Literature DB >> 28900560

BUILDING A BETTER GLUTEAL BRIDGE: ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF HIP MUSCLE ACTIVITY DURING MODIFIED SINGLE-LEG BRIDGES.

B J Lehecka1, Michael Edwards1, Ryan Haverkamp1, Lani Martin1, Kambry Porter1, Kailey Thach1, Richard J Sack2, Nils A Hakansson3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gluteal strength plays a role in injury prevention, normal gait patterns, eliminating pain, and enhancing athletic performance. Research shows high gluteal muscle activity during a single-leg bridge compared to other gluteal strengthening exercises; however, prior studies have primarily measured muscle activity with the active lower extremity starting in 90 ° of knee flexion with an extended contralateral knee. This standard position has caused reports of hamstring cramping, which may impede optimal gluteal strengthening. HYPOTHESIS/
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine which modified position for the single-leg bridge is best for preferentially activating the gluteus maximus and medius. STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-Sectional.
METHODS: Twenty-eight healthy males and females aged 18-30 years were tested in five different, randomized single-leg bridge positions. Electromyography (EMG) electrodes were placed on subjects' gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, rectus femoris, and biceps femoris of their bridge leg (i.e., dominant or kicking leg), as well as the rectus femoris of their contralateral leg. Subjects performed a maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) for each tested muscle prior to performing five different bridge positions in randomized order. All bridge EMG data were normalized to the corresponding muscle MVIC data.
RESULTS: A modified bridge position with the knee of the bridge leg flexed to 135 ° versus the traditional 90 ° of knee flexion demonstrated preferential activation of the gluteus maximus and gluteus medius compared to the traditional single-leg bridge. Hamstring activation significantly decreased (p < 0.05) when the dominant knee was flexed to 135 ° (23.49% MVIC) versus the traditional 90 ° (75.34% MVIC), while gluteal activation remained similarly high (51.01% and 57.81% MVIC in the traditional position, versus 47.35% and 57.23% MVIC in the modified position for the gluteus maximus and medius, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Modifying the traditional single-leg bridge by flexing the active knee to 135 ° instead of 90 ° minimizes hamstring activity while maintaining high levels of gluteal activation, effectively building a bridge better suited for preferential gluteal activation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gluteus maximus; gluteus medius; muscle recruitment; rehabilitation exercise

Year:  2017        PMID: 28900560      PMCID: PMC5534144     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 2159-2896


  15 in total

1.  Core stability measures as risk factors for lower extremity injury in athletes.

Authors:  Darin T Leetun; Mary Lloyd Ireland; John D Willson; Bryon T Ballantyne; Irene McClay Davis
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 5.411

2.  Electromyographic analysis of gluteus medius and gluteus maximus during rehabilitation exercises.

Authors:  Kristen Boren; Cara Conrey; Jennifer Le Coguic; Lindsey Paprocki; Michael Voight; T Kevin Robinson
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2011-09

Review 3.  A literature review of studies evaluating gluteus maximus and gluteus medius activation during rehabilitation exercises.

Authors:  Michael P Reiman; Lori A Bolgla; Janice K Loudon
Journal:  Physiother Theory Pract       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Effect of the abdominal draw-in manoeuvre in combination with ankle dorsiflexion in strengthening the transverse abdominal muscle in healthy young adults: a preliminary, randomised, controlled study.

Authors:  Seung-Chul Chon; Ki-Yeon Chang; Joshua Sung H You
Journal:  Physiotherapy       Date:  2009-11-12       Impact factor: 3.358

5.  Variability in lateral positioning of surface EMG electrodes.

Authors:  Taija Finni; Sulin Cheng
Journal:  J Appl Biomech       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.833

6.  Electromyographic analysis of core trunk, hip, and thigh muscles during 9 rehabilitation exercises.

Authors:  Richard A Ekstrom; Robert A Donatelli; Kenji C Carp
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2007-08-29       Impact factor: 4.751

7.  Gluteus medius strength, endurance, and co-activation in the development of low back pain during prolonged standing.

Authors:  Paul W M Marshall; Haylesh Patel; Jack P Callaghan
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 2.161

8.  Magnitudes of muscle activation of spine stabilizers, gluteals, and hamstrings during supine bridge to neutral position.

Authors:  James W Youdas; James P Hartman; Brooke A Murphy; Ashley M Rundle; Jenna M Ugorowski; John H Hollman
Journal:  Physiother Theory Pract       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  Which exercises target the gluteal muscles while minimizing activation of the tensor fascia lata? Electromyographic assessment using fine-wire electrodes.

Authors:  David M Selkowitz; George J Beneck; Christopher M Powers
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 4.751

10.  The effects of gluteus muscle strengthening exercise and lumbar stabilization exercise on lumbar muscle strength and balance in chronic low back pain patients.

Authors:  Ui-Cheol Jeong; Jae-Heon Sim; Cheol-Yong Kim; Gak Hwang-Bo; Chan-Woo Nam
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2015-12-28
View more
  15 in total

1.  ASSESSING AND TREATING GLUTEUS MAXIMUS WEAKNESS - A CLINICAL COMMENTARY.

Authors:  Matthew Buckthorpe; Matthew Stride; Francesco Della Villa
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-07

2.  EXAMINATION OF GLUTEUS MAXIMUS ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC EXCITATION ASSOCIATED WITH DYNAMIC HIP EXTENSION DURING BODY WEIGHT EXERCISE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.

Authors:  Paul Macadam; Erin H Feser
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-02

3.  ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF GLUTEAL RECRUITMENT: AN EXPLORATION OF ACTIVATION DURING JUMPING TASKS.

Authors:  John D Heick; Madeline Talkington; Tarang Jain
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2020-12

4.  A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF COMMON THERAPEUTIC EXERCISES THAT GENERATE HIGHEST MUSCLE ACTIVITY IN THE GLUTEUS MEDIUS AND GLUTEUS MINIMUS SEGMENTS.

Authors:  Damien Moore; Adam I Semciw; Tania Pizzari
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2020-12

5.  Hip and Trunk Muscle Activity and Mechanics During Walking With and Without Unilateral Weight.

Authors:  Kerri A Graber; Kari L Loverro; Mark Baldwin; Erika Nelson-Wong; Joshua Tanor; Cara L Lewis
Journal:  J Appl Biomech       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 1.606

6.  The effects of gluteal squeezes compared to bilateral bridges on gluteal strength, power, endurance, and girth.

Authors:  Bryan J Lehecka; Jessica Turley; Aaron Stapleton; Kyle Waits; John Zirkle
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 2.984

7.  Gluteal Muscle Activation During Common Yoga Poses.

Authors:  B J Lehecka; Sydney Stoffregen; Adam May; Jacob Thomas; Austin Mettling; Josh Hoover; Rex Hafenstine; Nils A Hakansson
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2021-06-01

8.  Medio-Lateral Hamstring Muscle Activity in Unilateral vs. Bilateral Strength Exercises in Female Team Handball Players - A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Brian Sørensen; Per Aagaard; Lasse Malchow-Møller; Mette Kreutzfeldt Zebis; Jesper Bencke
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2021-06-01

9.  Hip and Core Muscle Activation During High-Load Core Stabilization Exercises.

Authors:  Zohre Khosrokiani; Amir Letafatkar; Bahram Sheikhi; Abbey C Thomas; Peyman Aghaie-Ataabadi; Mohamad-Taghi Hedayati
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.355

10.  Electromyographic activity in the gluteus medius, gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis and rectus femoris during the Monopodal Squat, Forward Lunge and Lateral Step-Up exercises.

Authors:  José M Muyor; Isabel Martín-Fuentes; David Rodríguez-Ridao; José A Antequera-Vique
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.