Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R
during this exercise and its variations. Thus, this study aimed to ecently, many studies have analyzed muscle acti-
vity during different strength exercises (14,25,28,
verify how mechanical changes and loads affect lower limb
29,37). The superficial electromyographic (EMG)
muscle activity during the performance of different LP
technique is often used to identify the participa-
exercises. Fourteen women performed 3 LP exercises: 45°
tion of a muscle or muscle group in different performance
LP (LP45), LP high (LPH), and LP low (LPL) at 40% and 80% of techniques of many exercises (2–4,6,17,27,33). Exercises com-
the 1 repetition maximum. The electromyographic activity of the monly used in a strength training program seem to be more in-
rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, teresting to analyze during those analyses (20,23,24,35,36,39).
and gluteus maximus was recorded. Results suggested that The leg press (LP) is a multijoint (hip, knee, and ankle)
mechanical changes affect lower limb muscle activity and that it exercise, its variations (low foot placement [LPL], high foot
is related to the load used. At moderate effort levels, the rectus placement [LPH], and 45° [LP45]) are some of the most
femoris and gastrocnemius were more active during the LP45 common exercises performed by athletes to enhance per-
and LPL than during the LPH. At a high effort level, the rectus formance in sports (11,12). The hip and knee extension
femoris and vastus lateralis (quadriceps) were more active observed during concentric phase on LP is a very important
motion for these individuals because it involves the activation
during the LPL than the LPH. Again, the rectus femoris and
of large muscle groups of the lower body. The conditioning
gastrocnemius were more active during the LP45 and LPL than
of those muscles are directly related to improvement in run-
the LPH. On the other hand, gluteus maximus activity was
ning, jumping, and lifting for football, track and field, power
greater during the LPH than the LPL. This study found that lifting, and Olympic weightlifting athletes (10–12). Identify-
coordination patterns of muscle activity are different when ing how mechanical changes and different loads affect the
performing LP variations at high or moderate effort levels activation pattern in hip and knee extensor muscles may
because of mechanical changes and different loads lifted improve physical performance in athletic and nonathletic
during the different LP exercises. These results suggest that if populations (10–18).
the goal is to induce greater rectus femoris and vastus lateralis Caterisano et al. (5) evaluated hip and knee extensor muscle
activity performing squats at 3 ranges of motion. They found
that gluteus maximus and vastus medialis activity was
influenced by different mechanical changes in this exercise
Address correspondence to Eduardo Marczwski da Silva, (partial, parallel, and full depth). Escamilla et al. (12) quantified
eduardomarczwski@yahoo.com.br. the hip and knee extensors muscle activity during LPH and
22(4)/1059–1065 LPL exercises in different stance widths and foot positions.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research They found that the peak of EMG activity for the gastro-
Ó 2008 National Strength and Conditioning Association cnemius muscle was greater during the LPL than during the
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the
Problem
Articles in academic journals
and fitness periodicals have
never examined how mechani-
cal changes and loads lifted
affect muscle activity during
LP exercises. Thus, we used 3
of the most common LP varia-
tions to examine which posi-
tions adopted during LP
exercises could elicit the highest
level of electrical activity in 5
lower limb muscles. Electro-
myographic signals were col-
lected from each muscle during
performance of the different LPs
using different submaximum
(40% and 80%) effort levels.
Acquisition of all EMG signals
was performed on the same day
for each subject. According to
Figure 1. (A) LPL starting concentric position. (B) LPL final concentric position.
convention, the root mean
square of the EMG signal
(rmsEMG) was used to quantify
the average level of electrical
LPH, indicating that mechanical changes could modify activity produced during each condition. The signals were
muscle activity pattern during the performance of LP normalized by the signal collected during the maximum
exercises. However, only a single voluntary effort level was repetition of the LP45 to reduce the effect of variations in
used, gluteus maximus muscle activity was not measured, and signal amplitude among muscles and subjects (37). Compar-
the LP45 was not performed during these analyses. isons were made among exercises at 2 submaximum effort
Although the mechanical changes during strength exer- levels. These procedures were designed to address the
cises variations can modify muscle activity pattern, studies effectiveness of each exercise targeting specific muscles;
have not quantified how mechanical changes affect the hip however, some controversy regarding their relative efficacy
and knee extensor muscle activity pattern during LP exercises and safety still exists.
at different submaximum loads lifted (5,11,12). Furthermore, Subjects
these studies have been done only with men (5,6,12,35–37). Fourteen healthy young women (physical education stu-
Thus, the specific purpose of this study was to analyze how dents) from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
mechanical changes and the loads lifted could modify the hip (UFRGS) were selected for this study. The participants’ mean
and knee extensor muscle activity in women during different age, height, percentage of lean body mass and fat mass (6SD)
the TM
Raw EMG signals were band-pass filtered (Butterworth 5th was greater (p , 0.05) during the LP45 and LPL than during
order) at 20–500 Hz following the recommendations of the LPH (Figure 4A). At high effort level, the rectus femoris and
DeLuca (7). To examine the EMG signals in the time vastus lateralis (quadriceps) were more active (p , 0.05) in
domain, the raw signals were processed through an rms during the LPL than the LPH. The rectus femoris and
calculation. The rmsEMG average was obtained from the gastrocnemius were more active (p , 0.05) during the LP45 and
3 central submaximum effort repetitions of the LPL, LP45, LPL than during the LPH. However, during the LPH exercise,
and LPH, and the rmsEMG was obtained from maximum gluteus maximus activity was greater (p , 0.05) than during the
repetition (1RM) of the LP45 for each muscle during the LPL (Figure 4B). No statistical difference was observed in
concentric phase. This treatment was similar to that proposed by biceps femoris activity among the 3 exercises (Figure 4).
Escamilla et al. (12) and Pincivero et al (31). The rmsEMG mean
collected at 40% and 80% was normalized using the value
collected from different muscles during the 1RM of the LP45 DISCUSSION
(100%). This procedure was adopted due to limitations on In the present study, we examined young women performing
normalization by isometric actions (7). Muscle activity was 3 different LP exercises at 2 submaximum effort levels.
compared in the concentric phase between exercises at 40% and The EMG data were analyzed in order to compare muscle
80% of the 1RM. activity among exercises. The principal differences found in
muscle activation patterns are related to the mechanical
Statistical Analyses changes and effort levels required (40% and 80% of 1RM)
The Shapiro-Wilks statistical test was used to determine the during these exercises.
data normality. According to the result, repeated-measures At the moderate effort level (40%), we found that rectus
analyses of variance comparing the exercises (LP45, LPH, and femoris and gastrocnemius activity during the performance of
LPL) for each intensity (40% and 80% of 1RM) were applied the LP45 and LPL was greater than during the LPH exercise.
to the 5 muscle activity values to verify the differences in However, the same result was found at the high effort level
muscle activity. Subsequently, to determine the source of the (80%). It means that the activity patterns of rectus femoris and
significance, Bonferroni’s post hoc test was used. All statistical gastrocnemius were different among these exercises and did
procedures were adopted by using the SPSS 11.0 package for not depend on the effort level required. This was probably
Windows. Significance was set at p # 0.05. due to mechanical changes during the performance of these
exercises.
RESULTS For the rectus femoris, the fact that it is a biarticular (hip and
Figure 4 shows the rmsEMG normalized mean values of knee) muscle can explain these differences (10–12). Escamilla
muscle activity among the 3 exercises at 40% and 80%. At (10) suggested that the greater rectus femoris activity found
moderate effort levels, rectus femoris and gastrocnemius activity during monoarticular exercises (knee extension) compared to
biarticular exercises (LP and
squat) for the lower limbs can
be explained by its biarticular
function. When comparing dif-
ferent types of LP, it can be
verified that during the LPH at
the starting position, the high
foot placement increases the
hip flexion angle (the biceps
femoris and gluteus maximus
are stretched and the rectus
femoris is shortened). This
could impair the rectus femoris
mechanism that shortens this
muscle. Thus, it would result in
a strength deficit because, in
that position, the rectus femoris
would not be at a favorable
length to increase force pro-
Figure 4. Root mean square electromyographic values of the muscle activity of rectus femoris (RF), vastus lateralis duction (8,9,30). On the other
(VL), biceps femoris (BF), gastrocnemius (GAS), and gluteus maximus (GM) muscles during different types of
a
leg press exercises at a 40% effort level ( difference from LPH, p , 0.05) (A) and during different types of leg hand, in the LP45 and LPL
press exercises at an 80% effort level (bdifference from LPL, p , 0.05) (B). exercises, the rectus femoris
would not be as shortened,
thus increasing its force production capacity. Our result was gluteus maximus muscle consisted of approximately 40%–
different from that of Escamilla et al. (12). Probably the 70% of type I fibers and 30%–60% of type II fibers. Thus,
different hip ankle positions used during LPH and LPL selective recruitment of type II fibers at increasing force levels
performance can explain these differences. For the gastroc- in the gluteus maximus may still be responsible for the
nemius muscle, similar results were previously reported by increased EMG signal at the high effort level. Again, it sug-
Escamilla et al. (12), although only the LPL and LPH were gests that coordination patterns are different from the high to
compared in their study. These results were explained by the moderate effort levels (1,26). No difference was observed
subjects’ different ankle joint positions adopted during the 3 between exercises in biceps femoris activity, in agreement
exercises. During the LPH, the subject’s ankle is positioned at with the results found by Escamilla et al. (12).
a greater degree of plantar flexion compared to its position In conclusion, the results presented suggest that the
during the LP45 and LPL. This causes a shortening of the mechanical changes in LPL, LP45 and LPH performance
gastrocnemius muscle (17), which can impair the mechanics affect coordination activity patterns in women’s lower limb
of the gastrocnemius during this exercise, suggested again by muscles. The differences can be related to the load lifted
the relationship between force production and muscle length (effort level) during these exercises.
(force-length curves) (8,9,30).
On the other hand, at the high effort level (80%), we found PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
that vastus lateralis activity was greater during the LPL than
during the LPH and that gluteus maximus activity was greater LP exercises (LPL, LPH, and LP45) are commonly
during the LPH than during the LPL. It means that activity performed in strength training programs. Due to the fact
patterns of the vastus lateralis and gluteus maximus were dif- that the primary purpose of the LP exercises is the devel-
ferent between these exercises, depending on the effort level opment of increased strength during knee and hip extension
required. It probably was a result of mechanical changes in simultaneously, identifying the participation of the different
the arrangement of the loads lifted while performing these muscles involved in these exercises at different loads is very
exercises. important to coaches, athletes, and general people. The
A specific requirement of the vastus lateralis can occur results of our study indicate that when a load at 40% of 1RM is
during the LPL, but it happened only at the high effort level, selected, LPL and LP45 are recommended to strengthen the
confirming the different result obtained from that found by rectus femoris and gastrocnemius muscles. When a load at
Escamilla et al. (12). Woods and Bigland-Ritchie (38) found 80% of 1RM is selected, the exercises recommended to
nonlinear force–EMG relationships in muscles of mixed fiber strengthen the rectus femoris and gastrocnemius are the
composition. They suggested that at the low to moderate same. To strengthen the quadriceps (rectus femoris and vastus
effort level, low threshold units would be selectively lateralis) muscle, we recommend performing the LPL
recruited, while at the high effort level, high threshold units exercise. On the other hand, to strengthen the gluteus
would be responsible for increasing the EMG signal. maximus muscle, the LPH exercise should be performed.
According to Johnson et al. (22), the vastus lateralis muscle
consisted of approximately 45% of type I fibers and 55% of REFERENCES
type II. Thus, selective recruitment of type II fibers at 1. Anders, C, Bretschneider, S, Bernsdorf, A, and Schneider, W.
increasing force levels (80%) in the vastus lateralis may still be Activation characteristics of shoulder muscles during maximal
and submaximal efforts. Eur J Appl Physiol 93: 540–546, 2005.
responsible for increasing the EMG signal at the high effort
2. Blackard, DO, Jensen, RL, and Ebben, WP. Use of EMG analysis in
level. It suggests that coordination patterns are different from challenging kinetic chain terminology. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31:
the high to moderate effort levels (1,25). This finding 443–448, 1999.
combined with the rectus femoris results indicates that the 3. Büll, M, Vitti M, Freitas, V, and Rosa, G. Electromyographic
quadriceps muscle group (rectus femoris and vastus lateralis) validation of the trapezius and serratus anterior muscles in military
press exercises with open grip. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 41,
appears to require more mechanical changes during the LPL 179–184, 2001.
than the LPH, indicating a specific activity of these muscles 4. Büll, M, Vitti, M, Freitas, V, and Rosa, G. Electromyographic
mainly at the high effort level (80%). validation of the trapezius and serratus anterior muscles in the
For the gluteus maximus, this finding supports the rowing and frontal-lateral cross, dumbbells exercises. Electromyogr
Clin Neurophysiol 42, 79–84, 2002.
suggestions of Caterisano et al. (5) that a greater angle of
hip motion could increase gluteus maximus activity during 5. Caterisano, A, Moss, RE, Pellinger, TK, Woodruff, K, Lewis, VC,
Booth, W, and Khadra, T. The effect of back squat depth on the
LPH performance. Compared to the other exercises, in the EMG activity of 4 superficial hip and thigh muscles. J Strength Cond
starting position, the greater hip flexion angle observed could Res 16: 428–432, 2002.
be favorable to gluteus maximus force production (8,9,30). 6. Cogley, RM, Archambaut, TA, Fibeger, JF, Koverman, MM,
We suggest that the high gluteus maximus activity during the Youdas, JW, and Hollman, JH. Comparison of muscle activation
using various hand positions during the push-up exercise. J Strength
LPH helps the deficit caused by the rectus femoris and Cond Res 19: 628–633, 2005.
gastrocnemius muscles. However, this result was found only 7. De Luca, CJ. The use of surface electromyography in biomechanics.
at the high effort level. According to Johnson et al. (22), the J Appl Biomech 13: 135–163, 1997.
the TM
8. Edman, KA, Elzinga, G, and Noble, MI. Enhancement of 24. Khazei, D. Push-up power: five variations on this classic exercise.
mechanical performance by stretch during tetanic contractions of Mens Fitness 10: 56 –57, 1994.
vertebrate skeletal muscle fibres. J Physiol Lond 281: 139–155, 25. Kouzaki, M, Shinohara, M, Masani, K, Kanehisa, H, and Fukunaga, T.
1978. Alternate muscle activity observed between knee extensor synergists
9. Edman, KA, Elzinga, G, and Noble, MI. Residual force enhancement during low-level sustained contractions. J Appl Physiol 93: 675–684,
after stretch of contracting frog single muscle fibers. J Gen Physiol 80: 2002.
769–784, 1982. 26. Lawrence, JH and Deluca, CJ. Myoelectric signal versus force
10. Escamilla, RF. Knee biomechanics of the dynamic squat exercise. relationship in different human muscles. J Appl Physiol 54:
Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 127–141, 2001. 1653–1659, 1983.
11. Escamilla, RF, Fleisig, GS, Zheng, N, Barrentine, SW, Wilk, KE, and 27. Matheson, JW, Kernozek, TW, Feter, DCW, and Davies,
Andrews, JR. Biomechanics of the knee during closed kinetic chain GJ. Electromyographic activity and applied load during seated
and open kinetic chain exercises. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 556–569, quadriceps exercises. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 1713–1725, 2001.
1998. 28. McCaw, S and Melrose, D. Stance width and bar load effects on leg
12. Escamilla, RF, Fleisig, GS, Zheng, N, Lander, JE, Barrentine, SW, muscle activity during the parallel squat. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31:
Rews, JR, Bergemann, BW, and Moorman, CT. Effects of technique 428–436, 1999.
variations on knee biomechanics during squat and leg press. Med Sci 29. Ninos, JC, Irrgang, JJ, Berdett, R, and Weiss, JR. Electromyographic
Sports Exerc 3: 1552–1566, 2001. analysis of the squat performed in self-selected lower extremity
13. Escamilla, RF, Fleisig, GS, Zheng, N, Lander, JE, Barrentine, SW, neural rotation and 30 degrees of lower extremity turn-out from
Andrews, JR, Bergemann, BW, and Moorman, CT 3rd. The effects self-selected neutral position. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 25: 307–315,
of technique variations on knee biomechanics during the squat and 1997.
leg press. Med Sci Sports Exerc 29: S156, 1997. 30. Peterson, DR, Rassier, DE, and Herzog, W. Force enhancement
14. Ferreira, M, Büll, M, and Vitti, M. The comparison of the response in in single skeletal muscle fibres on the ascending limb of
the deltoid muscle (anterior portion) and the pectoralis major the force–length relationship. J Exp Biol 207: 2787–2791,
muscle (clavicular portion) determined by the frontal-lateral cross, 2004.
dumbbells and rowing exercises. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 43: 31. Pincivero, DM, Campy, RM, Salfetnikov, Y, Bright, A, and
75–79, 2003. Coelho, AJ. Influence of contraction intensity, muscle, and gender on
15. Ferreira, M, Büll, M, and Vitti, M. Participation of the deltoid median frequency of the quadriceps femoris. J Appl Physiol 90: 804–
(anterior portion) and the pectoralis major (clavicular portion) 810, 2001.
muscles in different modalities of supine and frontal elevation 32. Ploutz-Snyder, LL and Giamis, EL. Orientation and familiarization
exercises with different grips. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 43: to 1RM strength testing in old and young women. J Strength Cond
131–140, 2003. Res 15: 519–523, 2001.
16. Fiebert, IM, Correia, EP, Roach, KE, Carte, MB, Cespedes, J, and 33. Rabita, G, Pérot, C, and Lensel-Corbeil, G. Differential effect of knee
Hemstreet, K. A comparison of EMG activity between the medial extension isometric training on the different muscles of the
and lateral heads of the gastrocnemius muscle during isometric quadriceps femoris in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 83: 531–538,
plantar flexion contractions at various knee angles. Isokinetics Exerc 6: 2000.
71–77, 1996.
34. Rainoldi, A, Melchiorri, G, and Caruso, I. A method for positioning
17. Flanagan, S, Salem, GJ, Wang, M, Sanker, S, and Greendale, G. electrodes during surface EMG recordings in lower limb muscles.
Squatting exercises in older adults: kinematic and kinetic J Neurosci Methods 134: 37–43, 2004.
comparisons. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35: 635–643, 2003.
35. Signorile, JF, Weber, B, Roll, B, Caruso, JF, Lowenstein, I, and
18. Glass, SC and Armstrong, T. Electromyographical activity of the Perry, AC. An electromyographical comparison of the squat and
pectoralis muscle during incline and decline bench presses. J Strength knee extension exercises. J Strength Cond Res 8: 178–183,
Cond Res 11: 163–167, 1997. 1994.
19. Heyward, VH and Stolarczyk, LM. Avaliacxa˜o da composicxa˜o corporal 36. Signorille, JE, Applegate, B, Duque, M, Cole, N, and Zink, A.
aplicada. São Paulo: Manole, 2001. Selective recruitment of the triceps surae muscles with changes in
20. Isear, JA, Erickson, JC, and Worrell, TW. EMG analysis of lower knee angle. J Strength Cond Res 16: 433–439, 2004.
extremity muscle recruitment patterns during unloaded squat. Med 37. Signorile, JE, Zink, A, and Szwed, S. A comparative electromyo-
Sci Sports Exerc 29: 532–539, 1997. graphical investigation of muscle utilization patterns using various
21. Jackson, AS, Pollock, ML, and Ward, A. Generalized equations for hand positions during the lat pull-down. J Strength Cond Res 16:
predicting body density of women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 12: 175–182, 539–546, 2002.
1980. 38. Woods, JJ and Bigland-Ritchie, B. Linear and non-linear surface
22. Johnson, MA, Polgar, J, Weightman, D, and Appleton, D. Data on EMG/force relationships in human muscles. Am J Phys Med 62:
the distribution of fibre types in thirty-six human muscle—an autopsy 287–299, 1982.
study. J Neurol Sci 18: 111–129, 1973. 39. Wright, GA, Delong, TH, and Gehlsen, G. Electromyographic
23. Karst, GM and Willett, GM. Effects of specific exercise instructions activity of the hamstrings during performance of the leg curl, stiff-leg
on abdominal muscle activity during trunk curl exercises. J Orthop deadlift, and back squat movements. J Strength Cond Res 13: 168–174,
Sports Phys Ther 34: 548–552, 2004. 1999.