CAN SHOULDER MUSCLE COORDINATION DURING THE
SUPPORT SCALE AT RING HEIGHT BE REPLICATED
DURING TRAINING EXERCISES IN GYMNASTICS?
SYLVAIN M. BERNASCONI,1 NICOLAS R. TORDI,1 BERNARD M. PARRATTE,2
1
AND JEAN-DENIS R. ROUILLON
1
IFR 133, EA 3920 Cardiovascular Physiopathology and Prevention, University of Franche Comte´, Besancon, France;
and 2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, CHU Jean Minjoz, Besancxon, France
ABSTRACT
Bernasconi, SM, Tordi, NR, Parratte, BM, and Rouillon, J-DR.
Can shoulder muscle coordination during the support scale at
ring height be replicated during training exercises in gymnastics?
J Strength Cond Res 23(8): 2381–2388, 2009—The support
scale at ring height, the swallow, is a difficult strength element,
usually performed in gymnastics. Coaches try to simulate the
swallow position during training to strengthen muscles, specifi-
cally in the position used for competition. However, the real
effect of this position’s simulation on muscle force and coordi-
nation and consequently on the muscle activity has not been
determined. The purpose of the study was to compare muscle
activity and coordination during a swallow performed on the
rings, using a counterweight and during 2 training exercises
using dumbbells or barbells, respectively. Six top-level
gymnasts participated in the study. Electromyograms from
the biceps brachii, triceps brachii, deltoideus (clavicular part),
pectoralis major, serratus anterior, infraspinatus, trapezius
(middle part), and latissimus dorsi in the right shoulder were
collected during the 4 exercises and analyzed using root mean
square (RMS) and mean power frequency (MPF). The RMS
were normalized to the maximal voluntary contraction, and a
co-activation index was also determined between biceps
and triceps brachii. Our results show specific shoulder muscle
coordination for each exercise. As compared with the swallow
on the rings, the pectoralis major participates less in shoulder
flexion during the counterweight exercise, whereas the
deltoideus is more activated during the dumbbells exercise
(p , 0.05). The barbell exercise reduces the participation of
the serratus anterior in stabilizing the scapula (p , 0.05).
Training exercises must therefore be chosen with knowledge
of the specific muscle coordination induced by each. The
Address correspondence to Sylvain Bernasconi, bernasconi.sylvain@
free.fr.
23(8)/2381–2388
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2009 National Strength and Conditioning Association
counterweight exercise preserves the pectoralis major. The
barbell exercise reduces participation of the serratus anterior.
The dumbbells exercise may be useful to prepare the rotator
cuff muscles carefully for use.
K EY W ORDS electromyography, isometric contraction,
gymnast, muscle activity
INTRODUCTION
I
n gymnastics, the skills performed by athletes on the
rings require them to use the upper limbs to support
their body mass. The shoulder joint is not functionally
designed for this strain. Because its poor congruence
does not contribute to joint stability (6,14,25,28), the muscles
act as a dynamic component to stabilize the shoulder joint.
Unfortunately, the muscle activities do not always match the
mechanical strain imposed by the rings elements. Caraffa
et al. (7) showed that the suspension phase during the
backswing on the rings caused a high mechanical stress on
the shoulder joint, whereas the muscle activity around the
joint was slight. These authors concluded that this in-
adequate congruency between muscle activity and the
articular stress might explain the occurrence of labral lesions.
Top-level gymnasts also perform 5 to 6 strength elements
during a competitive movement. A paucity of studies have
focused on the shoulder muscles’ activity during strength
elements on the rings (2,3,24). Nemessuri et al. (24) studied
the cross-hang position and determined the muscles that act
as prime movers during the element. Our previous studies
demonstrated that training devices modify the muscles’ co-
ordination even if the training movements reproduce the
competitive position (2,3). The validity of using training
movements to prepare the shoulder muscles appropriately for
the strength elements on the rings is therefore put into question.
All top-level gymnasts perform the support scale at ring
height (Figure 1), the swallow, during international com-
petitions. To achieve a perfect swallow, the gymnast must
keep his body in the horizontal plane at ring height with his
arms straight for 2 seconds.
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 | 2381
Comparison of Shoulder Muscle Activity During Swallow and Three Training Movements in Gymnastics
Figure 1. Gymnast performing a swallow on rings.
Two kinds of isometric exercises could be performed for
swallow training. Traditional training uses a barbell or
dumbbells with the athlete in a lying position (Figures 2
and 3, respectively). More specific training reproduces the
movement on the ring using a counterweight (Figure 4).
However, no information is available on muscle activity
during competitive movement and the training exercises.
Consequently, the training exercises’ ability to reproduce the
muscle coordination involved during the competitive
exercise is currently unknown.
In considering these issues, surface electromyography
could be a valuable method to examine whether training
Figure 2. Gymnast using barbell in lying position.
the TM
2382 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Figure 3. Gymnast using dumbbells in lying position.
exercises modify the muscle function and coordination as
compared with the competitive movement. Several authors
have studied the relationship between the electromyogram
(EMG) and the force during isometric contractions
(4,20,22,26,27). They found that the force output modified
the EMG activity, and the increase of force output always
induces an EMG increase during nonfatiguing isometric
contractions (19,21,26). Furthermore, the mean power
frequency (MPF) is an index of the EMG power spectrum
and is correlated to muscle fatigue under isometric conditions
(1,4,15,23). The purposes of the study are a) to determine the
activity of 8 shoulder muscles during a swallow on the rings,
Figure 4. Gymnast performing swallow using a counterweight.

and b) to compare muscle activity and coordination between
the swallow on the rings and 3 training movements.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
Surface electromyography informs us about motor unit
recruitment and muscle force using the EMG/force relation-
ship during isometric contractions (4,26). This method does
not permit us to determine modifications of muscle coordina-
tion directly. However, muscle coordination can be evaluated
indirectly with the assumption of an EMG/force linear
relationship (9,13,26). This assumption allows for deter-
mining the modification of the muscle coordination a) when
differences are observed for only some muscles between
exercises; b) when muscle activity across time is different for
the muscles that have similar actions; and c) when muscle
fatigue is observed for different muscles during exercises.
Therefore, muscle coordination will be analyzed considering
these rationale.
Subjects
Six top-level gymnasts of the French national team partici-
pated in this study and gave informed consent of participation
after receiving appropriate information in agreement with
the Declaration of Helsinki for human experiments. Their
characteristics (mean 6 SD) were age: 22 6 3 years; height:
167 6 6 cm; and weight: 66 6 8 kg. All gymnasts follow
a training program of greater than 25 hours per week. These
tests were performed approximately 1 month before the 37th
World Artistic Gymnastics Championships.
Procedures
Each subject twice performed 4 exercises during the same
session: a) a swallow on the rings; b) a barbell exercise; c)
a dumbbells exercise; and d) a swallow on the rings using
a counterweight. During the barbell exercise (Figure 2), the
gymnast sustained 1 barbell (load: 41 6 2% of the body
weight) in the horizontal plane in a recumbent position. The
dumbbells exercise (Figure 3) was performed using 2 dumb-
bells (load: 12 6 3% of the body weight for each) in the same
position. During the counterweight exercise (Figure 4), the
gymnast performed a swallow on the rings with a counter-
weight (load: 18 6 9% of the body weight) applied to the
pelvic belt using a system of pulleys. Subjects had to keep this
position during 2 seconds for each exercise. The exercise
setting corresponded to the training situation regularly
encountered by the gymnasts. The exercise order was ran-
domized for all subjects with at least 20 minutes of recupera-
tion between each test for a total duration of approximately
4 hours.
Electromyographic signals were collected using a portable
EMG system (ME3000P8, Mega Electronics, Kuopio,
Finland) with a bandwidth of 8 to 500 Hz at a sampling
frequency of 1,000 Hz. Surface Ag-AgCl electrodes were
placed over the contracted belly of the muscles along their
longitudinal axis after skin preparation (skin shaved and
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
cleaned with an alcohol/ether/acetone solution) with
approximately 30 mm between the center of the electrodes.
The EMG activities were recorded simultaneously from the
biceps brachii, triceps brachii, deltoideus (clavicular part),
pectoralis major, serratus anterior, infraspinatus, trapezius
(middle part), and latissimus dorsi in the right shoulder.
Each exercise was recorded using a digital camera at 30 Hz.
The EMG activities and the video tape were further
synchronized using specific software (MegaWin 5, Mega
Electronics, Kuopio, Finland). Postacquisition calculation was
used to convert EMG signals in root mean square (RMS)
value with a time constant of 25 milliseconds. Two seconds of
isometric contraction during each exercise were used for
subsequent analysis. Mean RMS was then calculated for each
second and was further referred to as RMS. The MPF was
also calculated for each second (Hamming windowing, Fast
Fourier Transform [FFT] 512 points, 50% of FFT overlap).
The RMS and MPF of each trial per muscle were averaged
separately for each subject and exercise to reduce the
intrasubject variability and enhance data stability.
A co-activation index was determined for the biceps brachii
(BB) and triceps brachii (TB) muscles, according to Kellis
et al. (21):
RMSTB
Co-activation index ¼ 3100
RMSBB þ RMSTB
Maximal isometric shoulder flexion, extension, adduction,
and abduction were performed for each subject twice. The
hand was kept in supination, the elbow joint was fully
extended, and the shoulder joint was in neutral rotation and
in abduction at 30°. Each maximal isometric test involved
a contraction of 4 seconds duration. Mean RMS of the last
2 seconds of contraction was calculated, and the maximal
value of 8 maximal isometric shoulder contractions was used
for normalizing muscle activity during exercise.
Statistical Analyses
Mean and SD are used to describe data unless otherwise
specified. Gaussian distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test)
and homogeneity of variance (Bartlett test) were verified
before using the parametric tests presented below. A two-
way (exercise 3 time) analysis of variance with repeated
measures was used to compare RMS and coactivation
indexes for each muscle among the 4 exercises. Multiple
comparisons were performed with Student-Newman-Keuls
test. Because MPF comparisons between the exercises have
no rational significance, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were
used to compare MPF across time for each muscle and
exercise. All statistical tests were performed with an alpha
level of 0.05 (SigmaStat, SPSS, IL, USA). For RMS, the
statistical power for the variable ‘‘exercise’’ was between 0.41
and 1.00 and between 0.05 and 0.43 for the variable ‘‘time.’’
Considering the low statistical power for the variable ‘‘time,’’
we cannot preclude RMS differences across the 2 seconds.
However, the variable ‘‘time’’ is used primarily to distinguish
the results from the variable ‘‘exercise.’’ The main purpose
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 | 2383
Comparison of Shoulder Muscle Activity During Swallow and Three Training Movements in Gymnastics

Figure 5. Root mean square and mean power frequency for pectoralis major, clavicular part of deltoideus, and biceps brachii muscles during rings (Rs),
counterweight (CW), barbell (BB), and dumbbells (DBs) exercises. *p , 0.05 between exercises. #p , 0.05 across time.

was to differentiate the muscle activity between the exercises, RESULTS

and the statistical power for this variable is quite sufficient to Figure 5 shows RMS and MPF of 3 muscles involved in
reduce the beta error to an adequate level (mean statistical shoulder flexion. The RMS of the pectoralis major are
power of 0.85). significantly lower (p , 0.05) during the dumbbells exercise

Figure 6. Root mean square and mean power frequency for serratus anterior, middle part of trapezius, and infraspinatus muscles during rings (Rs), counterweight
(CW), barbell (BB), and dumbbells (DBs) exercises. *p , 0.05 between exercises. #p , 0.05 across time.

the TM

2384 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research


Figure 7. Root mean square and mean power frequency for latissimus dorsi muscle, triceps brachii muscle, and index of co-activation between biceps and triceps
brachii muscles during rings (Rs), counterweight (CW), barbell (BB), and dumbbells (DBs) exercises. *p , 0.05 between exercises.
as compared with the 3 other exercises. The RMS of the
deltoideus, clavicular part, and biceps brachii significantly
increase across time (p , 0.05) during the counterweight
exercise. The RMS of the biceps brachii are significantly
higher (p , 0.05) during the rings and counterweight exercise
than during the dumbbells exercise. The MPF of the
pectoralis major significantly decrease across time (p ,
0.05) during the rings exercise, whereas the MPF of the
biceps brachii decrease (p , 0.05) during the counterweight
exercise.
The RMS and MPF of the 2 muscles involved in scapula
stabilization are presented in Figure 6, with RMS and
MPF of the supraspinatus. The RMS of the serratus anterior
and infraspinatus are significantly higher (p , 0.05) during
the rings and counterweight exercises as compared with
the barbell and dumbbells exercises. However, the barbell
exercise involves higher RMS (p , 0.05) of the middle part
of the trapezius than the 3 other exercises. The RMS of this
muscle are also higher (p , 0.05) during the counterweight
exercise as compared with the dumbbells exercise. However,
only the MPF of the infraspinatus significantly decrease
(p , 0.05) during the rings exercise.
Figure 7 shows the RMS and MPF of the latissimus dorsi
and triceps brachii and the coactivation index between the
biceps and triceps brachii. The RMS of the latissimus dorsi
and triceps brachii are significantly higher (p , 0.05) during
the rings and counterweight exercises than during the barbell
and dumbbells exercises. The RMS of the latissimus dorsi are
significantly higher (p , 0.05) during the counterweight
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
exercise as compared with the barbell exercise. The co-
activation index is significantly lower (p , 0.05) during the
barbell and dumbbells exercises than during the rings and
counterweight exercises.
DISCUSSION
The objective of this study was a) to determine the activity of
8 shoulder muscles during the swallow; b) to compare the
activity and coordination of these 8 muscles between the skill
performed on the rings and its 3 training exercises (counter-
weight, barbell, and dumbbells).
The swallow is a support scale at ring height. Three main
actions have been determined from the muscle activity:
1. The pectoralis major (;80% MVC), deltoideus, clavicular
part (;90% MVC), and biceps brachii (;90% MVC)
perform an isometric flexion of the glenohumeral joint
(Figure 5).
2. The serratus anterior (;115% MVC) stabilizes the scapula
upon the thoracic wall (Figure 6), as assisted by the middle
part of the muscle trapezius (;50% MVC). The higher
activity observed for the serratus anterior during the
swallow as compared with the MVC procedure suggests
that our MVC determination was not adequate to provoke
its maximal contraction. However, the serratus anterior
holds the thoracic wall upon the scapula during the
swallow given that the upper limbs support the body mass
at the horizontal plane; the strain may be maximal for the
serratus anterior in this specific position.
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 | 2385
Comparison of Shoulder Muscle Activity During Swallow and Three Training Movements in Gymnastics
3. The infraspinatus (;65% MVC) achieves a lateral stabi-
lization of the glenohumeral joint (Figure 7). Among the
muscles of the rotator cuff, only this muscle performs the
lateral rotation and stabilization of the humerus (22,23).
Because the upper limbs support the body mass at the
horizontal plane during the swallow, the action of this
muscle also limits the posterior luxation of the humeral
head from the glenoid fossa.
Finally, the rings must be held near the body during the
swallow, but this action of shoulder adduction cannot be
accurately quantified. Because the pectoralis major and
infraspinatus are already active in performing the shoulder
flexion and stabilization, respectively, the latissimus dorsi
could be partly responsible for the shoulder adduction (28%
MVC). The second objective was to compare the 3 training
exercises with the competitive element to determine the
influence of the training exercises on muscle coordination.
The dumbbells exercise reduced the activity of the
pectoralis major and biceps brachii as compared with the
ring exercise, whereas the activity of the deltoideus, clavicular
part, was not modified (Figure 5). The clavicular part of the
deltoideus participated more in the shoulder flexion during
the dumbbells exercise than on the rings, demonstrating an
alteration of muscle coordination.
Comparison of the muscle activity among the 3 training
exercises indicates modifications of the muscle coordination
between shoulder flexors during these exercises. The
difference observed between the RMS and the dumbbells
and counterweight exercises reveals a similar alteration of
muscle coordination as that determined between the dumb-
bells exercise and the competitive element.
The RMS was only reduced for the pectoralis major when
comparing the dumbbells and barbell exercises, suggesting an
alteration of muscle coordination between the exercises. The
long head of the biceps brachii, similar to the clavicular part of
the deltoideus, probably produced a higher stabilization
action in the glenohumeral joint (lateral and anterior,
respectively) because each upper limb was independently
stabilized during the dumbbells exercise.
The RMS across time showed a significant increase for the
clavicular part of the deltoideus and for the biceps brachii
during the counterweight exercise. This increase under
isometric conditions reveals a recruitment of additional
motor units to maintain the required force (18,23). The
MPF reduced across time for the biceps brachii during the
counterweight exercise demonstrated, with the concurrent
RMS increase for the same muscle, neuromuscular fatigue
(1,10,11). An MPF reduction was also observed across time
for the pectoralis major on the rings, for which we can
assume neuromuscular fatigue. These modifications across
time suggest an alteration of the muscle coordination
between the competitive movement and the counterweight
exercise. The swallow on the rings would induce a higher
contribution of the pectoralis major than during the
counterweight exercise to maintain the position, whereas
the TM
2386 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the counterweight exercise would provoke a progressively
higher participation of the biceps brachii and the clavicular
part of the deltoideus.
The RMS for the serratus anterior and middle part of the
trapezius was lower during the dumbbells exercise than on the
rings (Figure 6). The scapula stabilization is therefore smaller
during the dumbbells exercise.
The RMS for the serratus anterior decreased during the
barbell exercise as compared with the competitive movement.
However, the RMS for the middle part of the trapezius were
higher during the barbell exercise than during the rings and
counterweight exercise. These results demonstrate a modifi-
cation of the muscle coordination to stabilize the scapula,
probably induced by the different positions during exercises.
The barbell exercise required a supine position (Figure 2),
with the athlete holding the scapula artificially between the
thoracic wall and the bench. On the contrary, during the
rings and counterweight exercises, the scapula was no longer
held this way (Figures 1 and 4). Our results indicate that the
serratus anterior preferentially stabilizes the scapula during
the rings and counterweight exercises, whereas the barbell
exercise inverts the participation of the middle part of
the trapezius and the serratus anterior to perform the same
action.
Barbell and dumbbells exercises reduced RMS for the
infraspinatus as compared with the rings and counterweight
exercises. The activity of the infraspinatus muscle has been
proposed to be representative of the activity of the rotator
cuff muscles (5). This decrease may represent a reduction of
the rotator cuff activity consecutive to a reduction of the
supported load.
Reduced MPF across time for this muscle during the
swallow on the rings is indicative of neuromuscular fatigue.
Additional training for the rotator cuff could be beneficial
into preventing shoulder lesions. To prepare the rotator cuff
muscles, the dumbbells exercise could be useful in that it
strengthens the infraspinatus. Indeed, a similar muscle activity
observed during the barbell and dumbbells exercises, asso-
ciated with the smaller mass used during the second exercise,
suggests a greater participation of this muscle. Furthermore,
independent control of the upper limbs during the dumbbells
exercises allows for adapting the training for each limb,
requiring a finer motor control.
The latissimus dorsi adducts the shoulder during the rings
and counterweight exercises to hold the upper limbs near the
body (Figure 7). However, its activity does not express the
entire force production in performance of this action; this
muscle also stabilizes the shoulder during flexion (17). The
varying participation of the latissimus dorsi in shoulder
stabilization would probably be correlated with the loads
used for each exercise.
The rings and the counterweight exercises caused a higher
activity of the triceps brachii as compared with the barbell and
dumbbells exercises. This muscle keeps the elbow extended
and also stabilizes the shoulder joint by limiting the posterior

luxation of the humeral head from the glenoid fossa (12). The
main function of the triceps brachii during the rings and
counterweight exercises is probably to stabilize the elbow for
keeping the arms extended. The recumbent position and the
distal load applied to the shoulder joint during the barbell and
dumbbells exercises keep the elbow joint mechanically
extended. Consequently, the RMS for the triceps brachii
are mostly representative of its action on the shoulder joint
during barbell and dumbbells exercises; second, the muscle
counteracts the action of the biceps brachii on the elbow.
Co-activation indexes support these hypotheses for the
functions of the triceps brachii during the rings and the 3
training exercises. The indexes also provide information on
the function of the biceps brachii. The reduced co-activation
indexes observed during the barbell and dumbbells exercises
as compared with the rings and counterweight exercises
demonstrate that the biceps brachii prevents excessive
extension of the elbow joint during the barbell and dumbbells
exercises and also participates in shoulder flexion. Conversely,
the biceps brachii participates mostly in shoulder flexion
during the rings and counterweight exercises.
To conclude, this is the first study that allows us to
characterize muscle activity during the swallow on the rings.
The swallow on the rings is performed using the pectoralis
major, deltoideus, clavicular part, biceps brachii, and serratus
anterior at greater than 80% of their voluntary contractions.
The trapezius and infraspinatus assist these muscles in
stabilizing the scapula and the humeral head, respectively.
Furthermore, our findings support previous suggestions
that muscle coordination is quite different between training
exercises and competitive movements. Dumbbells and
counterweight exercises modify the muscle coordination in
shoulder flexion as compared with the swallow performed on
the rings. The dumbbells exercise induces a higher partici-
pation of the deltoideus, clavicular part, and reduces the
contribution of the pectoralis major, such as in the
counterweight exercise. Scapula stabilization is mostly
performed by the trapezius, middle part, during the barbell
and dumbbells exercises, whereas the serratus anterior is
involved mainly during the counterweight exercise and the
competitive movement on the rings. The latissimus dorsi has
lesser stabilization and adduction actions on the shoulder
joint during the barbell and dumbbells exercises than during
the rings and counterweight exercises. Moreover, the triceps
brachii participates more in shoulder and elbow stabilization
during the exercises in a recumbent position as compared
with the rings and the counterweight exercises. These
differences are dependent on the exercise positions and their
respective loads.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The main muscles involved in this study are the pectoralis
major, deltoideus, clavicular part, biceps brachii, and serratus
anterior (greater than 80% of their maximal voluntary
contractions). Secondary muscles (between 50% and 80%
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
of their maximal voluntary contractions) are the infraspinatus
and trapezius. Although the counterweight exercise appears
to closely reproduce the competitive movement, it modifies
the muscle coordination during shoulder flexion by pre-
serving the pectoralis major. The barbell exercise appears to
provide similar muscle coordination for shoulder flexion as
compared with the rings, but it reduces the contribution of the
serratus anterior in stabilizing the scapula. The dumbbells
exercise preferentially uses the deltoideus, clavicular part, for
shoulder flexion. Consequently, the counterweight exercise
could be used to strengthen the muscles that stabilize the
scapula (serratus anterior and trapezius), given proper muscle
coordination. The barbell exercise could provide an in-
teresting exercise to prepare for muscle coordination of the
shoulder flexors (biceps brachii, pectoralis major, and
deltoideus, clavicular part). The dumbbells exercise may be
valuable to initially prepare the rotator cuff muscles for the
rings because the load could then be adapted to each
shoulder.
REFERENCES
1. Arendt-Nielsen, L, Mills, KR, and Forester, A. Changes in muscle
fiber conduction velocity, mean power frequency, and mean EMG
voltage during prolonged submaximal contractions. Muscle Nerve 12:
493–497, 1989.
2. Bernasconi, S, Tordi, N, Parratte, B, Rouillon, JD, and Monnier, G.
Surface electromyography of nine shoulder muscles in two iron
cross conditions in gymnastics. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 44: 240–245,
2004.
3. Bernasconi, S, Tordi, N, Parratte, B, Rouillon, JD, and Monnier, G.
Effects of two devices on the surface EMG responses of eleven
shoulder muscles during Azarian in gymnastics. J Strength Cond Res
20: 53–57, 2006.
4. Bigland-Ritchie, B. EMG/force relations and fatigue of human
voluntary contractions. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 9: 75–117, 1981.
5. Bressel, E, Bressel, M, Marquez, M, and Heise, GD. The effect of
handgrip position on upper extremity neuromuscular responses to
arm cranking exercise. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 11: 291–298, 2001.
6. Breteler, MDK, Spoor, CW, and Van Der Helm, FCT. Measuring
muscle and joint geometry parameters of a shoulder for modeling
purposes. J Biomech 32:1991-1997, 1999.
7. Caraffa, A, Cerulli, G, Rizzo, A, Buompadre, V, Appoggetti, S, and
Fortuna, M. An arthroscopic and electromyographic study of painful
shoulders in elite gymnasts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 4: 39–
42, 1996.
8. David, G, Magarey, ME, Jones, MA, Dvir, Z, Türker, KS, and
Sharpe, M. EMG and strength correlates of selected shoulder
muscles during rotations of the glenohumeral joint. Clin Biomech
(Bristol, Avon) 15: 95–02, 2000.
9. De Groot, JH, Rozendaal, LA, Meskers, CGM, and Arwert, HJ.
Isometric shoulder muscle activation patterns for 3-D planar forces:
A methodology for musculo-skeletal model validation. Clin Biomech
19: 790–800, 2004.
10. De Luca, CJ. The use of surface electromyography in biomechanics.
J Appl Biomech 13: 135–163, 1997.
11. Dimitrova, NA and Dimitrov, GV. Interpretation of EMG changes
with fatigue: facts, pitfalls, and fallacies. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 13:
13–36, 2003.
12. Eiserloh, H, Drez, D Jr, and Guanche, CA. The long head of the
triceps: a detailed analysis of its capsular origin. J Shoulder Elbow Surg
9: 332–335, 2000.
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 | 2387
Comparison of Shoulder Muscle Activity During Swallow and Three Training Movements in Gymnastics
13. Flanders, M and Soechting, JF. Arm muscle activation for static
forces in three-dimensional space. J Neurophysiol 64: 1818–1837,
1990.
14. Hess, SA. Functional stability of the glenohumeral joint. Man Ther
5: 63–71, 2000.
15. Kay, D, St. Clair Gibson, A, Mitchell, MJ, Lambert, MI, and
Noakes, TD. Different neuromuscular recruitment patterns during
eccentric, concentric and isometric contractions. J Electromyogr
Kinesiol 10: 425–431, 2000.
16. Kellis, E, Arabatzi, F, and Padadopoulos, C. Muscle co-activation
around the knee in drop jumping using the co-contraction index.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol 13: 229–238, 2003.
17. Kronberg, M, Nemeth, G, and Brostrom, LA. Muscle activity and
coordination in the normal shoulder. An electromyographic study.
Clin Orthop 287: 76–85, 1990.
18. Kuroda, E, Klissouras, V, and Milsum, JH. Electrical and metabolic
activities and fatigue in human isometric contraction. J Appl Physiol
29: 358–367, 1970.
19. Lawrence, JH and De Luca, CJ. Myoelectric signal versus force
relationship in different human muscles. J Appl Physiol 54: 1653–
1659, 1983.
20. Leedham, JS and Dowling, JJ. Force-length, torque-angle and
EMG-joint angle relationships of the human in vivo biceps brachii.
Eur J Appl Physiol 70: 421–426, 1995.
the TM
2388 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
21. Madeleine, P, Bajaj, P, Sogaard, K, and Arendt-Nielsen, L.
Mechanomyography and electromyography force relationship
during concentric, isometric and eccentric contractions.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol 11: 113–121, 2001.
22. Milner-Brown, HS and Stein, RB. The relation between the surface
electromyogram and muscular force. J Physiol 246: 549–569, 1975.
23. Moritani, T, Muro M, and Nagata, A. Intramuscular and surface
electromyogram changes during muscle fatigue. J Appl Physiol 60:
1179–1185, 1986.
24. Nemessuri, M, Bretz, K, and Csizmadia, F. EMG study of the cross-
hang position. In: Biomechanics VII-B. Morecki, A, Fidelus, K,
Kedzior, K, and Wit, A, eds. Baltimore, MD, University Park Press,
1981. pp. 55–58.
25. Parratte, B, Tatu, L, Vuillier, F, Diop, M, Bonniaud, V, and Monnier, G.
Anatomie fonctionnelle de l’épaule (functional anatomy of the
shoulder). Rev Med Trav 28: 149–159, 2001.
26. Perry, J and Bekey, GA. EMG-force relationships in skeletal muscle.
Crit Rev Biomed Eng 7: 1–22, 1981.
27. Sbriccoli, P, Bazzucchi, I, Rosponi, A, Bernardi, M, De Vito, G, and
Felici, F. Amplitude and spectral characteristics of biceps Brachii
sEMG depend upon speed of isometric force generation.
J Electromyogr Kinesiol 13: 139–147, 2003.
28. Singh, RB, Hunter, JC, and Smith, KL. MRI of shoulder instability:
state of the art. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 32: 127–134, 2003.