Muscle activity during running with different body-weight-support mechanisms: Aquatic environment versus body-weight-support treadmill

John A. Mercer, Bryon C. Applequist, Kenji Masumoto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Body-weight (BW) support during running can be accomplished using deep-water running (DWR; 100% BW support) and a lower-body positive-pressure (LBPP) treadmill. Purpose: To compare lower-extremity muscle activity during DWR and running on an LBPP treadmill at matched stride frequency. Methods: Eight subjects (40 ± 6.5 y, 173 ± 7.2 cm, 66.9 ± 11.7 kg) completed 4 running conditions all at a preferred stride frequency that was determined while running with no support. Two conditions were running on the LBPP treadmill at 60% and 80% of BW, and the other 2 conditions were different DWR styles: high knee (DWR-HK) and cross-country (DWR-CC). Average (AVG) and root-mean-square (RMS) electromyography (rectus femoris, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, and tibialis anterior) were each compared among conditions (repeated-measures analysis of variance). Results: Results for AVG and RMS variables were identical for statistical tests for each muscle. Rectus femoris electromyography during DWR-HK was lower than that of DWR-CC (P <.05) but not different than either 60% BW or 80% BW (P >.05). Biceps femoris electromyography was less during DWR-HK than DWR-CC (P <.05) but greater during DWR-HK than either BW 60% or BW 80% (P <.05). Neither gastrocnemius nor tibialis anterior electromyography differed between conditions (P >.05). Conclusion: Neither the mechanism of BW support nor style of DWR influenced gastrocnemius or tibialis anterior muscle activity during running at the same stride frequency. However, rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscle activity were influenced by not only the mechanism of BW support but also the style of DWR.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)300-306
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Sport Rehabilitation
Volume23
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Body Weight
Quadriceps Muscle
Electromyography
Muscles
Knee
Pressure
Lower Extremity
Analysis of Variance
Water
Hamstring Muscles

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Rehabilitation
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Biophysics
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Muscle activity during running with different body-weight-support mechanisms : Aquatic environment versus body-weight-support treadmill. / Mercer, John A.; Applequist, Bryon C.; Masumoto, Kenji.

In: Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, Vol. 23, No. 4, 01.01.2014, p. 300-306.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{54d7c4cf07ae4aee95b9da1f136eff9c,
title = "Muscle activity during running with different body-weight-support mechanisms: Aquatic environment versus body-weight-support treadmill",
abstract = "Background: Body-weight (BW) support during running can be accomplished using deep-water running (DWR; 100{\%} BW support) and a lower-body positive-pressure (LBPP) treadmill. Purpose: To compare lower-extremity muscle activity during DWR and running on an LBPP treadmill at matched stride frequency. Methods: Eight subjects (40 ± 6.5 y, 173 ± 7.2 cm, 66.9 ± 11.7 kg) completed 4 running conditions all at a preferred stride frequency that was determined while running with no support. Two conditions were running on the LBPP treadmill at 60{\%} and 80{\%} of BW, and the other 2 conditions were different DWR styles: high knee (DWR-HK) and cross-country (DWR-CC). Average (AVG) and root-mean-square (RMS) electromyography (rectus femoris, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, and tibialis anterior) were each compared among conditions (repeated-measures analysis of variance). Results: Results for AVG and RMS variables were identical for statistical tests for each muscle. Rectus femoris electromyography during DWR-HK was lower than that of DWR-CC (P <.05) but not different than either 60{\%} BW or 80{\%} BW (P >.05). Biceps femoris electromyography was less during DWR-HK than DWR-CC (P <.05) but greater during DWR-HK than either BW 60{\%} or BW 80{\%} (P <.05). Neither gastrocnemius nor tibialis anterior electromyography differed between conditions (P >.05). Conclusion: Neither the mechanism of BW support nor style of DWR influenced gastrocnemius or tibialis anterior muscle activity during running at the same stride frequency. However, rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscle activity were influenced by not only the mechanism of BW support but also the style of DWR.",
author = "Mercer, {John A.} and Applequist, {Bryon C.} and Kenji Masumoto",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1123/JSR.2013-0032",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "300--306",
journal = "Journal of Sport Rehabilitation",
issn = "1056-6716",
publisher = "Human Kinetics Publishers Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Muscle activity during running with different body-weight-support mechanisms

T2 - Aquatic environment versus body-weight-support treadmill

AU - Mercer, John A.

AU - Applequist, Bryon C.

AU - Masumoto, Kenji

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Background: Body-weight (BW) support during running can be accomplished using deep-water running (DWR; 100% BW support) and a lower-body positive-pressure (LBPP) treadmill. Purpose: To compare lower-extremity muscle activity during DWR and running on an LBPP treadmill at matched stride frequency. Methods: Eight subjects (40 ± 6.5 y, 173 ± 7.2 cm, 66.9 ± 11.7 kg) completed 4 running conditions all at a preferred stride frequency that was determined while running with no support. Two conditions were running on the LBPP treadmill at 60% and 80% of BW, and the other 2 conditions were different DWR styles: high knee (DWR-HK) and cross-country (DWR-CC). Average (AVG) and root-mean-square (RMS) electromyography (rectus femoris, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, and tibialis anterior) were each compared among conditions (repeated-measures analysis of variance). Results: Results for AVG and RMS variables were identical for statistical tests for each muscle. Rectus femoris electromyography during DWR-HK was lower than that of DWR-CC (P <.05) but not different than either 60% BW or 80% BW (P >.05). Biceps femoris electromyography was less during DWR-HK than DWR-CC (P <.05) but greater during DWR-HK than either BW 60% or BW 80% (P <.05). Neither gastrocnemius nor tibialis anterior electromyography differed between conditions (P >.05). Conclusion: Neither the mechanism of BW support nor style of DWR influenced gastrocnemius or tibialis anterior muscle activity during running at the same stride frequency. However, rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscle activity were influenced by not only the mechanism of BW support but also the style of DWR.

AB - Background: Body-weight (BW) support during running can be accomplished using deep-water running (DWR; 100% BW support) and a lower-body positive-pressure (LBPP) treadmill. Purpose: To compare lower-extremity muscle activity during DWR and running on an LBPP treadmill at matched stride frequency. Methods: Eight subjects (40 ± 6.5 y, 173 ± 7.2 cm, 66.9 ± 11.7 kg) completed 4 running conditions all at a preferred stride frequency that was determined while running with no support. Two conditions were running on the LBPP treadmill at 60% and 80% of BW, and the other 2 conditions were different DWR styles: high knee (DWR-HK) and cross-country (DWR-CC). Average (AVG) and root-mean-square (RMS) electromyography (rectus femoris, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius, and tibialis anterior) were each compared among conditions (repeated-measures analysis of variance). Results: Results for AVG and RMS variables were identical for statistical tests for each muscle. Rectus femoris electromyography during DWR-HK was lower than that of DWR-CC (P <.05) but not different than either 60% BW or 80% BW (P >.05). Biceps femoris electromyography was less during DWR-HK than DWR-CC (P <.05) but greater during DWR-HK than either BW 60% or BW 80% (P <.05). Neither gastrocnemius nor tibialis anterior electromyography differed between conditions (P >.05). Conclusion: Neither the mechanism of BW support nor style of DWR influenced gastrocnemius or tibialis anterior muscle activity during running at the same stride frequency. However, rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscle activity were influenced by not only the mechanism of BW support but also the style of DWR.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921709147&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921709147&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1123/JSR.2013-0032

DO - 10.1123/JSR.2013-0032

M3 - Article

C2 - 23921368

AN - SCOPUS:84921709147

VL - 23

SP - 300

EP - 306

JO - Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

SN - 1056-6716

IS - 4

ER -