CONTEXT: Comprehensive analysis of ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics during anterior lunge performance in young adults has not been studied. In addition, the effects of adding external resistance on the kinematics and kinetics are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of external load on ankle, knee, and hip joint kinematics and kinetics during the anterior lunge. DESIGN: Crossover study. SETTING: Laboratory environment. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16 recreationally active, college-aged adults (8 men, 8 women). INTERVENTION(S): Anterior lunges under 4 external-load conditions, 0% (control), 12.5%, 25%, and 50% of body mass. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ankle, knee, and hip peak flexion, net joint extensor moment impulse, and eccentric and concentric work were computed during the interval when the stepping limb was in contact with the ground. Additionally, 3 summary lunge characteristics were calculated. RESULTS: No significant (P > .05) load effects were noted for peak flexion angles or the lunge characteristics except for peak vertical total-body center-of-mass displacement. Trend analysis of significant condition-by-joint interactions revealed significant linear trends for all 3 joints, with the hip greater than the ankle and the ankle greater than the knee. Additionally, as the external load increased, mechanical work increased linearly at the hip and ankle but not at the knee. CONCLUSIONS: From a kinematic perspective, the lunge involves greater motion at the knee, but from a kinetic perspective, the anterior lunge is a hip-extensor-dominant exercise. Adding external weight prompted the greatest joint kinetic increases at the hip and ankle, with little change in the knee contributions. These results can assist clinicians in deciding whether the characteristics of the anterior lunge match a patient's exercise needs during rehabilitation and performance-enhancement programs.
CONTEXT: Comprehensive analysis of ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics during anterior lunge performance in young adults has not been studied. In addition, the effects of adding external resistance on the kinematics and kinetics are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of external load on ankle, knee, and hip joint kinematics and kinetics during the anterior lunge. DESIGN: Crossover study. SETTING: Laboratory environment. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16 recreationally active, college-aged adults (8 men, 8 women). INTERVENTION(S): Anterior lunges under 4 external-load conditions, 0% (control), 12.5%, 25%, and 50% of body mass. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ankle, knee, and hip peak flexion, net joint extensor moment impulse, and eccentric and concentric work were computed during the interval when the stepping limb was in contact with the ground. Additionally, 3 summary lunge characteristics were calculated. RESULTS: No significant (P > .05) load effects were noted for peak flexion angles or the lunge characteristics except for peak vertical total-body center-of-mass displacement. Trend analysis of significant condition-by-joint interactions revealed significant linear trends for all 3 joints, with the hip greater than the ankle and the ankle greater than the knee. Additionally, as the external load increased, mechanical work increased linearly at the hip and ankle but not at the knee. CONCLUSIONS: From a kinematic perspective, the lunge involves greater motion at the knee, but from a kinetic perspective, the anterior lunge is a hip-extensor-dominant exercise. Adding external weight prompted the greatest joint kinetic increases at the hip and ankle, with little change in the knee contributions. These results can assist clinicians in deciding whether the characteristics of the anterior lunge match a patient's exercise needs during rehabilitation and performance-enhancement programs.
Authors: Sean Flanagan; George J Salem; Man-Ying Wang; Serena E Sanker; Gail A Greendale Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Annette Heijne; Braden C Fleming; Per A Renstrom; Glenn D Peura; Bruce D Beynnon; Suzanne Werner Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: A Leardini; A Cappozzo; F Catani; S Toksvig-Larsen; A Petitto; V Sforza; G Cassanelli; S Giannini Journal: J Biomech Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Tine Alkjaer; Erik B Simonsen; S Peter Peter Magnusson; Henrik Aagaard; Poul Dyhre-Poulsen Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 2.063
Authors: Shawn Farrokhi; Christine D Pollard; Richard B Souza; Yu-Jen Chen; Stephen Reischl; Christopher M Powers Journal: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 4.751
Authors: Maureen K Dwyer; Samantha N Boudreau; Carl G Mattacola; Timothy L Uhl; Christian Lattermann Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Sean P Flanagan; Man-Ying Wang; Gail A Greendale; Stanley P Azen; George J Salem Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Bernard X W Liew; Christopher C Drovandi; Samuel Clifford; Justin W L Keogh; Susan Morris; Kevin Netto Journal: PeerJ Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Matthew Zellmer; Thomas W Kernozek; Naghmeh Gheidi; Jordan Hove; Michael Torry Journal: J Sport Health Sci Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 7.179