| Literature DB >> 25964810 |
Si-Hyun Kim1, Oh-Yun Kwon2, Kyue-Nam Park3, In-Cheol Jeon4, Jong-Hyuck Weon5.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine which variables of the range of motion (ROM) and strength of the hip, and ankle are associated with squat depth. In total, 101 healthy subjects (64 males, 37 females) participated in the study. Outcome measures consisted of the ROM of hip flexion, hip internal rotation, external rotation, ankle dorsiflexion with an extended and flexed knee joint, and strength of the hip flexor and ankle dorsiflexor. Squat depth was measured using SIMI motion analysis software. Pearson correlation was used to determine the relationship between variables and squat depth. Multiple stepwise regression analysis was performed to determine variables associated with squat depth. The multiple regression model indicated that ankle dorsiflexion with a flexed knee and the hip flexion ROM were significantly associated with squat depth in male subjects (R(2) = 0.435) and ankle dorsiflexion with an extended knee and dorsiflexor strength were significantly associated with squat depth in female subjects (R(2) = 0.324). Thus, exercises to increase the ROM of the ankle dorsiflexion, hip flexion, and dorsiflexor strength can be recommended to improve squat performance. Future studies should assess an increased ROM of the ankle dorsiflexion, hip flexion, or dorsiflexor strength effect on deep squat performance.Entities:
Keywords: dorsiflexion; hip flexion; range of motion; squat
Year: 2015 PMID: 25964810 PMCID: PMC4415844 DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Kinet ISSN: 1640-5544 Impact factor: 2.193
Subject characteristics (N =101)
| Characteristic | Males (N = 64) | Females (N = 37) |
|---|---|---|
| Age; years (mean ± SD) | 25.69 ± 5.93 | 21.95 ± 2.17 |
| Body height; cm (mean ± SD) | 174.25 ± 5.86 | 159.44 ± 24.50 |
| Body mass; kg (mean ± SD) | 67.61 ± 7.65 | 54.00 ± 6.30 |
| Leg length; cm (mean ± SD) | 88.46 ± 4.22 | 83.24 ± 3.61 |
Range of motion (°) and strength (% body weight) of the hip and ankle
| Males (N = 64) | Females (N = 37) | |
|---|---|---|
| Lower limb ROM | ||
| Hip flexion | 113.87 ± 9.76 | 120.34 ± 7.70 |
| Hip internal rotation | 31.32 ± 13.02 | 43.05 ± 11.73 |
| Hip external rotation | 63.80 ± 14.21 | 68.72 ± 11.27 |
| DF with extended knee | 8.23 ± 5.29 | 11.54 ± 5.58 |
| DF with flexed knee | 16.29 ± 6.23 | 20.83 ± 6.67 |
| Lower limb muscle strength | ||
| Hip flexor | 21.99 ± 4.79 | 24.76 ± 5.32 |
| Ankle dorsiflexor | 33.39 ± 13.89 | 44.70 ± 14.85 |
DF: dorsiflexion, ROM: range of motion.
Figure 1Pearson correlation coefficients between the ROM and strength and squat depth in male subjects.
Figure 2Pearson correlation coefficients between the ROM and strength and squat depth in female subjects.
Results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis for male subjects
| Dependent variable | Model | Independent variable | Adjusted R2 | T | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Squat depth (% leg length) | Model 1 | DF ROM with a flexed knee | 0.388 | .387 | −1.669 | −6.265[ |
| Model 2 | DF ROM with a flexed knee | 0.435 | .416 | −1.520 | −5.706[ | |
| Hip flexion ROM | −.383 | −2.249[ |
DF: dorsiflexion, HF: hip flexion, ROM: range of motion.
p<0.05.
Results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis for female subjects
| Dependent variable | Model | Independent variable | Adjusted R2 | T | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Squat depth (% leg length) | Model 1 | DF ROM with an extended knee | 0.237 | .215 | −1.242 | −3.296[ |
| Model 2 | DF ROM with an extended knee | 0.324 | .284 | −1.266 | −3.517[ | |
| Ankle dorsiflexor strength | 0.283 | 2.093[ |
DF: dorsiflexion, ROM: range of motion.
p<0.05.