| Literature DB >> 26839614 |
Monika Chudecka1, Anna Lubkowska2, Katarzyna Leźnicka1, Krzysztof Krupecki3.
Abstract
In order to achieve higher efficiency of training and thus better athletic performance, new research and diagnostic methods are constantly being developed, particularly those that are non-invasive. One such a method is thermography, suitable for quantitative and therefore objective evaluation of variables, such as changes in the temperature of the skin covering working muscles. The aim of this study was to use a thermal imaging infrared camera to evaluate temperature changes of symmetric body surfaces over symmetrically working muscles of male scullers after exercising on a two-oared rowing ergometer and compare these to asymmetrically working muscles of handball players after an endurance training session containing elements of an actual game. In the scullers, the mean temperature of body surfaces was always lower post than pre exercise, with no significant differences in an average temperature drop between the opposite sides, indicating that the work of the muscles involved in the physical exertion on the rowing ergometer was symmetrical. In contrast, in the handball players, skin temperatures in symmetric areas over the asymmetrically working muscles showed statistically significant differences between sides, which was associated with the functional asymmetry of training. This study indicates that thermal imaging may be useful for coaches in the evaluation of technical preparations in sports in which equal involvement of symmetric muscles is a condition of success, e.g. in scullers.Entities:
Keywords: anthropometry; coaching; symmetry of muscle activity; thermal imaging
Year: 2015 PMID: 26839614 PMCID: PMC4723162 DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Kinet ISSN: 1640-5544 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1Analyzed body surfaces
Decreases in mean temperature for the right and left side of the body in a series of tests in scullers
| Right side | Left side | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Body area | M (SD) [ºC] | M (SD) [ºC] | Student’s t-test |
| Arm front | 3.1 (0.45) | 3.1 (0.47) | 0.945 |
| Forearm front | 2.1 (0.45) | 2.2 (0.57) | 0.802 |
| Chest | 4.3 (0.86) | 4.3 (0.90) | 0.927 |
| Thigh front | 2.9 (0.68) | 2.8 (0.80) | 0.845 |
| Arm back | 3.3 (0.85) | 3.3 (0.92) | 0.828 |
| Forearm back | 2.5 (0.72) | 2.5 (0.72) | 0.982 |
| Back | 3.8 (0.79) | 3.8 (0.77) | 0.984 |
| Thigh back | 2.7 (0.58) | 2.6 (0.70) | 0.981 |
Decreases in mean temperature for the right and left side of the body in a series of tests in handball players
| Right side | Left side | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Body area | M (SD) [ºC] | M (SD) [ºC] | Student’s t-test |
| Arm front | 2.4 (0.40) | 2.0 (0.39) | |
| Forearm front | 1.7 (0.39) | 1.3 (0.38) | |
| Chest | 3.3 (0.57) | 3.0 (0.47) | 0.084 |
| Thigh front | 2.3 (0.50) | 2.3 (0.48) | 0.673 |
| Arm back | 2.1 (0.32) | 1.8 (0.30) | |
| Forearm back | 1.5 (0.36) | 1.1 (0.30) | |
| Back | 2.3 (0.47) | 2.0 (0.44) | 0.081 |
| Thigh back | 2.5 (0.41) | 2.5 (0.43) | 0.836 |
statistically significant differences are shown in bold (p ≤ 0.05)