See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339082831

Effect of Hip Joint Position on Electromyographic Activity of the Individual

Hamstring Muscles During Stiff-Leg Deadlift

Article in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · February 2020

DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003442

CITATIONS READS

5 1,601

3 authors:

Raki Kawama Katsuki Takahashi

Doshisha University Doshisha University
11 PUBLICATIONS 25 CITATIONS 8 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Taku Wakahara
Doshisha University
48 PUBLICATIONS 1,090 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Raki Kawama on 18 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 NUMBER 1 OF 1

AUTHOR QUERIES
DATE 10/21/2019
JOB NAME JSCR
ARTICLE JSCR-08-12649
QUERIES FOR AUTHORS R. Kawama et al.

THIS QUERY FORM MUST BE RETURNED WITH ALL PROOFS FOR CORRECTIONS

Please confirm the given names (pink) and surnames (blue) of authors have been identified correctly.
Please check and confirm whether all authors and their respective affiliations are appropriate.
AU1) Please note that as per style, the running head should contain only 50 characters; the introduced running head
exceeds 50 characters. Please check.
AU2) Please provide the Department/Unit (if any) for all the affiliations.
AU3) Please note that the abbreviation “EMG” has been defined as “electromyogram” and “electromyography” in the
document. Please check, and correct if necessary.
AU4) Please provide the age ranges for all subjects mentioned in the Subjects section if you have not already. If any
subjects were ,18 years of age, please confirm that written parental consent was obtained. Please also
confirm, if you have not already, that signed informed consent documents were obtained for all subjects.
AU5) Please provide city for the manufacturers “S&ME, Hitachi Aloka Medical and DKH.”
AU6) Please note that reference “14” is not cited in the text. Please cite it in the text or delete from the reference list.
 Original Research

Effect of Hip Joint Position on Electromyographic

Activity of the Individual Hamstring Muscles During
Stiff-Leg Deadlift
Raki Kawama,1,2 Katsuki Takahashi,3 and Taku Wakahara1,4
1
AU2 Faculty of Health and Sports Science, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan; 2Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences,
University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan; 3Graduate School of Health and Sports Science, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan; and 4Human
Performance Laboratory, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan

Abstract
Kawama, R, Takahashi, K, and Wakahara, T. Effect of hip joint position on electromyographic activity of the individual hamstring
muscles during stiff-leg deadlift. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2019—This study investigated the effect of hip joint position
on the activity level of individual hamstring muscles during stiff-leg deadlift. Fourteen male collegiate sprinters performed stiff-leg
deadlift in the adducted (ADD), neutral (NT), abducted (ABD), internally rotated by 20˚ (IN20), and externally rotated positions by 20˚
(EX20) and by 40˚ (EX40) of the hip joint. Surface electromyogram (EMG) was recorded from the proximal and distal regions of the
biceps femoris long head (BFlh), semitendinosus (ST), and semimembranosus (SM). Root mean square value of EMG (RMS-EMG)
data was calculated for the concentric and eccentric phases of deadlift and was normalized by RMS-EMG during maximal voluntary
contraction of isometric knee flexion as an activity level. Results revealed that the activity level of BFlh during the concentric phase
was higher in EX20 (p 5 0.008, difference 5 6.3%) and EX40 (p 5 0.001, difference 5 9.4%) than in NT. Semimembranosus
showed a higher activity level in IN20 than in EX40 during the concentric (p 5 0.004, difference 5 4.3%) and eccentric phases (p 5
0.023, difference 5 4.1%). In addition, the activity level was higher in ABD than in NT for BFlh (p 5 0.015, difference 5 4.6%), ST (p
5 0.047, difference 5 3.8%), and SM (p 5 0.005, difference 5 3.9%) during the concentric phase of deadlift. In conclusion, the
deadlift in the hip-abducted position requires high activation of the individual hamstrings and that in the hip externally and internally
rotated positions needs high activation of BFlh and SM, respectively.
Key Words: surface electromyography, biceps femoris long head, semitendinosus, semimembranosus

Introduction effective for preventing the injury of the muscle compared with
the training for strengthening the whole hamstring muscles.
The hamstrings consist of the biceps femoris long heads and bi-
Muscle activity level during training exercises has been evalu-
ceps femoris short heads (BFlh and BFsh, respectively), semite-
ated by surface electromyography (EMG). The EMG activity of AU3
ndinosus (ST) and semimembranosus (SM), working as hip
hamstrings was shown to be influenced by the hip joint position
extensors and/or knee flexors. It is known that there are mor-
(21). The activity level of BFlh during maximum isometric knee
phological and functional differences among the individual
flexion was lower with the hip flexed at 135° than with 0 or 45° of
hamstring muscles. For example, BFlh and SM possess a large
hip flexion (12). It should be noticed here that the hip joint is
physiological cross-sectional area, whereas ST has long muscle
a ball-and-socket joint, which allows three-dimensional motions,
fibers (15). Thus, BFlh and SM have a potential to generate large
such as internal/external rotation and adduction/abduction in
force, whereas ST has a potential to generate high contraction
addition to flexion/extension. A previous study examined the
velocity (11). The individual hamstring muscles were demon-
activation ratio of the medial-lateral hamstrings during single-leg
strated to be important for sports, such as sprint running and
deadlift in an internally and an externally rotated positions of the
football (1,4). For instance, muscle volume of ST in sprinters was
hip joint (13). The results showed that the medial-lateral ham-
54% greater than in nonsprinters, whereas these differences were
strings activation ratio in the internally rotated position (ap-
26 and 20% in BFlh and SM, respectively (6). In addition, ST
proximately 3.2) was higher than that in the externally rotated
showed higher activation than that of BFlh as increasing running
position (approximately 0.8) over the full range of the motion.
speed (8). These results suggest that ST may play a more signifi-
This finding suggests that the internal/external rotation of the hip
cant role in sprint running than BFlh. Meanwhile, muscle strain
joint affects the muscle activity level of the lateral and medial
injuries often occurred during the maximal sprinting and kicking
hamstring muscles. Within the medial hamstrings, the activity
in the hamstrings, especially in BFlh (5,15,18). The injury of BFlh
level was demonstrated to be different between ST and SM during
was shown to be prevented by resistance training for strength-
deadlift (16). However, BFlh crosses both the hip and knee joints,
ening the hamstring muscles as a whole (3). It may be possible that
whereas BFsh does not cross the hip joint. Therefore, it is possible
training program aimed at selectively strengthening BFlh is more
that the influence of the hip joint position on the muscle activity
Address correspondence to Dr. Taku Wakahara, twakahar@mail.doshisha.ac.jp. level differs among the individual hamstrings. However, Lynn
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 00(00)/1–6 and Costigan (13) did not separate the lateral hamstrings into
ª 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association
BFlh and BFsh, or the medial hamstrings into ST and SM.

Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 The Individual Hamstring Activities in Different Hip Joint Positions (2019) 00:00
Meanwhile, it was shown that activity level during stiff-leg
deadlift was nonuniform along the length of BFlh and ST (7).
However, it remains unclear whether the muscle activity level is
different between the proximal and distal regions within the in-
dividual hamstrings during stiff-leg deadlift in various hip joint
positions.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of hip
joint position on the level of activity of the individual hamstring
muscles during stiff-leg deadlift.
Methods
Experimental Approach to the Problem
To determine the effect of hip joint position on the individual
hamstring muscles, stiff-leg deadlift was chosen. This is be-
cause stiff-leg deadlift has been widely prescribed by strength
and conditioning professionals to strengthen the hamstring
muscles, and the hip joint positions (internal/external rotation
and adduction/abduction) can be easily manipulated by
adjusting foot placement and angle during the exercise. Sub-
jects performed stiff-leg deadlift in 6 hip joint positions in
a random order after maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of
isometric knee flexion. During the deadlift, EMG signals were
recorded from the proximal and distal regions of BFlh, ST, and
SM for the analyses. Root mean square values of EMG data
(RMS-EMG) were calculated for each of the concentric and
eccentric phases of the deadlift and were normalized by RMS-
EMG during MVC as % MVC.
Subjects
AU4 Fourteen male collegiate sprinters (age: 19.6 6 1.0 years, body
mass: 64.5 6 4.1 kg, height: 175.4 6 5.6 cm, personal best time of
a 100-m race: 11.03 6 0.25 seconds, mean 6 SD) participated in
this study. The age range of these subjects was from 18 to 21
years. They had a minimum of 3 years of experience of sprint
running and no injury in the hamstrings at the time of experiment.
All subjects were fully informed of the purpose and procedure of
this study and gave written informed consent before participation
in the study. All protocols of this study were approved by the
research ethics review committee of the authors’ institution
(18,002).
Procedures
Bipolar electrodes (DL-141; S&ME, Japan, interelectrode dis-
AU5 tance: 12 mm) were placed over 40 and 60% of the thigh length
(the distance between the greater trochanter [0%] and the pop-
liteal crease [100%]) for BFlh; 30 and 50% for ST and 50 and
70% for SM to evaluate the activity in the proximal and distal
regions of each muscle. The electrode placements were de-
termined on the basis of innervation patterns of the individual
hamstring muscles (19,20). The border of each muscle was
carefully identified with an ultrasonic apparatus (PROSOUND
a7; Hitachi Aloka Medical, Japan). After careful preparation of
the skin by shaving hair, abrading, and cleaning with alcohol, the
electrodes (DL-141, S&ME, interelectrode distance: 12 mm) were
attached on the right thigh and fixed with surgical tape. A ground
electrode was attached on the right medial malleolus.
Subjects lay prone on a bed of a dynamometer (BIODEX
SYSTEM4; Biodex Medical Systems, Upton, NY) with the right
knee joint at 45° (full extension 5 0°). The pelvis and right ankle
Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
were fixed with belts. They held the bed with their arms. After
a warm-up session including 3 submaximal contractions, they
performed 2 MVCs of isometric knee flexions for 2 seconds.
After MVC measurement, the subjects performed stiff-leg
deadlift in the following 6 hip joint positions (Figure 1): (a): in- ½F1
ternally rotated by 20° (IN20), (b) neutral (NT), (c) externally
rotated by 20° (EX20) and (d) by 40° (EX40), (e) adducted
(ADD), and (f) abducted (ABD) positions. In IN20, EX20, and
EX40, the distance between the middle of the heels was set at 20%
of their height. In ADD, NT, and ABD, the feet were placed
parallel with a distance between the middle of the heels set at 5,
20, and 40% of their height, respectively. They put their feet on
white tapes preset to adjust the hip joint positions. The deadlift
was started from the upright position with a barbell positioned in
front of the thighs. They slowly lowered the barbell to their tibial
tuberosities with the knee joints extended and then lifted the
barbell to the start position. As a familiarization session, subjects
performed a few repetitions of deadlift in each of the hip joint
positions with a load of 60% of their body mass with particular
attention to the range of motion and body position during the
deadlift. After this session, they performed 2 sets of 2 repetitions
of deadlift with the same load as the familiarization session. Each
of the concentric and eccentric phases of deadlift was completed
in 2 seconds with a metronome set to 60 b·min21. The order of the
hip joint positions was randomized across the subjects. Sufficient
rest was allowed between the different hip joint positions to avoid
an influence of muscular fatigue on EMG data. When they were
unable to perform the deadlift at the prescribed pace or with
proper technique, an additional set was requested to perform
after 3-minute rest.
Raw EMG signals were preamplified and filtered at 5–500
Hz with the electrodes and recorded on a computer at a sam-
pling frequency of 1000 Hz via an A/D converter (PowerLab
16SP; AD Instruments, Sydney, Australia). The EMG signals
were high-pass filtered at a cutoff frequency of 5 Hz with
computer software (LabChart ver.8; AD Instruments). The
knee flexion torque signal was sampled with the A/D converter
(PowerLab 16SP; AD Instruments) at 1000 Hz and transferred
to the computer. The RMS-EMG during MVC was determined
for 0.5 seconds around the peak torque. The higher RMS-EMG
value of the 2 MVC trials was used for the normalization of
EMG. The RMS-EMG during the stiff-leg deadlift was calcu-
lated from the EMG data of each of concentric (from the start
to the end of upward movement) and eccentric phases (from
the start to the end of the downward movement). To determine
the concentric and eccentric phases, the motion of the subject
during the deadlift was recorded with a digital video camera
(EX-100; Casio, Tokyo, Japan) at 30 Hz. The video was syn-
chronized with the EMG data by using an electrical signal from
a synchronizer (PH-1250A-6SW; DKH, Japan). The RMS-
EMG values during deadlift excluding the largest and the
smallest values among the 4 data sets (2 sets 3 2 repetitions) of
each hip joint position were extracted, and the mean of the 2
values was normalized by RMS-EMG during MVC as %MVC.
The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of the individual
hamstring muscles were analyzed by the 2 extracted RMS-
EMG values in each hip joint position. Based on the previous
study (10), ICC was evaluated as “almost perfect” (ICC .
0.81), “substantial” (ICC 5 0.61–0.80), and “moderate” (ICC
5 0.41–0.60). All EMG data of the individual hamstring
muscles were evaluated as almost perfect (ICC [1, 2] 5
0.89–0.99) except for the proximal region of SM during ec-
centric phase in NT (ICC [1, 2] 5 0.67).
 The Individual Hamstring Activities in Different Hip Joint Positions (2019) 00:00
Figure 1. Images demonstrating the positions of the hip joint. A) IN20: Internally rotated by 20˚,
NT: neutral, EX20: Externally rotated by 20˚, and EX40: Externally rotated by 40˚. B) ADD:
Adducted, NT, and ABD: Abducted.
Statistical Analyses
All statistical analyses were performed using a statistical software
package (IBM SPSS Statistics, ver. 25.0, IBM). A three-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures was used
to examine the effects of muscle (BFlh, ST, and SM), region
(proximal and distal) and hip joint position on RMS-EMG of the
concentric and eccentric phase, separately. The ANOVA was
separately performed for the internal/external rotation (IN20,
NT, EX20, and EX40) and adduction/abduction (ADD, NT, and
ABD) of the hip joint. If a significant interaction was found, two-
and one-way ANOVAs with Bonferroni multiple comparison
tests were performed to test for any differences in RMS-EMG
among the hip joint positions. The statistical power, effect size
(partial h2 and Cohen’s d), and confidence interval (CI) were
calculated for these tests. The statistical significance level was set
at p , 0.05.
Results
Three-way ANOVA for the internal/external rotation showed no
significant interaction of muscle 3 region 3 hip joint position for
RMS-EMG in the concentric phase (p 5 0.165, partial h2 5
0.108, statistical power 5 0.575). Because no significant inter-
½F2 actions of muscle 3 region (p 5 0.689, partial h2 5 0.028, sta-
tistical power 5 0.104) or region 3 hip joint position (p 5 0.996,
partial h2 5 0.064, statistical power 5 0.053) were found, RMS-
EMG values in the proximal and distal regions were pooled for
each muscle. A significant interaction of muscle 3 hip joint po-
sition was found for the pooled RMS-EMG in the concentric
phase (p , 0.001, partial h2 5 0.563, statistical power 5 0.999,
Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
| www.nsca.com
Figure 2A). The post hoc test revealed that RMS-EMG of BFlh
was significantly higher in EX20 than that in NT (p 5 0.008,
95% CI: 1.4–11.5, d 5 0.446, difference 5 6.3%). The RMS-
EMG of BFlh in EX40 was significantly higher than that in NT (p
5 0.001, 95% CI: 4.1–14.7, d 5 0.627, difference 5 9.4%) and
IN20 (p 5 0.021, 95% CI: 1.0–13.9, d 5 0.497, difference 5
7.4%). The RMS-EMG of ST was not significantly different
among IN20, NT, EX20, and EX40 (p 5 0.051, partial h2 5
0.179, statistical power 5 0.634). The RMS-EMG of SM was
significantly higher in IN20 than that in EX40 (p 5 0.004, 95%
CI: 1.2–7.3, d 5 0.407, difference 5 4.3%).
Three-way ANOVA for the adduction/abduction showed no
significant interaction of muscle 3 region 3 hip joint position for
RMS-EMG in the concentric phase (p 5 0.770, partial h2 5
0.034, statistical power 5 0.148). There were no significant
interactions of muscle 3 region (p 5 0.911, partial h2 5 0.007,
statistical power 5 0.063) or region 3 hip joint position (p 5
0.749, partial h2 5 0.022, statistical power 5 0.091). Hence,
RMS-EMG values in the proximal and distal regions were pooled
for each muscle. Although no significant interaction of muscle 3
hip joint position was found for the pooled RMS-EMG in the
concentric phase (p 5 0.792, partial h2 5 0.031, statistical power
5 0.140), there was a significant main effect of hip joint position
(p 5 0.001, partial h2 5 0.434, statistical power 5 0.972,
Figure 2B). The post hoc analysis showed that the RMS-EMG in
ABD was significantly higher than that in NT for BFlh (p 5 0.015,
95% CI: 0.9–8.4, d 5 0.320, difference 5 4.6%), ST (p 5 0.047,
95% CI: 0.0–7.5, d 5 0.444, difference 5 3.8%), and SM (p 5
0.005, 95% CI: 1.2–6.6, d 5 0.367, difference 5 3.9%).
Three-way ANOVA for the internal/external rotation showed
no significant interaction of muscle 3 region 3 hip joint position
 The Individual Hamstring Activities in Different Hip Joint Positions (2019) 00:00

Figure 2. A) Root mean square of electromyograms (RMS-EMG) of (a) the biceps femoris long head (BFlh), (b) semitendinosus
(ST), and (c) semimembranosus (SM) in the concentric phase of the deadlift in the internally/externally rotated positions of the
hip joint. B) RMS-EMG of (d) BFlh, (e) ST, and (f) SM in the concentric phase of the deadlift in the adducted/abducted positions
of the hip joint. The asterisks between the bars indicate a statistically significant difference (p , 0.05). NS 5 not significant. Hip
joint positions: ADD 5 adducted; NT 5 neutral; ABD 5 abducted; IN20 5 internally rotated by 20˚; EX20 5 externally rotated
by 20˚; EX40 5 externally rotated by 40˚.

for RMS-EMG in the eccentric phase (p 5 0.806, partial h2 5
0.037, statistical power 5 0.192). Because there were no signifi-
cant interactions of muscle 3 region (p 5 0.604, partial h2 5
½F3 0.038, statistical power 5 0.125) or region 3 hip joint position (p
5 0.808, partial h2 5 0.024, statistical power 5 0.107), RMS-
EMG values in the proximal and distal regions were pooled for
each muscle. There was a significant interaction of muscle 3 hip
joint position for the pooled RMS-EMG in the eccentric phase (p
, 0.001, partial h2 5 0.444, statistical power 5 0.999,
Figure 3A). The post hoc analysis demonstrated that RMS-EMG
of BFlh was significantly higher in EX40 than that in IN20 (p 5
0.038, 95% CI: 0.3–13.4, d 5 0.684, difference 5 6.8%). The
RMS-EMG of ST was not significantly different among the hip
joint positions (p 5 0.660, partial h2 5 0.048, statistical power 5
0.176). The RMS-EMG of SM was significantly higher in IN20
than in EX20 (p 5 0.019, 95% CI: 0.5–6.3, d 5 0.440, difference
5 3.4%) and EX40 (p 5 0.023, 95% CI: 0.5–7.8, d 5 0.548,
difference 5 4.1%).

Figure 3. A) Root mean square of electromyograms (RMS-EMG) of (a) the biceps femoris long head (BFlh), (b) semitendinosus
(ST), and (c) semimembranosus (SM) in the eccentric phase of the deadlift in the internally/externally rotated positions of the
hip joint. B) RMS-EMG of (d) BFlh, (e) ST, and (f) SM in the eccentric phase of the deadlift in the adducted/abducted positions
of the hip joint. The asterisks between the bars indicate a statistically significant difference (p , 0.05). NS 5 not significant. Hip
joint positions: ADD 5 adducted; NT 5 neutral; ABD 5 abducted; IN20 5 internally rotated by 20˚; EX20 5 externally rotated
by 20˚; EX40 5 externally rotated by 40˚.

Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 The Individual Hamstring Activities in Different Hip Joint Positions (2019) 00:00
Three-way ANOVA for the adduction/abduction showed no
significant interaction of muscle 3 region 3 hip joint position for
RMS-EMG in the eccentric phase (p 5 0.983, partial h2 5 0.007,
statistical power 5 0.068). There were no significant interactions
of muscle 3 region (p 5 0.804, partial h2 5 0.017, statistical
power 5 0.081) or region 3 hip joint position (p 5 0.502, partial
h2 5 0.052, statistical power 5 0.157). Thus, RMS-EMG values
in the proximal and distal regions were pooled for each muscle.
There was no significant interaction of muscle 3 hip joint position
(p 5 0.650, partial h2 5 0.046, statistical power 5 0.191) or
significant main effect of hip joint position (p 5 0.672, partial h2
5 0.030, statistical power 5 0.108, Figure 3B) for the pooled
RMS-EMG in the eccentric phase.
Discussion
The results of this study showed that the level of muscle activity of
BFlh in EX20 and EX40 was higher than that in NT during the
concentric phase of stiff-leg deadlift, whereas that of SM was
higher in IN20 than in EX40 during the concentric and eccentric
phases. In addition, the activity levels of the individual hamstring
muscles in ABD were higher than that in NT during the concentric
phase. However, no significant differences were found in the ac-
tivity level of ST among the hip joint positions during the con-
centric or eccentric phases except for the difference between NT
and ABD during concentric phase. It has been reported that the
internal/external rotation of the hip joint affects the muscle
Figure 4. A) The schematic illustration of the biceps femoris
long head (BFlh) and the semimembranosus (SM) at the ex-
ternally and internally rotated position in the sagittal plane
during stiff-leg deadlift. The dotted lines indicate moment
arms of BFlh and SM at the hip joint in the sagittal plane. B) The
schematic illustration of the component of the force generated
by the individual hamstrings at the neutral and the abducted
position in the frontal plane (posterior view) during stiff-leg
deadlift. The downward arrows indicate the component of
muscle force contributing to the hip extension torque.
Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
| www.nsca.com
activity level of the hamstrings during single-leg deadlift (13).
However, the previous study (13) did not separate the lateral or
medial hamstrings into the individual hamstrings. This study first
revealed that the external/internal rotation and abduction of the
hip joint affect the muscle activity levels of the individual ham-
string muscles during stiff-leg deadlift.
The muscle activity level of BFlh was higher in EX20 and EX40
than in NT during the concentric phase of stiff-leg deadlift. On the
contrary, the activity level of SM was higher in IN20 than in EX40
during the concentric and eccentric phases. As the stiff-leg deadlift
is a hip-dominant exercise, the hip extensors including the in-
dividual hamstring muscles need to generate hip extension tor-
que. The magnitude of muscle torque is the product of the muscle
force and its moment arm. It is possible that the moment arm of
BFlh and SM at the hip joint in the sagittal plane increased when
these muscles were located at the most posterior position in the
externally and internally rotated position, respectively
(Figure 4A). If so, the long moment arm greatly contributes to ½F4
generating muscle torque, and thus high activity level of the
muscle with the long moment arm could be efficient for exerting
the required torque. Taken together, the possible difference in the
moment arm at the hip joint might be related to the difference in
the activity level of BFlh and SM in the internally/externally ro-
tated positions, respectively.
The activity levels of the individual hamstring muscles were
higher in ABD than in NT during the concentric phase of the
deadlift. To lift the barbell, the hip extensors including the
hamstring muscles in ABD must generate the hip extension
torque equivalent to that in NT. However, the contribution of
the component of the force generated by the individual ham-
strings to the production of hip extension torque was supposed
to be smaller in ABD than in NT (Figure 4B). Thus, higher ac-
tivation of the hamstring muscles may be required in ABD as
compared to NT.
There was no difference in the muscle activity level of ST
among the hip joint positions during concentric or eccentric
phases of the deadlift except for the difference between NT and
ABD during concentric phase. A previous study reported that
muscle activity level of ST during stiff-leg deadlift was lower than
that of BFlh and SM (16). Similarly, the average EMG activity
across the hip joint positions in this study was lower in ST (19 and
8%) than in BFlh (32 and 15%) and in SM (33 and 20%) during
the concentric and eccentric phases, respectively. These results
imply that a contribution of ST to the production of hip extension
torque would be small during stiff-leg deadlift among the bi-
articular hamstring muscles. This might be related to the lack of
difference in the activity level of ST among the hip joint positions.
The current result suggests that the internal/external rotation and
adduction of the hip joint do not have a great influence on the
activity level of ST during stiff-leg deadlift.
The activity level was not different between the proximal and
distal regions within the individual hamstring muscles during
stiff-leg deadlift. This result was inconsistent with the previous
finding that the distal region of BFlh showed a higher activity level
than the proximal region during stiff-leg deadlift (7). There are
some differences between the present and previous studies. First,
the neuromuscular activity of a region was determined from the
data recorded from multiple electrodes using high-density EMG
in the previous study (7), while using a single electrode in this
study. Second, range of motion during the deadlift differed be-
tween the 2 studies. In the previous study, the subjects lowered the
bar from their thigh to the floor (7). However, the subjects of this
study lowered the bar from their thigh to tibial tuberosities.
 The Individual Hamstring Activities in Different Hip Joint Positions (2019) 00:00
Finally, the load during the deadlift might be heavier in the pre-
vious study (80% of one repetition maximum) than in this study
(60% of body mass). Although these differences may be associ-
ated with the discrepancy between the 2 studies, it is unclear how
these factors affect the activity level of the proximal and distal
regions within the individual hamstring muscles. Further research
is needed to scrutinize the regional difference in the activity within
each of the hamstring muscles.
This study has several limitations. The surface EMG is known
to be susceptible to cross-talk from adjacent muscles. To reduce
the effect of cross-talk, we carefully identified the belly of each
muscle using ultrasonography. Moreover, our subjects were male
sprinters, who have larger hamstring muscles than other pop-
ulations (9). Therefore, we assume that the effect of cross-talk did
not have a substantial influence on the main finding of this study.
Further research is warranted to clarify the applicability of the
present findings to other populations.
Practical Applications
Stiff-leg deadlift is commonly used for preventing strain injury
of the hamstring muscles and enhancing the strength of hip
extensor muscles in rehabilitation and training fields. When
performing the stiff-leg deadlift, athletes and their coaches
may not pay attention to the hip joint position. Meanwhile,
this study revealed the effects of hip joint position on the
muscle activity levels of the individual hamstrings during the
stiff-leg deadlift. The activity level of BFlh was higher in the
externally rotated and abducted positions than in the neutral
position. It is known that BFlh is the most frequently injured
muscle among the hamstrings, probably due to the weakness
of the muscle strength (17). Thus, the stiff-leg deadlift in the
externally rotated and abducted positions may have a great
potential to prevent the injury of BFlh. However, SM showed
a high level of activity in the internally rotated or abducted
positions. The strain injury of SM frequently occurred during
stretching exercises executed at an extreme joint position (2).
It is possible that the injury of SM is prevented by performing
the stiff-leg deadlift in the internally rotated and abducted
positions. Taken together, it is recommended that athletes and
their coaches carefully select the hip joint position during the
stiff-leg deadlift considering the different activity levels of the
individual hamstring muscles.
Acknowledgments
The authors show their greatest appreciation to the participations
in this study and all members of their laboratory. The results of
this study do not constitute endorsement of any product by the
authors or the National Strength and Conditioning Association.
The authors have no conflict of interests to disclose.
Copyright © 2019 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
View publication stats
References
1. Arnason A, Andersen TE, Holme I, Engebretsen L, Bahr R. Prevention of
hamstring strains in elite soccer: An intervention study. Scand J Med Sci
Sports 18: 40–48, 2008.
2. Askling CM, Tengvar M, Saartok T, Thorstensson A. Proximal hamstring
strains of stretching type in different sports: Injury situations, clinical and
magnetic resonance imaging characteristics, and return to sport. Am J
Sports Med 36: 1799–1804, 2008.
3. Askling CM, Karlsson J, Thorstensson A. Hamstring injury occurrence in
elite soccer players after preseason strength training with eccentric over-
load. Scand J Med Sci Sports 13: 244–250, 2003.
4. Askling CM, Tengvar M, Saartok T, Thorstensson A. Acute first-time
hamstring strains during high-speed running: A longitudinal study in-
cluding clinical and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Am J Sports
Med 35: 197–206, 2007.
5. Garrett JW, Rich FR, Nikolaou PK. Computed tomography of hamstring
muscle strains. Med Sci Sports Exerc 21: 506–514, 1989.
6. Handsfield GG, Knaus KR, Fiorentino NM, et al. Adding muscle where
you need it: Non-uniform hypertrophy patterns in elite sprinters. Scand J
Med Sci Sports 27: 1050–1060, 2017.
7. Hegyi A, Peter A, Finni T, Cronin NJ. Region-dependent hamstrings
activity in Nordic hamstring exercise and stiff-leg deadlift defined with
high-density electromyography. Scand J Med Sci Sports 28: 992–1000,
2018.
8. Higashihara A, Ono T, Kubota J, Okuwaki T, Fukubayashi T. Functional
differences in the activity of the hamstring muscles with increasing running
speed. J Sports Sci 28: 1085–1092, 2010.
9. Hoshikawa Y, Muramatsu M, Iida T, et al. Event-related differences in the
cross-sectional areas and torque generation capabilities of quadriceps
femoris and hamstrings in male high school athletes. J Physiol Anthropol
29: 13–21, 2010.
10. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for cate-
gorical data. Biometrics 33: 159–174, 1977.
11. Lieber RL, Fridén J. Functional and clinical significance of skeletal muscle
architecture. Muscle Nerve 23: 1647–1666, 2000.
12. Lunnen JD, Yack J, LeVeau BF. Relationship between muscle length,
muscle activity, and torque of the hamstring muscles. Phys Ther 61:
190–195, 1981.
13. Lynn SK, Costigan PA. Changes in the medial-lateral hamstring activation
ratio with foot rotation during lower limb exercise. J Electromyogr
Kinesiol 19: 197–205, 2009.
14. Lysholm J, Wiklander J. Injuries in runners. Am J Sports Med 15:
168–171, 1987. AU6
15. Makihara Y, Nishino A, Fukubayashi T, Kanamori A. Decrease of knee
flexion torque in patients with ACL reconstruction: Combined analysis of
the architecture and function of the knee flexor muscles. Knee Surg Sports
Traumatol Arthrosc 14: 310–317, 2006.
16. Ono T, Higashihara A, Fukubayashi T. Hamstring functions during hip-
extension exercise assessed with electromyography and magnetic reso-
nance imaging. Res Sports Med 19: 42–52, 2011.
17. Orchard J, Marsden J, Lord S, Garlick D. Preseason hamstring muscle
weakness associated with hamstring muscle injury in Australian foot-
ballers. Am J Sports Med 25: 81–85, 1997.
18. Pomeranz SJ, Heidt RS Jr. MR imaging in the prognostication of ham-
string injury. Work Prog Radiol 189: 897–900, 1993.
19. Rha DW, Yi KH, Park ES, Park C, Kim HJ. Intramuscular nerve distri-
bution of the hamstring muscles: Application to treating spasticity. Clin
Anat 29: 746–751, 2016.
20. Woodley SJ, Mercer SR. Hamstring muscles: Architecture and in-
nervation. Cells Tissues Organs 179: 125–141, 2005.
21. Worrell TW, Karst G, Adamczyk D, et al. Influence of joint position on
electromyographic and torque generation during maximal voluntary
isometric contractions of the hamstrings and gluteus maximus muscles.
J Orthopaedic Sports Phys Ther 31: 730–740, 2001. AU1