PosturePPMvsRCMNCT05912751
Acute Responses of Postural Alignment, Kinematic Synergy, and Intermuscular Coherence to Postural Muscle Facilitation (Retrospective)
A study testing Exercise Then Foam Roll and Foam Roll Then Exercise in people with Posture and Musculoskeletal Equilibrium, run by Radford University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Postural alignment is often intervened upon in health, fitness, and physical medicine settings. Despite a long tradition in this area, current notions of optimal or normal posture are superficial and often logically inconsistent. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 40 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Posture, Musculoskeletal Equilibrium
- What is being tested?
- Exercise Then Foam Roll and Foam Roll Then Exercise
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 10 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 10 Aug 2021to 14 Apr 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 40 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Healthy adult
- 18 - 40 years of age
Who cannot join
- Recent (< 6 months) history of lower extremity injury
- Recent (< 6 months) history of other musculoskeletal or neurological disorder affecting balance
- Contraindications to participation in physical activity
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Radford University Carilion
Roanoke, Virginia, 24013
About this study
Postural alignment is often intervened upon in health, fitness, and physical medicine settings. Despite a long tradition in this area, current notions of optimal or normal posture are superficial and often logically inconsistent. A recent attempt to reconcile diverging opinions about good posture proposes that alignment be considered in relation to individual joints' natural tendencies to collapse under gravity. This theory allows different maladaptive postures to be described in terms of functional deficits and compensatory adaptations at the muscular level. Working within this type of theory, postural interventions may be able to account for comparative advantages in maintaining alignment between different muscle systems. This would represent a step forward from current practices, which usually attempt to force arbitrary alignment patterns indiscriminately.
The current study presents motion capture and electromyography (EMG) data evaluating the effects of two interventions on individual participants' bipedal standing alignment patterns with respect to the gravitational collapsing tendencies referenced above. Additional outcomes included functional grouping of muscle activation signals (via intermuscular coherence) and kinetic chain continuity. The interventions include 1) an experimental intervention purported to engage muscles that naturally resist the collapsing effects of gravity, and 2) a control intervention designed to inhibit other muscle groups that are sometimes involved in maintaining bipedal alignment in a compensatory role. Study outcomes are measured before and after both interventions to quantify the acute effects of each. All participants complete both interventions in random order, crossing over after a one-week washout period. This research will provide insight into the acute effects of studied interventions, specifically those relating to maintenance of bipedal alignment with respect to gravitational collapsing tendencies.
- Conditions
- Posture, Musculoskeletal Equilibrium
- Being tested
- Exercise Then Foam Roll, Foam Roll Then Exercise
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Exercise Then Foam RollOther
Also called AB
Participants in AB will perform the experimental (exercise) intervention first and the control (foam rolling) intervention second.
Foam Roll Then ExerciseOther
Also called BA
Participants in BA will perform the control (foam rolling) intervention first and the experimental (exercise) intervention second.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Exercise Then Foam Roll | Other | This arm (sequence) will first complete the exercise intervention promoting muscular engagement resisting gravitational collapsing tendencies, then the control intervention involving self-myofascial release of muscle groups not thought to resist gravitational collapse. Receives: Other: Exercise Then Foam Roll |
| Foam Roll Then Exercise | Other | This arm (sequence) will first complete the control intervention involving self-myofascial release of muscle groups not thought to resist gravitational collapse, then the exercise intervention promoting muscular engagement resisting gravitational collapsing tendencies. Receives: Other: Foam Roll Then Exercise |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
The purpose of this outcome is to quantify the communication of motion from the upper body to the lower body. In a test involving placing hands-on-head and pulling the elbows back as far as possible, the response in the lower body is quantified by posterior rotation of the tibial segment.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
The purpose of this outcome is to quantify the communication of motion from the upper body to the lower body. In a test involving placing hands-on-head and pulling the elbows back as far as possible, the response in the lower body is quantified by posterior rotation of the tibial segment.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
The purpose of this outcome is to quantify the communication of motion from the upper body to the lower body. In a test involving placing hands-on-head and pulling the elbows back as far as possible, the response in the lower body is quantified by posterior rotation of the tibial segment.
Measured: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
The purpose of this outcome is to quantify the communication of motion from the upper body to the lower body. In a test involving placing hands-on-head and pulling the elbows back as far as possible, the response in the lower body is quantified by posterior rotation of the tibial segment.
Measured: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Jun 2023
- Study start10 Aug 2021
- Primary completion14 Apr 2022
- Study completion14 Apr 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PostureStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 10 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Radford University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Stephen Glass, Radford University
- Investigators
- Stephen Glass, PhD, Principal investigator, Radford University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05912751
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2021-288-RUC (Retrospective)
- Acronym
- PPMvsRCM
- Status last verified
- Jun 2023
- First submitted
- 12 Jun 2023
- Last updated
- 22 Jun 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified raw data for individual participants will be shared upon request with parties committing to institutional data sharing agreements.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Jun 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Acute Responses of Postural Alignment, Kinematic Synergy, and Intermuscular Coherence to Postural Muscle Facilitation (Retrospective)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05912751
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PPMvsRCM / 2021-288-RUC (Retrospective)
- Conditions
- Posture, Musculoskeletal Equilibrium
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 10 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Radford UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 Aug 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 14 Apr 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 14 Apr 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Jun 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Postural alignment is often intervened upon in health, fitness, and physical medicine settings. Despite a long tradition in this area, current notions of optimal or normal posture are superficial and often logically inconsistent. A recent attempt to reconcile diverging opinions about good posture proposes that alignment be considered in relation to individual joints' natural tendencies to collapse under gravity. This theory allows different maladaptive postures to be described in terms of functional deficits and compensatory adaptations at the muscular level. Working within this type of theory, postural interventions may be able to account for comparative advantages in maintaining alignment between different muscle systems. This would represent a step forward from current practices, which usually attempt to force arbitrary alignment patterns indiscriminately.
The current study presents motion capture and electromyography (EMG) data evaluating the effects of two interventions on individual participants' bipedal standing alignment patterns with respect to the gravitational collapsing tendencies referenced above. Additional outcomes included functional grouping of muscle activation signals (via intermuscular coherence) and kinetic chain continuity. The interventions include 1) an experimental intervention purported to engage muscles that naturally resist the collapsing effects of gravity, and 2) a control intervention designed to inhibit other muscle groups that are sometimes involved in maintaining bipedal alignment in a compensatory role. Study outcomes are measured before and after both interventions to quantify the acute effects of each. All participants complete both interventions in random order, crossing over after a one-week washout period. This research will provide insight into the acute effects of studied interventions, specifically those relating to maintenance of bipedal alignment with respect to gravitational collapsing tendencies.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Exercise Then Foam Roll | Other | Other: Exercise Then Foam RollThis arm (sequence) will first complete the exercise intervention promoting muscular engagement resisting gravitational collapsing tendencies, then the control intervention involving self-myofascial release of muscle groups not thought to resist gravitational collapse. |
| Foam Roll Then Exercise | Other | Other: Foam Roll Then ExerciseThis arm (sequence) will first complete the control intervention involving self-myofascial release of muscle groups not thought to resist gravitational collapse, then the exercise intervention promoting muscular engagement resisting gravitational collapsing tendencies. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 40 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Healthy adult
- 18 - 40 years of age
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Recent (< 6 months) history of lower extremity injury
- Recent (< 6 months) history of other musculoskeletal or neurological disorder affecting balance
- Contraindications to participation in physical activity
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Exercise Then Foam RollAlso: ABParticipants in AB will perform the experimental (exercise) intervention first and the control (foam rolling) intervention second. | Other | Exercise Then Foam Roll |
| Foam Roll Then ExerciseAlso: BAParticipants in BA will perform the control (foam rolling) intervention first and the experimental (exercise) intervention second. | Other | Foam Roll Then Exercise |
Primary outcome
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
This outcome is a cumulative descriptor of segment angle distance from the pattern in which an individual's posture would collapse. The reference point for each individual is calculated using both pre and post-intervention data for a given day.
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
Pooled intermuscular coherence
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
Weighted average of frequency-domain correlations between muscle pairs belonging to anterior, posterior, and trunk muscle groups.
4 secondary outcomes
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 1)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
Time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 7)
Top-down kinetic chain continuity
Time frame: Immediately after Intervention (Day 7)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Jun 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified raw data for individual participants will be shared upon request with parties committing to institutional data sharing agreements.
Related trials for Posture
Recruiting
Effects of Feldenkrais Approach in Cases With Forward Head Posture
Forward Head Posture
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Relationship of Forward Head Posture With Burnout and Quality of Life
Forward Head Posture
RecruitingObservational study
The Association Between Smartphone Overuse and Mechanical Neck Pain Among Galala University Students
Mechanical Neck Pain, Forward Head Posture (FHP)
Not yet recruiting
Immediate Effect of Kinesiotaping With Rounded Shoulder Posture in University Students
Rounded Shoulder Posture, Kinesio Taping
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Correlation Between Forward Head Posture and Executive Functions in Cervical Radiculopathy
Cervical Radiculopathy, Forward Head Posture
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Stephen Glass, PhD principal investigator
Radford University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Exercise Then Foam Roll and Foam Roll Then Exercise in people with Posture and Musculoskeletal Equilibrium, run by Radford University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Jun 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Euclidean distance from the vector describing subject-specific, simulated gravitational collapse (time frame: Immediately before Intervention (Day 1)). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Jun 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.