传统举重和相扑式举重的差异:运动学、动力学和电图研究

M. Jovanović, Marko Kapeleti, M. Ubović, N. Pažin, D. Ilić, Vladimir Mrdaković
{"title":"传统举重和相扑式举重的差异:运动学、动力学和电图研究","authors":"M. Jovanović, Marko Kapeleti, M. Ubović, N. Pažin, D. Ilić, Vladimir Mrdaković","doi":"10.5937/fizkul75-33867","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Deadlift is a measure of the overall strength of the whole body and it is one of the three exercises in the powerlifting competition. There are conventional and sumo variant of deadlift. The aim of this study was to determine the differences between the two lifting techniques from the aspect of kinematics, kinetics and electromyography. Nine physically active men, average age 29.1 ± 3.3 years, body height 181.0 ± 1.0 cm, body weight 82.3 ± 13.3 kg and body massindex 25.0 ± 3.8 kg/m2 were recruited forthisstudy. Each subject lifted weight close to his own body weight with three repetitions, in three series, for each of the techniques. The speed of one lift was 3 seconds for each of the phases (concentric and eccentric). The angles and amplitudes for the following figurative points were monitored: trunk in relation to the horizontal plane (angle), center of the hip joint and center of the knee joint in the \"liftoff\" (LO - position in which the weight separates from the ground) and \"knee passing\" (KP - position in which the weight passes in front of the knee position), i.e. in the liftoff-knee passing (LO-KP), knee passing-lift completion (KP-LC; LC - final, i.e. completely upright body position) and liftoff-lift completion (LOLC) phase. The mechanical work was monitored as a one of the kinetic variables. Electromyographic activity was monitored for the following muscles: m. vastus medialis, m. vastus lateralis, m. rectus femoris, m. gluteus Maximus, m. erector spinae (L3-L4), m. semimembranosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum. The monitored electromyographic variablewasthe average normalized amount of muscle activation in relation to maximal voluntary contraction, for all 18 individual deadlift repetitions (3 series × 3 repetitions × 2 techniques). One-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for the amount of muscle activation and performed mechanical work) and two-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for angles and amplitudes) were used for statistical data processing. Significant differences were found between techniques in the initial angular positions in all monitored joints (p<0.05), except for the angle in the knee joint where the trend was observed (p=0.0996), as well as in the transit position for the trunk angle relative to the horizontal plane and angle at the hip joint (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between techniques in amplitudes in the hip joint during KP-LC phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude (p<0.05), as well as in the knee joint during LO-KP phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude in the form of a trend (p=0.0996). The performed mechanical work is significantly higher when lifting the load with the conventional deadlift technique (DLcon) (p<0.05). Activation of medial and lateral heads of m. quadriceps femoris is significantly higher (p<0.05) when lifting with sumo deadlift technique (DLsu). It was noticed that activation of postural muscle groups (m. erector spinae, m. gluteus maximum, m. semitendinosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum) is higher when lifting the load with DLcon, but not significantly (p>0.05).","PeriodicalId":30424,"journal":{"name":"Fizicka Kultura","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences between conventional and sumo variants of deadlifting: Kinematic, kinetic and electromiographic study\",\"authors\":\"M. Jovanović, Marko Kapeleti, M. Ubović, N. Pažin, D. Ilić, Vladimir Mrdaković\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/fizkul75-33867\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Deadlift is a measure of the overall strength of the whole body and it is one of the three exercises in the powerlifting competition. There are conventional and sumo variant of deadlift. The aim of this study was to determine the differences between the two lifting techniques from the aspect of kinematics, kinetics and electromyography. Nine physically active men, average age 29.1 ± 3.3 years, body height 181.0 ± 1.0 cm, body weight 82.3 ± 13.3 kg and body massindex 25.0 ± 3.8 kg/m2 were recruited forthisstudy. Each subject lifted weight close to his own body weight with three repetitions, in three series, for each of the techniques. The speed of one lift was 3 seconds for each of the phases (concentric and eccentric). The angles and amplitudes for the following figurative points were monitored: trunk in relation to the horizontal plane (angle), center of the hip joint and center of the knee joint in the \\\"liftoff\\\" (LO - position in which the weight separates from the ground) and \\\"knee passing\\\" (KP - position in which the weight passes in front of the knee position), i.e. in the liftoff-knee passing (LO-KP), knee passing-lift completion (KP-LC; LC - final, i.e. completely upright body position) and liftoff-lift completion (LOLC) phase. The mechanical work was monitored as a one of the kinetic variables. Electromyographic activity was monitored for the following muscles: m. vastus medialis, m. vastus lateralis, m. rectus femoris, m. gluteus Maximus, m. erector spinae (L3-L4), m. semimembranosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum. The monitored electromyographic variablewasthe average normalized amount of muscle activation in relation to maximal voluntary contraction, for all 18 individual deadlift repetitions (3 series × 3 repetitions × 2 techniques). One-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for the amount of muscle activation and performed mechanical work) and two-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for angles and amplitudes) were used for statistical data processing. Significant differences were found between techniques in the initial angular positions in all monitored joints (p<0.05), except for the angle in the knee joint where the trend was observed (p=0.0996), as well as in the transit position for the trunk angle relative to the horizontal plane and angle at the hip joint (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between techniques in amplitudes in the hip joint during KP-LC phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude (p<0.05), as well as in the knee joint during LO-KP phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude in the form of a trend (p=0.0996). The performed mechanical work is significantly higher when lifting the load with the conventional deadlift technique (DLcon) (p<0.05). Activation of medial and lateral heads of m. quadriceps femoris is significantly higher (p<0.05) when lifting with sumo deadlift technique (DLsu). It was noticed that activation of postural muscle groups (m. erector spinae, m. gluteus maximum, m. semitendinosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum) is higher when lifting the load with DLcon, but not significantly (p>0.05).\",\"PeriodicalId\":30424,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fizicka Kultura\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fizicka Kultura\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/fizkul75-33867\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fizicka Kultura","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/fizkul75-33867","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

硬举是对全身力量的一种衡量,是力量举比赛的三大练习之一。硬举有传统和相扑两种。本研究的目的是从运动学、动力学和肌电图方面确定两种举重技术之间的差异。研究对象为体力活动男性9名,平均年龄29.1±3.3岁,身高181.0±1.0 cm,体重82.3±13.3 kg,体质指数25.0±3.8 kg/m2。每个实验对象举起接近自己体重的重量,在三个系列中重复三次。每个阶段(同心和偏心)的一次提升速度为3秒。监测以下图形点的角度和振幅:躯干相对于水平面(角度),髋关节中心和膝关节中心在“起跳”(LO-重量与地面分离的位置)和“过膝”(KP-重量在膝盖位置前面经过的位置),即在起跳-过膝(LO-KP),过膝-举完(KP- lc;LC -最后阶段,即完全直立的身体位置)和升降完成(LOLC)阶段。将机械功作为动力学变量之一进行监测。监测以下肌肉的肌电活动:股内侧肌、股外侧肌、股直肌、臀大肌、竖脊肌(L3-L4)、半膜肌和股长二头肌。监测的肌电图变量是所有18个单独硬举重复(3系列× 3重复× 2技术)中与最大自愿收缩相关的肌肉激活的平均归一化量。重复测量的单向方差分析(肌肉激活量和完成的机械功)和重复测量的双向方差分析(角度和振幅)用于统计数据处理。在所有监测关节的初始角度位置上,不同技术之间存在显著差异(p0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differences between conventional and sumo variants of deadlifting: Kinematic, kinetic and electromiographic study
Deadlift is a measure of the overall strength of the whole body and it is one of the three exercises in the powerlifting competition. There are conventional and sumo variant of deadlift. The aim of this study was to determine the differences between the two lifting techniques from the aspect of kinematics, kinetics and electromyography. Nine physically active men, average age 29.1 ± 3.3 years, body height 181.0 ± 1.0 cm, body weight 82.3 ± 13.3 kg and body massindex 25.0 ± 3.8 kg/m2 were recruited forthisstudy. Each subject lifted weight close to his own body weight with three repetitions, in three series, for each of the techniques. The speed of one lift was 3 seconds for each of the phases (concentric and eccentric). The angles and amplitudes for the following figurative points were monitored: trunk in relation to the horizontal plane (angle), center of the hip joint and center of the knee joint in the "liftoff" (LO - position in which the weight separates from the ground) and "knee passing" (KP - position in which the weight passes in front of the knee position), i.e. in the liftoff-knee passing (LO-KP), knee passing-lift completion (KP-LC; LC - final, i.e. completely upright body position) and liftoff-lift completion (LOLC) phase. The mechanical work was monitored as a one of the kinetic variables. Electromyographic activity was monitored for the following muscles: m. vastus medialis, m. vastus lateralis, m. rectus femoris, m. gluteus Maximus, m. erector spinae (L3-L4), m. semimembranosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum. The monitored electromyographic variablewasthe average normalized amount of muscle activation in relation to maximal voluntary contraction, for all 18 individual deadlift repetitions (3 series × 3 repetitions × 2 techniques). One-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for the amount of muscle activation and performed mechanical work) and two-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements (for angles and amplitudes) were used for statistical data processing. Significant differences were found between techniques in the initial angular positions in all monitored joints (p<0.05), except for the angle in the knee joint where the trend was observed (p=0.0996), as well as in the transit position for the trunk angle relative to the horizontal plane and angle at the hip joint (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between techniques in amplitudes in the hip joint during KP-LC phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude (p<0.05), as well as in the knee joint during LO-KP phase (p<0.05) and total amplitude in the form of a trend (p=0.0996). The performed mechanical work is significantly higher when lifting the load with the conventional deadlift technique (DLcon) (p<0.05). Activation of medial and lateral heads of m. quadriceps femoris is significantly higher (p<0.05) when lifting with sumo deadlift technique (DLsu). It was noticed that activation of postural muscle groups (m. erector spinae, m. gluteus maximum, m. semitendinosus and m. biceps femoris caput longum) is higher when lifting the load with DLcon, but not significantly (p>0.05).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信