The Effects Of Swiss Ball Core Stability Training On P50Sensory Gating And Cognitive Potential P300

Objective:①To observe the effects of seven weeks Swiss ball core stability trainingand traditional stability training on P50sensory gating and cognitive potential P300.②To compare and evaluate the fitness puzzle effects of the two different stabilitytraining.Subjects: By recruiting, thirty-five healthy, no history of the disease, normal hearingfemale undergraduates in Shandong Normal University took part in this study. Theywere randomly devided into three groups.①Core stability training group(n=12):Subjects performed three times a week, every thirty minutes, seven weeks of Swissball kneeling lift arm training.②Traditional stability training group(n=11): Subjectsperformed three times a week, every thirty minutes, seven weeks of single footstanding.③Control group(n=12): The subjects were not related to regular exercise.Methods: In order to analyze, by using literature method, survey method,experimental method and mathematical statistics method respectively. Measurementof health-related indexes:①Auditory P50sensory gating measurement: Subjectswere tested for Cz sensory gating in the quiet state, the test period were beforetraining,five and seven weeks later,and recovery after a week. The test instrumentused NDI-092EMG/evoked potential instrument electrical nerve diagnosis instrumentthat was made in shanghai. The observation index were S2/S1(P50amplitude ratio),S1-S2(P50amplitude difference),100×(1-S2/S1)(P50value).②Auditory eventrelated potential P300measurement: The time period, record electrode andinstrumentation of each P300test were the same as P50. The observation index wereP300latency(ms), P300amplitude(uv), reaction time(ms).③Height and weightmeasurement: Before the training program, Height(cm) and weight(kg) of subjectswere measured by RGZ-120-RT height and weight measurement meter that was madein Wuxi weighing apparatus factory. Statistical analysis: After repeated examinationof experimental data is correct and the data ready, using SPSS for windows15.0withboth descriptive and inferential statistics. Analysis of differences within groups usingPaired-Sample t Test and Reapted measure ANOVA. Analysis of difference betweengroups using Independent-samples t Test and One-Way ANOVA.Significantdifference and very significant difference criterion represented by P<0.05, P<0.01,respectively. The results are expressed in X SD.Results:①Seven weeks training later, the time of maintain balance within traditionaltraining group was1438.55±695.11seconds after five weeks, seven weeks later was2188.73±605.33seconds. Swiss ball training group were initially unable to balanceon the ball, five weeks later, remained kneeling lift arm on the Swiss Ball for1736.08±587.63seconds, seven weeks after can adhere to2006.58±702.79seconds. Exercise performance of both training group were significantly increased.②Comparison between groups: In the three period test(pretest, after five and sevenweeks test) of P300latency, there was no significant difference between three groups(P>0.05). Within group comparisons: Compared with the test period of pretest andfive weeks later, After seven weeks, the measured P300latency of traditional traininggroup showed very significant shortening (P<0.01); Compared with the pretest, themeasured P300latency of Swiss ball training group after five weeks was shortenedsignificantly (P<0.05); There was no significant differences of P300latency betweencontrol group (P>0.05).③Comparison between groups: Compared with the controlgroup, the P300amplitude of both training groups revealed significant differences(P<0.05). In the test of five and seven weeks later, the P300amplitude of Swiss balltraining group has significant difference compared to control group (P<0.05). Withingroup comparisons: In the P300amplitude test period of pretest, five and seven weekslater, there was no significant difference within the three groups (P>0.05).④Comparison between groups: compared with the control group, there are significantdifferences in the P300reaction of Swiss ball training group in the pretest (P<0.05),after five weeks was very significant (P<0.01); After seven weeks,both traininggroups revealed very significant differences (P<0.01). Within Group comparison: Inthe traditional training group, compared with the P300reaction of pretesting, afterfive and seven weeks showed very significant shortening (P<0.01); Compared withfive weeks later test, the measured reaction time after seven weeks was shortenedsignificantly (P<0.05); In Swiss ball training group, compared with pretesting, thereaction time measured after five and seven weeks was shortened very significant(P<0.01); In the test of three period, the difference of reaction time was not significantwithin the control groups (P>0.05).⑤Comparison between groups: in the P50amplitude ratio test, there was no significant difference in the test of early stage andfive weeks later between three groups (P>0.05); In the test of seven weeks later,compared with the control group, the P50amplitude ratio of both training groups werereduced very significant (P<0.01), the difference between the two training groups inP50amplitude ratio was no significant (P>0.05).Within group comparison: comparedwith pretest, after seven weeks, P50amplitude ratio of traditional training group wasdecreased significantly (P<0.05); After five and seven weeks, P50amplitude ratio ofSwiss ball training group was decreased very significant (P<0.01); In the three testperiod, there was no significant difference in P50amplitude ratio of the control group(P>0.05).⑥The measurement of P50amplitude difference that obtained in pretest,five and seven weeks later, there were no significant differences between and withinthree groups (P>0.05).⑦Comparison between groups: The measurement of P50value in pretest and five weeks later, there were no significant differences between thethree groups (P>0.05); Compared with the control group, in the P50value test ofseven weeks later, two training groups was increased very significant (P<0.01); Therewere no significant differences in the P50value test of three times between the twotraining groups (P>0.05). Within group comparison: Compared with the pretest, theP50value test in seven weeks later of traditional training group was increasedsignificantly (P<0.05); After five and seven weeks, the measured P50value of Swiss ball training group were increased very significant (P<0.01); The P50value test ofthree times in the control group was not significant difference (P>0.05).⑧In thetraditional training group, compared with the test of P50and P300index after sevenweeks, there were prolonged P300latency, increased P50amplitude ratio anddecreased P50value revealed in the test of recovery after a week. There was noobvious change in the rest of the index.⑨In the Swiss ball training group, there wasno significant test difference of P300and P50index between the test of seven weekslater and recovery of a week.Conclusions:①Sensory gating P50amplitude ratio and the calculated values can beimproved through training, the effects of training also showed a reversible. The effectsof Swiss ball core stability training on sensory gating P50is better than the traditionalstability training which performanced for the obvious effect of training and for a longtime.②Both Swiss ball core stability training and traditional single foot standingstability training can shorten the P300reaction time and latency in Cz significantly,and the effects of training showed reversible. The effects of Swiss ball core stabilitytraining prior to traditional stability training.