What Is the Influence of Cambered Running Surface on Lower Extremity Muscle Activity?

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Birgit Unfried ◽  
Arnel Aguinaldo ◽  
Daniel Cipriani
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Gluteus Medius ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Road Surface ◽  
Vastus Medialis ◽  
Lateral Gastrocnemius ◽  
Lower Extremity Muscle ◽  
Fitness Sport

Running on a road for fitness, sport, or recreation poses unique challenges to the runner, one of which is the camber of the surface. Few studies have examined the effects of camber on running, namely, kinematic studies of the knee and ankle. There is currently no information available regarding muscle response to running on a cambered road surface. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of a cambered road on lower extremity muscle activity, as measured by electromyography in recreational runners. In addition, this study examined a true outdoor road surface, as opposed to a treadmill surface. The mean muscle activity of the tibialis anterior, lateral gastrocnemius, vastus medialis oblique, biceps femoris, and gluteus medius were studied. Fifteen runners completed multiple running trials on cambered and level surfaces. During the stance phase, mean activities of tibialis anterior, lateral gastrocnemius, and vastus medialis oblique were greater on the gutter side than the crown side. There were no differences in mean muscle activity during the swing phase. The findings of this study suggest that running on a road camber alters the activity of select lower extremity muscles possibly in response to lower extremity compensations to the cambered condition.

Lower-Extremity Muscle Activity During Aquatic and Land Treadmill Running at the Same Speeds

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Matthew Silvers ◽  
Eadric Bressel ◽  
D. Clark Dickin ◽  
Garry Killgore ◽  
Dennis G. Dolny
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Swing Phase ◽  
Treadmill Running ◽  
Vastus Medialis ◽  
Lower Extremity Muscle

Context:Muscle activation during aquatic treadmill (ATM) running has not been examined, despite similar investigations for other modes of aquatic locomotion and increased interest in ATM running.Objectives:The objectives of this study were to compare normalized (percentage of maximal voluntary contraction; %MVC), absolute duration (aDUR), and total (tACT) lower-extremity muscle activity during land treadmill (TM) and ATM running at the same speeds.Design:Exploratory, quasi-experimental, crossover design.Setting:Athletic training facility.Participants:12 healthy recreational runners (age = 25.8 ± 5 y, height = 178.4 ± 8.2 cm, mass = 71.5 ± 11.5 kg, running experience = 8.2 ± 5.3 y) volunteered for participation.Intervention:All participants performed TM and ATM running at 174.4, 201.2, and 228.0 m/min while surface electromyographic data were collected from the vastus medialis, rectus femoris, gastrocnemius, tibialis anterior, and biceps femoris.Main Outcome Measures:For each muscle, a 2 × 3 repeated-measures ANOVA was used to analyze the main effects and environment–speed interaction (P ≤ .05) of each dependent variable: %MVC, aDUR, and tACT.Results:Compared with TM, ATM elicited significantly reduced %MVC (−44.0%) but increased aDUR (+213.1%) and tACT (+41.9%) in the vastus medialis, increased %MVC (+48.7%) and aDUR (+128.1%) in the rectus femoris during swing phase, reduced %MVC (−26.9%) and tACT (−40.1%) in the gastrocnemius, increased aDUR (+33.1%) and tACT (+35.7%) in the tibialis anterior, and increased aDUR (+41.3%) and tACT (+29.2%) in the biceps femoris. At faster running speeds, there were significant increases in tibialis anterior %MVC (+8.6−15.2%) and tACT (+12.7−17.0%) and rectus femoris %MVC (12.1−26.6%; swing phase).Conclusion:No significant environment–speed interaction effects suggested that observed muscle-activity differences between ATM and TM were due to environmental variation, ie, buoyancy (presumed to decrease %MVC) and drag forces (presumed to increase aDUR and tACT) in the water.

scholarly journals Lower Extremity Muscle Activity During a Women's Overhand Lacrosse Shot

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianna M. Millard ◽  
John A. Mercer
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Body Height ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Medial Gastrocnemius ◽  
Discrete Events ◽  
Warm Up ◽  
Lower Extremity Muscle ◽  
One Year

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to describe lower extremity muscle activity during the lacrosse shot. Participants (n=5 females, age 22±2 years, body height 162.6±15.2 cm, body mass 63.7±23.6 kg) were free from injury and had at least one year of lacrosse experience. The lead leg was instrumented with electromyography (EMG) leads to measure muscle activity of the rectus femoris (RF), biceps femoris (BF), tibialis anterior (TA), and medial gastrocnemius (GA). Participants completed five trials of a warm-up speed shot (Slow) and a game speed shot (Fast). Video analysis was used to identify the discrete events defining specific movement phases. Full-wave rectified data were averaged per muscle per phase (Crank Back Minor, Crank Back Major, Stick Acceleration, Stick Deceleration). Average EMG per muscle was analyzed using a 4 (Phase) x 2 (Speed) ANOVA. BF was greater during Fast vs. Slow for all phases (p<0.05), while TA was not influenced by either Phase or Speed (p>0.05). RF and GA were each influenced by the interaction of Phase and Speed (p<0.05) with GA being greater during Fast vs. Slow shots during all phases and RF greater during Crank Back Minor and Major as well as Stick Deceleration (p<0.05) but only tended to be greater during Stick Acceleration (p=0.076) for Fast vs. Slow. The greater muscle activity (BF, RF, GA) during Fast vs. Slow shots may have been related to a faster approach speed and/or need to create a stiff lower extremity to allow for faster upper extremity movements.

scholarly journals Neuromuscular Responses of Elite Skaters During Different Roller Figure Skating Jumps

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-32
Author(s):  
Patrícia Dias Pantoja ◽  
André Mello ◽  
Giane Veiga Liedtke ◽  
Ana Carolina Kanitz ◽  
Eduardo Lusa Cadore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Muscle Activation ◽  
Vastus Lateralis ◽  
Gluteus Maximus ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Figure Skating ◽  
Vastus Medialis ◽  
Lateral Gastrocnemius ◽  
Neuromuscular Activity

AbstractThis study aimed to describe the neuromuscular activity of elite athletes who performed various roller figure skating jumps, to determine whether the muscle activation is greater during jumps with more rotations and in which phase the muscles are more active. This study also aimed to analyze if there is any difference in the muscle activity pattern between female and male skaters. Four elite skaters were evaluated, and each participated in two experimental sessions. During the first session, anthropometric data were collected, and the consent forms were signed. For the second session, neuromuscular data were collected during jumps, which were performed with skates at a rink. The following four roller figure skating jumps were evaluated: single Axel, double Axel, double Mapes and triple Mapes. The neuromuscular activity of the following seven muscles was obtained with an electromyograph which was fixed to the waist of each skater with a strap: biceps femoris, lateral gastrocnemius, tibialis anterior, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis and gluteus maximus. The signal was transmitted wirelessly to a laptop. During the roller figure skating jumps, the lateral gastrocnemius, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, biceps femoris and gluteus maximus, showed more activation during the jumps with more rotations, and the activation mainly occurred during the propulsion and flight phases. Female skaters demonstrated higher muscle activities in tibialis anterior, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis and gluteus maximus during the landing phase of the triple Mapes, when compared to their male counterparts. The results obtained in this study should be considered when planning training programs with specific exercises that closely resemble the roller figure skating jumps. This may be important for the success of elite skaters in competitions.

Muscle Activity During Running With Different Body-Weight-Support Mechanisms: Aquatic Environment Versus Body-Weight-Support Treadmill

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 300-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Mercer ◽  
Bryon C. Applequist ◽  
Kenji Masumoto
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Body Weight Support ◽  
Stride Frequency ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Lower Extremity Muscle ◽  
Weight Support

Background:Body-weight (BW) support during running can be accomplished using deep-water running (DWR; 100% BW support) and a lower-body positive-pressure (LBPP) treadmill.Purpose:To compare lower-extremity muscle activity during DWR and running on an LBPP treadmill at matched stride frequency.Methods:Eight subjects (40 ± 6.5 y, 173 ± 7.2 cm, 66.9 ± 11.7 kg) completed 4 running conditions all at a preferred stride frequency that was determined while running with no support. Two conditions were running on the LBPP treadmill at 60% and 80% of BW, and the other 2 conditions were different DWR styles: high knee (DWR-HK) and cross-country (DWR-CC). Average (AVG) and root-mean-square (RMS) electromyography (rectus femoris, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, and tibialis anterior) were each compared among conditions (repeated-measures analysis of variance).Results:Results for AVG and RMS variables were identical for statistical tests for each muscle. Rectus femoris electromyography during DWR-HK was lower than that of DWR-CC (P < .05) but not different than either 60% BW or 80% BW (P > .05). Biceps femoris electromyography was less during DWR-HK than DWR-CC (P < .05) but greater during DWR-HK than either BW 60% or BW 80% (P < .05). Neither gastrocnemius nor tibialis anterior electromyography differed between conditions (P > .05).Conclusion:Neither the mechanism of BW support nor style of DWR influenced gastrocnemius or tibialis anterior muscle activity during running at the same stride frequency. However, rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscle activity were influenced by not only the mechanism of BW support but also the style of DWR.

scholarly journals Changes in muscle coactivation during running: a comparison between two techniques, forefoot vs rearfoot

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 332-336
Author(s):  
Daniel Araya ◽  
Juan López ◽  
Germán Villalobos ◽  
Rodrigo Guzmán-Venegas ◽  
Oscar Valencia
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Surface Electromyography ◽  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Biceps Femoris ◽  
Medial Gastrocnemius ◽  
Initial Contact ◽  
Joint Stability ◽  
Paired Data ◽  
Lateral Gastrocnemius

Introduction: Surface electromyography has been a technique used to describe muscle activity during running. However, there is little literature that analyses the behaviour of muscle coactivation in runners, describing the effect between two techniques associated with the initial contact, such as the use of rearfoot (RF) and forefoot (FF). Material and method: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle coactivation levels developed in the lower limb during two running techniques, FF vs RF. Fourteen amateur runners were evaluated (eight men, six women; age= 23.21 ± 3.58 years, mass= 63.89 ± 8.13 kg, height= 1.68 ± 0.08m). Surface electromyography was used to measure muscle activity during both running techniques evaluated on a treadmill, considering the muscle pairs: Rectus femoris- Biceps femoris (RFe-BF), Lateral Gastrocnemius–Tibialis Anterior (LG-TA), and Medial Gastrocnemius - Tibialis Anterior (MG-TA). These were calculated in three windows considering ten running cycles (0-5%, 80-100%, and 0-100%). To compare FF vs RF t-student test for paired data was used. Results: It was observed significant differences in the MG-TA pair (FF= 18.42 ± 11.84% vs RF = 39.05 ± 13.28%, p = 0.0018 during 0-5%, and RFe-BF pair (FF = 42.38 ± 18.11% vs RF = 28.37 ± 17.2%, p = 0.0331) during 80-100% of the race. Conclusion: Our findings show that the behaviour of muscle coactivation is different between FF vs RF techniques if we analyze little windows in the running cycle. This could be associated with an increase in the joint stability between these short intervals, represented in the initial and final regions of the running cycle.

scholarly journals Role of Occupational Footwear and Prolonged Walking on Lower Extremity Muscle Activation during Maximal Exertions and Postural Stability Tasks

Biomechanics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-213
Author(s):  
Harish Chander ◽  
Sachini N. K. Kodithuwakku Arachchige ◽  
Alana J. Turner ◽  
Reuben F. Burch V ◽  
Adam C. Knight ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Postural Stability ◽  
Muscle Activation ◽  
Medial Gastrocnemius ◽  
Lower Extremity Muscle ◽  
Prolonged Duration ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Impact

Background: Occupational footwear and a prolonged duration of walking have been previously reported to play a role in maintaining postural stability. The purpose of this paper was to analyze the impact of three types of occupational footwear: the steel-toed work boot (ST), the tactical work boot (TB), and the low-top work shoe (LT) on previously unreported lower extremity muscle activity during postural stability tasks. Methods: Electromyography (EMG) muscle activity was measured from four lower extremity muscles (vastus medialis (VM), medial hamstrings (MH), tibialis anterior (TA), and medial gastrocnemius (MG) during maximal voluntary isometric contractions (MVIC) and during a sensory organization test (SOT) every 30 min over a 4 h simulated workload while wearing ST, TB, and LT footwear. The mean MVIC and the mean and percentage MVIC during each SOT condition from each muscle was analyzed individually using a repeated measures ANOVA at an alpha level of 0.05. Results: Significant differences (p < 0.05) were found for maximal exertions, but this was limited to only the time main effect. No significant differences existed for EMG measures during the SOT. Conclusion: The findings suggest that occupational footwear type does not influence lower extremity muscle activity during both MVIC and SOT. Significantly lower muscle activity during maximal exertions over the course of the 4 h workload was evident, which can be attributed to localized muscular fatigue, but this was not sufficient to impact muscle activity during postural stability tasks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document