Literature DB >> 26398962

Biomechanics of Counterweighted One-Legged Cycling.

Steven J Elmer1, John McDaniel, James C Martin.   

Abstract

One-legged cycling has served as a valuable research tool and as a training and rehabilitation modality. Biomechanics of one-legged cycling are unnatural because the individual must actively lift the leg during flexion, which can be difficult to coordinate and cause premature fatigue. We compared ankle, knee, and hip biomechanics between two-legged, one-legged, and counterweighted (11.64 kg) one-legged cycling. Ten cyclists performed two-legged (240 W), one-legged (120 W), and counterweighted one-legged (120 W) cycling (80 rpm). Pedal forces and limb kinematics were recorded to determine work during extension and flexion. During counterweighted one-legged cycling relative ankle dorsiflexion, knee flexion, and hip flexion work were less than one-legged but greater than two-legged cycling (all P < .05). Relative ankle plantar flexion and hip extension work for counterweighted one-legged cycling were greater than one-legged but less than two-legged cycling (all P < .05). Relative knee extension work did not differ across conditions. Counterweighted one-legged cycling reduced but did not eliminate differences in joint flexion and extension actions between one- and two-legged cycling. Even with these differences, counterweighted one-legged cycling seemed to have advantages over one-legged cycling. These results, along with previous work highlighting physiological characteristics and training adaptations to counterweighted one-legged cycling, demonstrate that this exercise is a viable alternative to one-legged cycling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26398962     DOI: 10.1123/jab.2014-0209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Biomech        ISSN: 1065-8483            Impact factor:   1.833


  7 in total

1.  Interlimb differences in parameters of aerobic function and local profiles of deoxygenation during double-leg and counterweighted single-leg cycling.

Authors:  Danilo Iannetta; Louis Passfield; Ahmad Qahtani; Martin J MacInnis; Juan M Murias
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.619

2.  Physiological Responses to Counterweighted Single-Leg Cycling in Older Males.

Authors:  Phil LaSCOLA; C Eric Heidorn; Brandon Pollock; Keith Burns; John McDANIEL
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2020-12-01

3.  Physiological responses to incremental, interval, and continuous counterweighted single-leg and double-leg cycling at the same relative intensities.

Authors:  Martin J MacInnis; Nathaniel Morris; Michael W Sonne; Amanda Farias Zuniga; Peter J Keir; Jim R Potvin; Martin J Gibala
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 3.078

4.  Caution needed when interpreting muscle activity patterns during extremely low pedaling cadence.

Authors:  Yuliang Sun; Li Li
Journal:  J Sport Health Sci       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 7.179

5.  Muscular activity patterns in 1-legged vs. 2-legged pedaling.

Authors:  Sangsoo Park; Graham E Caldwell
Journal:  J Sport Health Sci       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 7.179

6.  Single Leg Cycling Offsets Reduced Muscle Oxygenation in Hypoxic Environments.

Authors:  Shane Draper; Tyler Singer; Cody Dulaney; John McDaniel
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 4.614

7.  Single leg aerobic capacity and strength in individuals with surgically repaired anterior cruciate ligaments.

Authors:  Morgan Cooper Bagley; Sara A Harper; John McDaniel; Lisa Custer
Journal:  Phys Ther Sport       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 2.365

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.