-
Something wrong with this record ?
Does the Dumbbell-Carrying Position Change the Muscle Activity in Split Squats and Walking Lunges
P. Stastny, M. Lehnert, AM. Zaatar, Z. Svoboda, Z. Xaverova,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Biomechanical Phenomena physiology MeSH
- Walking physiology MeSH
- Lower Extremity physiology MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Electromyography * MeSH
- Isometric Contraction physiology MeSH
- Muscle, Skeletal physiology MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Resistance Training * MeSH
- Cross-Sectional Studies MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
The forward walking lunge (WL) and split squat (SSq) are similar exercises that have differences in the eccentric phase, and both can be performed in the ipsilateral or contralateral carrying conditions. This study aimed to determine the effects of dumbbell-carrying position on the kinematics and electromyographic (EMG) amplitudes of the gluteus medius (Gmed), vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL), and biceps femoris during WLs and SSqs. The resistance-trained (RT) and the non-resistance-trained (NT) groups (both n = 14) performed ipsilateral WLs, contralateral WLs, ipsilateral SSqs, and contralateral SSqs in a randomized order in a simulated training session. The EMG amplitude, expressed as a percentage of the maximal voluntary isometric contraction (%MVIC), and the kinematics, expressed as the range of motion (ROM) of the hip and knee, were measured during 5 repetition maximum for both legs. The repeated measure analyses of variance showed significant differences between the RT and NT groups. The NT group showed a smaller knee flexion ROM (p < 0.001, η = 0.36) during both types of WLs, whereas the RT group showed a higher eccentric Gmed amplitude (p < 0.001, η = 0.46) during all exercises and a higher eccentric VL amplitude (p < 0.001, η = 0.63) during contralateral WLs. Further differences were found between contralateral and ipsilateral WLs in both the RT (p < 0.001, η = 0.69) and NT groups (p < 0.001, η = 0.80), and contralateral WLs resulted in higher eccentric Gmed amplitudes. Contralateral WLs highly activated the Gmed (90% MVIC); therefore, this exercise can increase the Gmed maximal strength. The ipsilateral loading condition did not increase the Gmed or VM activity in the RT or NT group.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc16020812
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230627141455.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 160722s2015 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000976 $2 doi
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000976 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)25968228
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Stastny, Petr $u Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University in Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Does the Dumbbell-Carrying Position Change the Muscle Activity in Split Squats and Walking Lunges / $c P. Stastny, M. Lehnert, AM. Zaatar, Z. Svoboda, Z. Xaverova,
- 520 9_
- $a The forward walking lunge (WL) and split squat (SSq) are similar exercises that have differences in the eccentric phase, and both can be performed in the ipsilateral or contralateral carrying conditions. This study aimed to determine the effects of dumbbell-carrying position on the kinematics and electromyographic (EMG) amplitudes of the gluteus medius (Gmed), vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL), and biceps femoris during WLs and SSqs. The resistance-trained (RT) and the non-resistance-trained (NT) groups (both n = 14) performed ipsilateral WLs, contralateral WLs, ipsilateral SSqs, and contralateral SSqs in a randomized order in a simulated training session. The EMG amplitude, expressed as a percentage of the maximal voluntary isometric contraction (%MVIC), and the kinematics, expressed as the range of motion (ROM) of the hip and knee, were measured during 5 repetition maximum for both legs. The repeated measure analyses of variance showed significant differences between the RT and NT groups. The NT group showed a smaller knee flexion ROM (p < 0.001, η = 0.36) during both types of WLs, whereas the RT group showed a higher eccentric Gmed amplitude (p < 0.001, η = 0.46) during all exercises and a higher eccentric VL amplitude (p < 0.001, η = 0.63) during contralateral WLs. Further differences were found between contralateral and ipsilateral WLs in both the RT (p < 0.001, η = 0.69) and NT groups (p < 0.001, η = 0.80), and contralateral WLs resulted in higher eccentric Gmed amplitudes. Contralateral WLs highly activated the Gmed (90% MVIC); therefore, this exercise can increase the Gmed maximal strength. The ipsilateral loading condition did not increase the Gmed or VM activity in the RT or NT group.
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a biomechanika $x fyziologie $7 D001696
- 650 _2
- $a průřezové studie $7 D003430
- 650 12
- $a elektromyografie $7 D004576
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a isometrická kontrakce $x fyziologie $7 D007537
- 650 _2
- $a dolní končetina $x fyziologie $7 D035002
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a kosterní svaly $x fyziologie $7 D018482
- 650 12
- $a odporový trénink $7 D055070
- 650 _2
- $a chůze $x fyziologie $7 D016138
- 650 _2
- $a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Lehnert, Michal
- 700 1_
- $a Zaatar, Amr, $d 1973- $7 xx0154659
- 700 1_
- $a Svoboda, Zdenek
- 700 1_
- $a Xaverova, Zuzana
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008742 $t Journal of strength and conditioning research $x 1533-4287 $g Roč. 29, č. 11 (2015), s. 3177-87
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25968228 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20160722 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230627141452 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1155482 $s 945340
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2015 $b 29 $c 11 $d 3177-87 $i 1533-4287 $m Journal of strength and conditioning research $n J Strength Cond Res $x MED00008742
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20160722