The research was conducted to compare lumbar stabilization exercise with and without IMU sensor on non-specific low back pain patients (N=30). They were classified into two groups; lumbar stabilization exercise using IMU sensor (ILS), (n₁=20) and general lumbar stabilization exercise (GLS), (n₂=10). By comparing the
difference between pre and post intervention via pain (VAS), lumbar inclination (L5), trunk muscle activity and muscle thickness, the significant differences were identified. Muscle activity was measured on external oblique (EO), internal oblique (IO), and multifidus (MF) by
using surface electromyography (sEMG). Muslce thickness was measured on external oblique, internal oblique, transverse abdominis(TrA) and quadratus lumborum (QL) by using ultrasonography. sEMG
activity was recorded at four types of bridge position. Subjects who were chronic non-specific low back pain patient were attending the K university located in D metropolitan.
Each group performed the proposed lumbar stabilization exercise for 30 minutes a day, 5 times a week for 4 weeks. The paired T test was used to compare each group of variables. The independent T test was used to compare groups and the statistical significant level α set 0.05. The main results are as followed; 1. In both pain and L5 inclination there was not significant difference between the groups. However, statistically significant decrease
were observed between intervention period in both groups (p<.05).
2. The trunk muscle activity was observed no significant differences in each type of four bridging positions with the exceptions of the internal oblique of ILS and multifidus of GLS at side bridging position (p<.05), which had greater differences.
3. The trunk muscle thickness was significantly different in left external oblique, both internal oblique, both transverse abdominis, and both multifidus of ILS, and in left external oblique and internal oblique of GLS. However, there was no significant differences in both quadratus lumborum of ILS, and in right external oblique, right internal oblique, both transverse abdominis, both multifidus, and both quadratus lumborum of GLS.
Based on the results above, there are significant difference between periods of intervention such as pain, lumbar inclination, and muscle thickness in both groups. The most affected factors to stabilize lumbar region was pain, L5 inclination and especially muscle thickness in ILS
group. These factors determine that IMU sensor based exercise is more effective intervention in clinical field.