Journal of bodywork and movement therapies · 2024
Comparison of kinematic parameters, muscle activity and movement timing between "good" and "poor" performers of a single-leg squat.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zawadka Magdalena, Smolka Jakub, Lukasik Edyta, Skublewska-Paszkowska Maria
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Visual scales offer a cost-effective alternative to complex biomechanical analysis for single-leg squat (SLS) performance. There is a lack of consensus on the relationship between visual rating and kinematic measurements in physical therapy assessments. The study aimed to compare kinematic parameters, muscle activity and timing between good and poor performers of SLS, selected based on visual evaluation of movement.
METHODS: Forty asymptomatic male volunteers were classified based on a visual assessment of their SLS movements. For participants rated as good performers (n = 19) and poor performers (n = 8), electromyographic activity, kinematic parameters and movement timing were compared.
RESULTS: SLS execution was significantly different in groups in terms of the hip frontal plane and spine transversal plane of movement and the timing of the hip and knee motion. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in multifidus muscle activity during SLS, frontal plane movement of the knee and squat depth.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study indicate that coordination and timing of movements should be carefully considered during SLS examinations to obtain a comprehensive evaluation for planning exercise rehabilitation.
METHODS: Forty asymptomatic male volunteers were classified based on a visual assessment of their SLS movements. For participants rated as good performers (n = 19) and poor performers (n = 8), electromyographic activity, kinematic parameters and movement timing were compared.
RESULTS: SLS execution was significantly different in groups in terms of the hip frontal plane and spine transversal plane of movement and the timing of the hip and knee motion. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in multifidus muscle activity during SLS, frontal plane movement of the knee and squat depth.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study indicate that coordination and timing of movements should be carefully considered during SLS examinations to obtain a comprehensive evaluation for planning exercise rehabilitation.