Background: Hip extension is an important action in daily activities (standing, stepping and walking) and sporting actions (running, sprint-running and jumping). Though several different exercises exist, a comprehensive understanding of which exercises best target the gluteus maximus (Gmax) and the magnitude of muscular excitation associated with each exercise is yet to be established. Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the electromyographic (EMG) excitation of the Gmax during body weight exercises that utilize hip extension. Methods: A systematic approach was used to search Pubmed, Sports Discuss, Web of Science and Science Direct using the Boolean phrases (gluteal OR gluteus maximus) AND (activity OR excitation OR activation) AND (electromyography OR EMG) AND (hip extension). Articles that examined injury-free participants of any age, gender or excitation level were included. Articles were excluded when not available in English, where studies did not normalize EMG excitation to maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC), where a load or resistance was added to the exercise, or where no hip extension occurred. Exercises were grouped into vertical and horizontal (anteroposterior or posteroanterior) force vectors. Results: Thirty-nine studies of high methodological quality were retained for analysis. Twenty-five exercises were performed in the vertical vector (average: 33.4% MVIC, highest: single leg wall squat 86% MVIC), fourteen exercises were performed in the horizontal (anteroposterior) force vector (average: 32.8% MVIC, highest: single leg bridge 54.2% MVIC, while thirty-eight exercises were included in the horizontal (posteroanterior) vector (average: 30.4% MVIC, highest: plank with bent leg hip extension 106.2% MVIC). Limitations: The differences in subject's backgrounds, exercise technique and the methodological approaches varied between studies, most notably in the different positions used for obtaining MVIC, which could have dramatically impacted normalized levels of gluteal activation. Conclusion: The findings from this review provide an indication of Gmax muscle excitation generated by a variety of hip extension body weight exercises, which may assist practitioners in making exercise selection decisions for programming.
The modified Thomas test was developed to assess the presence of hip flexion contracture and to measure hip extensibility. Despite its widespread use, to the authors’ knowledge, its criterion reference validity has not yet been investigated. The purpose of this study was to assess the criterion reference validity of the modified Thomas test for measuring peak hip extension angle and hip extension deficits, as defined by the hip not being able to extend to 0º, or neutral. Twenty-nine healthy college students (age = 22.00 ± 3.80 years; height = 1.71 ± 0.09 m; body mass = 70.00 ± 15.60 kg) were recruited for this study. Bland–Altman plots revealed poor validity for the modified Thomas test’s ability to measure hip extension, which could not be explained by differences in hip flexion ability alone. The modified Thomas test displayed a sensitivity of 31.82% (95% CI [13.86–54.87]) and a specificity of 57.14% (95% CI [18.41–90.10]) for testing hip extension deficits. It appears, however, that by controlling pelvic tilt, much of this variance can be accounted for (r = 0.98). When pelvic tilt is not controlled, the modified Thomas test displays poor criterion reference validity and, as per previous studies, poor reliability. However, when pelvic tilt is controlled, the modified Thomas test appears to be a valid test for evaluating peak hip extension angle.
The aim of this review was to examine the literature that has used lower limb wearable resistance (WR) during sprint running. A systematic search was completed to identify acute and longitudinal studies assessing the effects of lower limb WR on sprint running performance from international peer-reviewed journals. The Boolean phrases (limb OR leg OR lower extremity) AND (sprint * ) AND (resist * OR weight OR load * ) were used to search PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science electronic databases. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis that reported the acute kinematic and kinetic effects (n = 8), acute performance effects (n = 3), and longitudinal effects (n = 1). Results showed that the WR micro-loading (0.6-5% body mass) significantly increased contact time (2.9-8.9%), decreased step frequency (−1.4 to −3.7%), and slowed total sprint times (0.6-7.4%). Unloaded sprinting immediately following sprints with lower limb WR resulted in no significant change to total sprinting times. One longitudinal training study did not find a significant effect on maximal sprinting speed for non-trained participants. It can be concluded that not all step kinematic variables are affected during sprinting with an added load up to 5% body mass. Therefore, coaches can use lower limb WR to selectively overload certain aspects of sprint running, in particular stride frequency. It also appears that lower limb WR overloads sprint movement velocity and may provide a stimulus to increase horizontal force output, therefore, it may be inferred that lower limb WR has the potential to elicit improved sprinting performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.