COMPARISON OF NORMALIZED MUSCLE ACTIVATION EFFECTS OF THREE DIFFERENT EXERCISES ON SUPRAHYOID MUSCLES IN HEALTHY SUBJECTS

Abstract

Purpose:The most important airway protection mechanism during swallowing is adequate laryngeal elevation. Suprahyoid muscles are responsible for laryngeal elevation. The aim of our study was to compare the effects of  three different exercises including Shaker,  CTAR  and a new method Chin Tuck with TheraBand Exercises on suprahyoid muscles activity.

Methods:Forty-two healthy subjects with a mean age of  27.92±5.02 years (min=18, max=40), of which 50% were male were included. All  individuals  were divided into three groups; Chin Tuck Against Resistance (CTAR); Group 1, Shaker exercise; Group 2, Chin Tuck Exercise with Theraband (Theraband); Group 3, with computerized randomization. Surface EMG evaluation was performed to determine  electrical activity  of the suprahyoid muscles during maximal voluntary isometric contraction and during performing CTAR, Shaker exercise and Chin Tuck with Theraband. Normalized suprahyoid muscle activations were calculated  as: Recorded Maximum Electrical Activity During Exercise  (mV) / Recorded Maximum Electrical  Activity During Maximum İsometric Contraction (mV).

Results:A statistically significant difference was found between three groups in terms of normalized suprahyoid muscle activiteit (p<0.001). The difference between three groups was caused by the difference between Group 1 and Group 2 (p<0.001) and between Group1 and Group 3 (p=0.040) in favor of Group 1.  No difference was found between Group 2 and Group3 (p=0.104).

Conclusion:In conclusion, primarily CTAR exercise should be included in rehabilitation to increase the suprahyoid muscle activation. In addition, chin tuck exercise with Therband can also be considered as an alternative to CTAR.

Keywords

• Deglutition,Electromyography,dysphagia

A COMPARISON OF ACTIVATION EFFECTS OF THREE DIFFERENT EXERCISES ON SUPRAHYOID MUSCLES IN HEALTHY SUBJECTS

Öz

Purpose: The most crucial airway protection mechanism during swallowing is adequate laryngeal elevation. Suprahyoid muscles are responsible for laryngeal elevation. Our study aimed to compare the effects of three different exercises, Shaker, resistance chin tuck (CTAR) exercise, and chin tuck exercise with theraband, on suprahyoid muscles activity responsible for laryngeal elevation.

Methods: Forty-two healthy subjects with a mean age of 27.92±5.02 years (18-40 years), of which 50% were male were included. All individuals were divided into three groups with computerized randomization. Surface Electromyography (EMG) evaluation was performed to determine electrical activity of the suprahyoid muscles (geniohyoid, mylohyoid, anterior belly of digastric, thyrohyoid, stylohyoid muscles) during maximal voluntary isometric contraction and during performing CTAR, Shaker exercise and chin tuck with theraband. Normalized suprahyoid muscle activations were calculated as the recorded maximum electrical activity during exercise (mV)/recorded maximum electrical activity during maximum isometric contraction (mV).

Results: A statistically significant difference was found between three groups regarding normalized suprahyoid muscle activation (p<0.001). The difference between the three groups was caused by the difference between CTAR and Shaker (p<0.001) and between CTAR and theraband (p=0.040) in favor of CTAR. No difference was found between Shaker and theraband (p=0.104).

Conclusion: Primarily CTAR exercise should be included in rehabilitation to increase the suprahyoid muscle activation. In addition, chin tuck exercise with theraband can also be considered as an alternative to CTAR.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dysphagia; Electromyography; Suprahyoid Muscles

Kaynakça

1. 1. Logemann J. The evaluation and treatment of swallowing disorders. Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery. 1998;6(6): 395-400.
2. 2. Daniels SK, et al. Aspiration in patients with acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79(1): 14-19
3. 3. Smithard DG, et al, Can bedside assessment reliably exclude aspiration following acute stroke? Age and ageing. 1998;27(2): 99-106.
4. 4. Logemann J, Swallowing physiology and pathophysiology. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1988;21(4): 613-623.
5. 5. Cichero J. Applied anatomy and physiology of the normal swallow, in Dysphagia: Foundation, theory and practice. New York: Wiley; 2006:p. 13-25.
6. 6. Shaw GY, et al. Transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (VitalStim) curative therapy for severe dysphagia: myth or reality? Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 2007;116(1): 36-44.
7. 7. Wheeler-Hegland KM, Rosenbek JC, Sapienza CM. Submental sEMG and hyoid movement during Mendelsohn maneuver, effortful swallow, and expiratory muscle strength training. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51(5):1072-1087.
8. 8. Yoon WL, Khoo JK, Liow SJ. Chin tuck against resistance (CTAR): new method for enhancing suprahyoid muscle activity using a Shaker-type exercise. Dysphagia. 2014;29(2):243-248.

9. 9. Shaker R, Easterling C, Kern M, Nitschke T, Massey B, Daniels S, Grande B, Kazandjian M, Dikeman K. Rehabilitation of swallowing by exercise in tube-fed patients with pharyngeal dysphagia secondary to abnormal UES opening. Gastroenterology. 2002;122:1314–1321.
10. 10. Demir N, et al. Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Eating Assessment Tool (T-EAT-10). Dysphagia. 2016;31(5):644-649.
11. 11. Soylu AR, Arpinar-Avsar P. Detection of surface electromyography recording time interval without muscle fatigue effect for biceps brachii muscle during maximum voluntary contraction. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2010;20(4):773-6.
12. 12. Coriolano MGWS, Belo LR, Carneiro D, Asano AG, Oliveira PJAL, Silva DM, Lins OG. Swallowing in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Surface Electromyography Study. Dysphagia. 2012; 27: 550–555.
13. 13. http://www.thera-bandacademy.com/tba-product/theraband-elastic-resistance
14. 14. Yoshida M, Groher ME, Crary MA. Comparison of surface electromyographic (sEMG) activity of submental muscles between the head lift and tongue press exercises as therapeutic exercise for pharyngeal dysphagia. Gerodontology. 2007;24:111–116.
15. 15. Easterling C, Grande B, Kern M, Sears K, Shaker R. Attaining and maintaining isometric and isokinetic goals of the Shaker exercise. Dysphagia. 2005;20:133–138.
16. 16. Sze WP, Yoon WL, Escoffier N, Rickard Liow SJ. Evaluating the Training Effects of Two Swallowing Rehabilitation Therapies Using Surface Electromyography—Chin Tuck Against Resistance (CTAR) Exercise and the Shaker Exercise. Dysphagia. 2016;31(2):195-205.
17. 17. Gao J, Zhang HJ. Effects of chin tuck against resistance exercise versus Shaker exercise on dysphagia and psychological state after cerebral infarction. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017;53(3):426-432.
18. 18. Anderson PA, Oza AL, Puschak TJ, Sasso R. Biomechanics of occipitocervical fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(7):755-61.
19. 19. Huelke DF, Nusholtz GS. Cervical spine biomechanics: a review of the literature. J Orthop Res. 1986;4(2):232-45.
20. 20. Koskimies K, Sutinen P, Aalto H, Starck J, Toppila E, Hirvonen T, Kaksonen R, Ishizaki H, Alaranta H, Pyykkö I. Postural stability, neck proprioception and tension neck. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1997;529(2):95-97.
21. 21. Forghani A, Preuss R, Milner TE. Effects of amplitude and predictability of perturbations to the arm on anticipatory and reactionary muscle responses to maintain balance. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2017;35:30-39.