Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises.
J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Jan; 22(1):95-102.JS

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to compare trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. Nine resistance-trained men participated in one testing session in which squats (SQ) and deadlifts (DL) were completed with loads of approximately 50, 70, 90, and 100% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Isometric contractions during 3 stability ball exercises (quadruped (QP), pelvic thrust (PT), ball back extension (BE)) were also completed. During all exercises, average integrated electromyography (IEMG) from the rectus abdominus (RA), external oblique (EO), longissimus (L1) and multifidus (L5) was collected and analyzed. Results demonstrate that when expressed relative to 100% DL 1RM, muscle activity was 19.5 +/- 14.8% for L1 and 30.2 +/- 19.3% for L5 during QP, 31.4 +/- 13.4% for L1 and 37.6 +/- 12.4% for L5 during PT, and 44.2 +/- 22.8% for L1 and 45.5 +/- 21.6% for L5 during BE. IEMG of L1 during SQ and DL at 90 and 100% 1RM, and relative muscle activity of L5 during SQ and DL at 100% 1RM was significantly greater (P < or = 0.05) than in the stability ball exercises. Furthermore, relative muscle activity of L1 during DL at 50 and 70% 1RM was significantly greater than in QP and PT. No significant differences were observed in RA and EO during any of the exercises. In conclusion, activity of the trunk muscles during SQs and DLs is greater or equal to that which is produced during the stability ball exercises. It appears that stability ball exercises may not provide a sufficient stimulus for increasing muscular strength or hypertrophy; consequently, the role of stability ball exercises in strength and conditioning programs is questioned. SQs and DLs are recommended for increasing strength and hypertrophy of the back extensors.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Neuromuscular Laboratory, Department of Health, Leisure & Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina, USA.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18296961

Citation

Nuzzo, James L., et al. "Trunk Muscle Activity During Stability Ball and Free Weight Exercises." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 22, no. 1, 2008, pp. 95-102.
Nuzzo JL, McCaulley GO, Cormie P, et al. Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(1):95-102.
Nuzzo, J. L., McCaulley, G. O., Cormie, P., Cavill, M. J., & McBride, J. M. (2008). Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(1), 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e31815ef8cd
Nuzzo JL, et al. Trunk Muscle Activity During Stability Ball and Free Weight Exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(1):95-102. PubMed PMID: 18296961.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. AU - Nuzzo,James L, AU - McCaulley,Grant O, AU - Cormie,Prue, AU - Cavill,Michael J, AU - McBride,Jeffrey M, PY - 2008/2/26/pubmed PY - 2008/4/9/medline PY - 2008/2/26/entrez SP - 95 EP - 102 JF - Journal of strength and conditioning research JO - J Strength Cond Res VL - 22 IS - 1 N2 - The purpose of this investigation was to compare trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. Nine resistance-trained men participated in one testing session in which squats (SQ) and deadlifts (DL) were completed with loads of approximately 50, 70, 90, and 100% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Isometric contractions during 3 stability ball exercises (quadruped (QP), pelvic thrust (PT), ball back extension (BE)) were also completed. During all exercises, average integrated electromyography (IEMG) from the rectus abdominus (RA), external oblique (EO), longissimus (L1) and multifidus (L5) was collected and analyzed. Results demonstrate that when expressed relative to 100% DL 1RM, muscle activity was 19.5 +/- 14.8% for L1 and 30.2 +/- 19.3% for L5 during QP, 31.4 +/- 13.4% for L1 and 37.6 +/- 12.4% for L5 during PT, and 44.2 +/- 22.8% for L1 and 45.5 +/- 21.6% for L5 during BE. IEMG of L1 during SQ and DL at 90 and 100% 1RM, and relative muscle activity of L5 during SQ and DL at 100% 1RM was significantly greater (P < or = 0.05) than in the stability ball exercises. Furthermore, relative muscle activity of L1 during DL at 50 and 70% 1RM was significantly greater than in QP and PT. No significant differences were observed in RA and EO during any of the exercises. In conclusion, activity of the trunk muscles during SQs and DLs is greater or equal to that which is produced during the stability ball exercises. It appears that stability ball exercises may not provide a sufficient stimulus for increasing muscular strength or hypertrophy; consequently, the role of stability ball exercises in strength and conditioning programs is questioned. SQs and DLs are recommended for increasing strength and hypertrophy of the back extensors. SN - 1533-4287 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18296961/Trunk_muscle_activity_during_stability_ball_and_free_weight_exercises_ L2 - http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&amp;PAGE=linkout&amp;SEARCH=18296961.ui DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -