Trunk Muscle Activation During Dynamic Weight-Training Exercises and Isometric Instability Activities
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2007, 21(4), 1108-1112 © 2007 National Strength & Conditioning Association TRUNK MUSCLE ACTIVATION DURING DYNAMIC WEIGHT-TRAINING EXERCISES AND ISOMETRIC INSTABILITY ACTIVITIES NicoLLE HAMLYN,! DAVID G. BEHM/ AND WARREN B. YOUNG^ 'School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada; ^School of Human Movement and Sport Sciences, University of Ballarat, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia. ABSTRACT. Hamlyn, N., D.G. Behm, and W.B. Young. Trunk back disorders arises as a result of a lack of strength and muscle activation during dynamic weight-training exercises and endurance of the trunk muscles. Numerous studies have isometric instability activities. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(4): placed individuals on trunk exercise programs that in 1108-1112. 2007.—The purpose of this study was to examine the turn resulted in a greater increase in endurance and de- extent of activation in various trunk muscles during dynamic cline in reports of LBP episodes (17). weight-training and isometric instability exercises. Sixteen sub- jects performed squats and deadlifts with 80% 1 repetition max- Because LBP has been associated with poor physical imum (IRM), as well as with hody weight as resistance and 2 conditioning, it is apparent that active exercise is an ef- unstable calisthenic-type exercises (superman and sidebridge). fective approach for both the prevention and the rehabil- Electromyographic (EMG) activity was measured from the lower itation of low back injuries (11). However, the most effi- abdominals (LA), external obliques (EO), upper lumbar erector cient method of training the trunk muscles remains un- spinae (ULES), and lumbar-sacral erector spinae (LSES) muscle clear, whether it be used to address LBP or improve ath- groups. Results indicated that the LSES EMG activity during letic performance. It is apparent that training while the 80% IRM squat significantly exceeded 80% IRM deadlift under unstable conditions does increase the activity of LSES EMG activity by 34.5%. The LSES EMG activity of the 80% IRM squat also exceeded the body weight squat, deadlift, these muscles. According to Anderson and Behm (2), the superman, and sidebridge by 56, 56.6, 65.5, and 53.1%, respec- electromyographic (EMG) activity of the soleus, abdomi- tively. The 80% IRM deadlift ULES EMG activity significantly nal stabilizers, upper lumbar erector spinae (ULES), and exceeded the 80% IRM squat exercise by 12.9%. In addition, the lumbo-sacral erector spinae (LSES) significantly in- 80% IRM deadlift ULES EMG activity also exceeded the body creased during an unstable squat movement when com- weight squat, deadlift, superman, and sidebridge exercises by pared with a stable squat movement. In addition, Behm 66.7, 65.5, 69.3, and 68.6%, respectively. There were no signifi- et al. (4) had subjects perform various trunk-stabilizing cant changes in EO or LA activity. Therefore, the augmented exercises with stable and unstable (Swiss ball) conditions. activity of the LSES and ULES during 80% IRM squat and Results indicated that the abdominal stabilizers, LSES, deadlift resistance exercises exceeded the activation levels and ULES exhibited significantly greater activity with achieved with the same exercises performed with body weight and selected instability exercises. Individuals performing up- the unstable conditions. The 2 most effective exercises for right, resisted, dynamic exercises can achieve high trunk muscle trunk activation were the sidebridge and superman. A activation and thus may not need to add instability device ex- study by Marshall and Murphy (15) found that perform- ercises to augment core stability training. ing tasks on a Swiss ball led to greater activation of the external obliques, transverse abdominus, internal KEY WORDS, electromyography, squats, deadlifts, erector spinae, obliques, erector spinae, and rectus abdominus levels abdominals when compared with stable surfaces. A common sight in many fitness and rehabilitation INTRODUCTION centers is the various devices (e.g., Swiss balls, dyna discs, wobble boards) used to establish unstable condi- raining the muscles surrounding the trunk re- tions. Swiss balls have been incorporated into strength gion, otherwise known as the core stabilizer training programs on the helief that a labile surface will muscles, has gained greater emphasis in recent provide a greater challenge to the trunk muscles, increase years. Developing core strength has been em- the dynamic balance of the user, and possibly help to sta- phasizemd as a valuable component in general and sports bilize the spine in order to prevent injuries (l4). conditioning programs in addition to active rehabilitation It is important to recognize that for individuals to ex- programs for individuals with low back pain (LBP). These perience optimal performance, one must ensure that their muscles play an integral role in carrying out both simple training regimen incorporates training specificity (22). and complex activities. To ensure that these activities are Thus, it is imperative for a training program to emulate the carried out without risk of injury or niuscle soreness (i.e., specific muscular actions and velocities that will be encoun- low back pain), the core stabilizer muscles must be con- tered in the particular sport or task at hand. The practical ditioned to endure the activities at hand. application of training the trunk stabilizers from a supine Low back pain is the most common cause of muscu- or prone position may not transfer effectively to the predom- loskeletal afflictions in North America for persons youn- inately erect activities of daily living. Dynamic resistance ger than 45 years of age (11). As of 1998, it was estimated training exercises wdth free weights provide a modicum of that more than $24 billion is required each year to cover instability. Perhaps a combination of relatively high-inten- the medical costs associated with managing LBP and that sity resistance using free weights (light to moderate insta- at least a quarter of the working population has reported bility) can provide greater activation than the very popular an episode of LBP (25). The development of many low instability exercises commonly used today. 1108 TRUNK ACTIVATION DURING WEIGHT TRAINING AND INSTABILITY 1109 To our knowledge, there are no studies that have at- muscles, such as the longissimus, are categorized as glob- tempted to compare trunk EMG activity between dynam- al stabilizers. The positioning of the ULES EMG elec- ic weight-training activities and isometric instability ac- trodes was more lateral in order to decrease the activity tivities. Therefore, the objective of this study was to com- ofthe deep multifidus and emphasize the activity ofthe pare the extent of activation of various muscles of the longissimus (2, 4). Therefore, positioning for the LSES trunk region during dynamic weight-training exercises muscles attempts to represent activity of the local stabi- and isometric instability activities. Based on previous re- lizer group. Monitoring electrodes for the LA were placed search, it was hypothesized that the isometric activities superior to the inguinal ligament and medial to the an- on instability devices would produce greater EMG activ- terior superior iliac spine (2, 4). Based on reports from ity of the trunk stabilizers. McGill et al. (16), the surface electrodes can adequately represent the EMG activity from the deep abdominal METHODS muscles. In contrast, Ng et al. (19) indicated that if the Experimental Approach to the Problem electrodes are placed too close to the anterior superior iliac spine, there might be competing signals from the The purpose of this experiment was to compare the acti- transverse abdominus and internal obliques. Therefore, vation of various trunk muscles with weight-training ac- the EMG activity for the lower abdominal stabilizers re- tivities and selected unstable calisthenic-type exercises. ceived EMG signals from both the internal obliques and Eor the dynamic weight-training exercises, the estimated the transverse abdominus. 1 repetition maximum (IRM) for each subject was first The EMG signals were monitored, amplified (Biopac determined. On a separate day, subjects performed a Systems MEC 100 amplifier, Santa Barbara, CA), and di- warm-up set (approximately 45% IRM) for an Olympic rected through an analog-digital converter (Biopac bar free squat, which was followed by a set of 6 repeti- MPlOO) and stored on a computer (Sona, St. John's, New- tions at 80% IRM. The same format was followed for an foundland). AcqKnowledge software (AcqKnowledge III, Olympic bar deadlift. In addition, subjects were required Biopac System Inc., Holliston, MA) was used to filter the to perform 2 trunk-specific calisthenic-type isometric ac- signal (10-500 Hz). Electromyographic activity was sam- tivities using a Swiss ball. The chosen activities included pled at 2,000 Hz with a Blackman-61 dB band-pass filter the superman (4) and the side bridge (4, 7). These partic- between 10 and 500 Hz, amplified (Biopac Systems, input ular exercises were chosen because previous studies in- impedance = 2M, common mode rejection ratio >110 dB dicated that they provided the highest trunk EMG acti- min (50/60), gain X 1,000, noise >5: V), and analog-to- vation among a wide variety of exercises (4, 7). The sub- digitally converted (12 bit) and stored on a personal com- jects were required to maintain each contraction for 30 puter (Sona) for further analysis. The EMG signal was seconds. The degree of activation was monitored by ex- rectified and smoothed (10 samples), and the amplitude amining changes in the mean root mean square (RMS) of the RMS EMG signal was calculated. amplitude of the EMG activity of selected trunk muscles. Measurements were taken for 1 second during the ec- Subjects centric (down-phase) and 1 second during the concentric (up-phase) portions of the squat and deadlift during the Sixteen physically active people (8 men and 8 women; middle portion of the exercise set (i.e., repetitions 3, 4, 24.1 years ± 6.8, 175.6 cm ± 5.9, 165.1 lbs ± 27.3) were and 5) vs.