 – reference: 10569366 - Am J Sports Med. 1999 Nov-Dec;27(6):784-91 – reference: 15621319 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Feb;20(2):155-61 – reference: 22919499 - Rehabil Res Pract. 2012;2012:783824 – reference: 20179649 - J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Feb;25(2):497-503 – reference: 10859105 - J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Jun;82(6):849-57 – reference: 25202195 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Aug;26(8):1275-6 – reference: 20664364 - J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Dec;24(12):3352-62 – reference: 10696154 - Phys Ther. 2000 Mar;80(3):276-91 – reference: 21873902 - J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Oct;25(10):2891-4 – reference: 16900226 - Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2006 Aug;31(4):376-83 – reference: 25013300 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Jun;26(6):937-9 – reference: 22836526 - Clin Anat. 2013 Mar;26(2):236-43 – reference: 11390048 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2001 Jun;16(5):408-14 – reference: 15705025 - J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):146-51 – reference: 14977678 - Am J Sports Med. 2004 Mar;32(2):484-93 – reference: 15935534 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Aug;20(7):700-9 – reference: 17218116 - J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008 Jun;18(3):472-9 – reference: 23916077 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1994 Jan;9(1):44-50 – reference: 18833308 - J Athl Train. 2008 Sep-Oct;43(5):464-9 – reference: 12763431 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003 Jun;18(5):369-79 – reference: 25013271 - J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Jun;26(6):805-6 – reference: 12446161 - Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2002 Nov-Dec;17(9-10):650-9 |
| SSID | ssj0017839 |
| Score | 2.1626635 |
| Snippet | Background
Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise... Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise is... Background Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise... BACKGROUND: Proper alignment of the scapula during upper extremity motion is important in maintaining shoulder joint function and health. Push-up plus exercise... |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral biomedcentral proquest gale pubmed crossref springer |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 23 |
| SubjectTerms | Adolescent Adult Biomechanical Phenomena Elbow - physiology Electromyography Epidemiology Exercise - physiology Female Humans Internal Medicine Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Movement Muscle Contraction Muscle, Skeletal - physiology Orthopedics physical therapy and occupational health Rehabilitation Research Article Rheumatology Shoulder - physiology Sports Medicine Young Adult |
| SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: SpringerLink Journals (ICM) dbid: U2A link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlR1Na9RAdNAK4kVq60dsK08QBWVwM5PJx6GHRSxFqCcXehtmJhMrpMliNkiP_ee-N0kWs1TB25I3s5Pkfed9MfaGWmyhW2B4XCUVT1IT86JMJc99Zssqi723VJx88TU9XyVfLtXlWMfdTdnuU0gySOrA1nn6sUNJSlk6seLUJo6r--yBQteduHElltvQQYYqfwxf3rltp7K9nimkXbH8h17azZncCZwGfXS2zx6PhiQsB8w_Yfd8c8AOlw060dc38BZCamf4Zn7AHl6MEfRDdot0AWMSB7QVTCOXgL7FgmlK8LVtf-Gv77WHtoEwrxkRCVT_gWA0MkMpBKC164Yd132HtwB0nSZRwFD6CAbWfXfF-zWs677bnvSUrc4-f_t0zscxDNyqbLHhLk8ra9GuQEuyKtAD8tkiLUsncjQ2CusKj0IKvexUerPwufWJzY2MpUpE6fJMyGdsr2kb_4IBOnupUi5BjGRJWVljpRcutrEx0vsiidjpDDd6PbTc0NQEew5B0tADbjXiVhNutYrYYsKldmOPcxq1Uevg6-CSO7a8326ZTvvH4ndEIJqYH__XmbGGAZ-O2mjpJQ1VR4NJ5RE7nq1EpnUz8OuJxDSBKNOt8W3faaoKEbGMUzzs-UBy2_sSKqe6YBGxbEaMs9c0hzQ_rkLP8ESKDH2DiH2YyFaPwqr7--O-_K_VR-yRCGwmULcfs73Nz96foMW2sa8Ch_4GBVo74g priority: 102 providerName: Springer Nature |
| Title | The effects of exercise type and elbow angle on vertical ground reaction force and muscle activity during a push-up plus exercise |
| URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12891-015-0486-5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25881172 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1674213165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0486-5 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC4327800 |
| Volume | 16 |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfR1db9Mw0NrHCy8IGB9hozISAglkqB3HTh8mVKpNE9ImhKjUNytOHIaUJd3SCPbIP-fOSQqpyl6qNGfHce7Od2ffByGvMMUWmAUJ47nMmVQJZ5NMhSx22ma55s5ZDE4-v1Bnc_l5ES12SF_eqvuA9VbTDutJzW-K97-ubz8Cwx97ho_VhxrWWPTf4RHDBHIs2iX7IJgU2mLn8u-hgo59YTEO6zETUsvukHPrIzbi34uB2NpcvP-RXpuelRvHq15qnT4g9zt1k05b-nhIdlz5iBxMSzC1r27pa-odQP3O-gH5DSRDO_8OWuW0r8ZEcZuWJmVGXWGrn3D1vXC0Kqkv5Qw4phgaAmDQP32UBAVFOG17XDU1jEvxPhapoG1UJE3osqkvWbOky6Kp1yM9JvPTk2-zM9ZVaGA20uMVS2OVWwsqByiZ-QSMI6fHKstSEYMeMrHpxMH6BQa4Cl0ydrF10sZJyMNIiiyNtQifkL2yKt0zQsEOVFGUSkCDllluExs6kXLLkyR0biIDcjxAiFm22TgM5sceQoBVTYtQAwg1iFATBWTcI9CkXfpzrMJRGG8GQZMtXd6uu_Sj3dH4DVKFQUqF56ZJF94As8MMW2aK9dZBl4rigBwNWgI_pwPwy56uDILQCa50VVMbDBgRPOQKBnva0tn6vUQUY8iwCIgeUODgMw0h5Y9Ln05chkKD2RCQdz2tmp4N_z_d53dP4pDcE56ZBMj5I7K3umncC9DeVnZEdvVCj8j-p5OLL1_h30zNRn4nZOS5FX7nYvoHZPVF3A |
| linkProvider | Scholars Portal |
| linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlR1Ni9QwNOgsqBfRXT-qq0YQBSU4TZM2PXgo4jKOO3txF_YWkjTdFbrtYKeIR_-5L2k62GEVvA19yaTt--77QuiVa7EFboEiccUqwlIVk7xMEyJspssqi63Vrjh5dZIuztjynJ-HOu5uzHYfQ5JeUnu2Fun7DiSpy9KJOXFt4gi_ifYEGCNshvaKYvl1uQ0eZKD0QwDz2o07te31RCXtCuY_NNNu1uRO6NRrpKN76G4wJXEx4P4-umGbfXRQNOBGX_3Er7FP7vRfzffRrVWIoR-gX0AZOKRx4LbC49Al7L7GYtWU2Na6_QG_LmqL2wb7ic2ASuwqQAAMZqYvhsBg75phx1XfwS1gd93NosBD8SNWeN13l6Rf43Xdd9uTHqCzo0-nHxckDGIgmmfzDTEirbQGywJsySoHH8hm87QsDRVgbuTa5BbEFPjZaWLV3AptmRYqiRPOaGlERpOHaNa0jX2MMLh7KeeGAUYyVlZa6cRSE-tYqcTanEXowwQ3cj003ZCuDfYUAsQhB9xKwK10uJU8QvMRl9KELudu2EYtvbcDS67Z8na7ZTztH4vfOAKRjv3hf40KVQzwdK6RlizcWHUwmbiI0OFkJbCtmYBfjiQmHcjlujW27Tvp6kJonMQpHPZoILntfVEuXGUwjVA2IcbJa5pCmm-Xvms4S2gG3kGE3o1kK4O46v7-uE_-a_ULdHtxujqWx59PvjxFd6hnOQqa_hDNNt97-wzst41-Hvj1N1C8QCU |
| linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlR1da9UwNOiE4Yvo5kd1agRRUMJu0yRtH3y4TC_zY8MHB3sLSZo6oWuLvUV89J97Tpte7GUKvpWepEl7Ts5Hzxchz7HEFpgFhsWlKJlQJmZ5oRKW-dQWZRp7bzE5-eRUHZ-JD-fyPPQ57aZo98klOeY0YJWmen3YFuV4xDN12AFXxYidWDIsGcfkdXJDoORDb6062rgRUhD_wZV55bStLPdqJpy2WfQfMmo7fnLLiTrIptVtcisolXQ5UsEdcs3Xe2R_WYNBffmTvqBDmOfw_3yP7J4Eb_o--QU0QkNAB21KOrVfovhflpq6oL6yzQ-4-lp52tR06N0MSKWYCwJgUDiHtAgKmq8bZ1z2HWyB4n3sSkHHNEhqaNt3F6xvaVv13Walu-Rs9e7L0TELLRmYlelizVymSmvhS4NWWeZgDfl0oYrC8QwUj9y63APDAotbJd4sfGa9sJlJ4kQKXrgs5ck9slM3tX9AKBh-SkonACOpKEprbOK5i21sTOJ9LiLyZoYb3Y7lNzQWxJ5DgEz0iFsNuNWIWy0jsphwqV2od45tNyo92D0w5IoprzZTptX-MfglEohGRgDPdSbkM8DbYUktvcQG66A8ySwiB7ORcIDdDPxsIjGNIIx6q33TdxozRHicxAoWuz-S3GZfXGaYI8wjks6IcfaZ5pD628VQP1wkPAU7ISKvJ7LVgXF1f3_dh_81-inZ_fx2pT-9P_34iNzkw4njIPIPyM76e-8fgyK3tk-Gw_obda9C-w |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+effects+of+exercise+type+and+elbow+angle+on+vertical+ground+reaction+force+and+muscle+activity+during+a+push-up+plus+exercise&rft.jtitle=BMC+musculoskeletal+disorders&rft.au=San+Juan%2C+Jun+G&rft.au=Suprak%2C+David+N&rft.au=Roach%2C+Sean+M&rft.au=Lyda%2C+Marc&rft.date=2015-02-10&rft.pub=BioMed+Central+Ltd&rft.issn=1471-2474&rft.eissn=1471-2474&rft.volume=16&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2Fs12891-015-0486-5&rft.externalDocID=A541424458 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1471-2474&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1471-2474&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1471-2474&client=summon |