Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads.
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Jul; 33 Suppl 1:S60-S69.JS

Abstract

Clark, DR, Lambert, MI, and Hunter, AM. Trunk muscle activation in the back and hack squat at the same relative loads. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S60-S69, 2019-The hack squat (HS) is likely to produce a greater 1 repetition maximum (1RM) compared with the back squat (BS). This can be attributed to the support of the trunk during the HS compared with no support during BS. This support, however, may compromise trunk muscle activation (TMA), therefore producing different training adaptations. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare 1RM in BS and HS and TMA at 4 relative loads, 65, 75, 85, and 95% of maximal system mass. Ten males completed 3 test sessions: (a) BS and HS 1RM, (b) HS and BS neuromuscular test familiarization, and (c) neuromuscular test for 3 reps at 4 loads for BS and HS. Back squat TMA was significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) than HS for all muscles and phases except rectus abdominus in concentric phase. Trunk muscle activation increased (p ≤ 0.05) with load in all muscles for both exercises and phases apart from lumbar sacral erector spinae in HS eccentric phase. Mean HS 1RM and submaximal loads were significantly (p < 0.0001) higher than the equivalent BS loads. Duration of the eccentric phase was higher (p < 0.01) in HS than BS but not different in concentric phase. Duration increased significantly (p < 0.01) with load in both exercises and both phases. Despite higher absolute tests loads in HS, TMA was higher in BS. Trunk muscle activation is sensitive to load in both exercises. Back squat is more effective than HS in activating the muscles of the trunk and therefore, arguably more effective in developing trunk strength and stability for dynamic athletic performance.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Physiology, Exercise and Nutrition Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.Department of Human Biology, Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.Physiology, Exercise and Nutrition Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

28704312

Citation

Clark, David R., et al. "Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads." Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 33 Suppl 1, 2019, pp. S60-S69.
Clark DR, Lambert MI, Hunter AM. Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33 Suppl 1:S60-S69.
Clark, D. R., Lambert, M. I., & Hunter, A. M. (2019). Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33 Suppl 1, S60-S69. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002144
Clark DR, Lambert MI, Hunter AM. Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33 Suppl 1:S60-S69. PubMed PMID: 28704312.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Trunk Muscle Activation in the Back and Hack Squat at the Same Relative Loads. AU - Clark,David R, AU - Lambert,Michael I, AU - Hunter,Angus M, PY - 2017/7/14/pubmed PY - 2019/11/9/medline PY - 2017/7/14/entrez SP - S60 EP - S69 JF - Journal of strength and conditioning research JO - J Strength Cond Res VL - 33 Suppl 1 N2 - Clark, DR, Lambert, MI, and Hunter, AM. Trunk muscle activation in the back and hack squat at the same relative loads. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S60-S69, 2019-The hack squat (HS) is likely to produce a greater 1 repetition maximum (1RM) compared with the back squat (BS). This can be attributed to the support of the trunk during the HS compared with no support during BS. This support, however, may compromise trunk muscle activation (TMA), therefore producing different training adaptations. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare 1RM in BS and HS and TMA at 4 relative loads, 65, 75, 85, and 95% of maximal system mass. Ten males completed 3 test sessions: (a) BS and HS 1RM, (b) HS and BS neuromuscular test familiarization, and (c) neuromuscular test for 3 reps at 4 loads for BS and HS. Back squat TMA was significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) than HS for all muscles and phases except rectus abdominus in concentric phase. Trunk muscle activation increased (p ≤ 0.05) with load in all muscles for both exercises and phases apart from lumbar sacral erector spinae in HS eccentric phase. Mean HS 1RM and submaximal loads were significantly (p < 0.0001) higher than the equivalent BS loads. Duration of the eccentric phase was higher (p < 0.01) in HS than BS but not different in concentric phase. Duration increased significantly (p < 0.01) with load in both exercises and both phases. Despite higher absolute tests loads in HS, TMA was higher in BS. Trunk muscle activation is sensitive to load in both exercises. Back squat is more effective than HS in activating the muscles of the trunk and therefore, arguably more effective in developing trunk strength and stability for dynamic athletic performance. SN - 1533-4287 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/28704312/Trunk_Muscle_Activation_in_the_Back_and_Hack_Squat_at_the_Same_Relative_Loads_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002144 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -