High-Density Electromyography Excitation in Front vs. Back Lat Pull-Down Prime Movers.

The current study compared the spatial excitation of the primary muscles during the lat pull-down exercise with the bar passing in front (front-LPD) or behind the neck (back-LPD) using high-density electromyography. Fourteen resistance trained men performed a front-LPD or a back-LPD within a non-fatiguing set with 8-RM as the external load. The muscle excitation centroid of latissimus dorsi, middle trapezius, pectoralis major, biceps brachii, triceps brachii and posterior deltoid muscles were recorded during the ascending and the descending phase. During the descending phase, the front-LPD showed superior excitation of the latissimus dorsi (ES = 0.97) and the pectoralis major (ES = 1.17), while in the ascending phase, the back-LPD exhibited superior excitation of the latissimus dorsi (ES = 0.63), and the front-LPD showed superior excitation of the biceps brachii (ES = 0.41) and the posterior deltoid (ES = 1.77). During the descending phase, the front-LPD showed a more lateral centroid of the latissimus dorsi (ES = 0.60), the biceps brachii (ES = 0.63) and the triceps brachii (ES = 0.98), while the centroid was more medial for the middle trapezius (ES = 0.58). The centroid of the middle trapezius was also more medial in the front-LPD during the ascending phase (ES = 0.85). The pectoralis major centroid was more cranial in the front-LPD for both the descending (ES = 1.58) and the ascending phase (ES = 0.88). The front-LPD appears to provide overall greater excitation in the prime movers. However, distinct spatial excitation patterns were observed, making exercise suitable for the training routine.

Biceps Brachii and Brachioradialis Excitation in Biceps Curl Exercise: Different Handgrips, Different Synergy.

The current study analyzed the excitation of biceps brachii, brachioradialis, and anterior deltoid during bilateral biceps curl performed with different handgrips. Ten competitive bodybuilders performed bilateral biceps curl in non-exhaustive 6-rep sets using 8-RM with the forearm in supinated, pronated, and neutral positions. The ascending and descending phase of each variation was separately analyzed using the normalized root mean square collected using surface electromyography. During the ascending phase, (i) biceps brachii excitation was greater with the supinated compared to the pronated [+19(7)%, ES: 2.60] and neutral handgrip [+12(9)%, ES: 1.24], (ii) the brachioradialis showed greater excitation with the supinated compared to the pronated [+5(4)%, ES: 1.01] and neutral handgrip [+6(5)%, ES: 1.10], (iii) the anterior deltoid excitation was greater with the pronated and neutral handgrip compared to the supinated condition [+6(3)% and +9(2)%, ES: 2.07 and 3.18, respectively]. During the descending phase, the anterior deltoid showed greater excitation in the pronated compared to the supinated handgrip [+5(4)%, ES: 1.02]. Changing the handgrips when performing biceps curl induces specific variations in biceps brachii and brachioradialis excitation and requires different anterior deltoid interventions for stabilizing the humeral head. Practitioners should consider including different handgrips in the biceps curl routine to vary the neural and mechanical stimuli.

Bilateral Biceps Curl Shows Distinct Biceps Brachii and Anterior Deltoid Excitation Comparing Straight vs. EZ Barbell Coupled with Arms Flexion/No-Flexion.

The present study investigated the excitation of the biceps brachii and anterior deltoid during bilateral biceps curl performed using the straight vs. EZ barbell and with or without flexing the arms. Ten competitive bodybuilders performed bilateral biceps curl in non-exhaustive 6-rep sets using 8-RM in four variations: using the straight barbell flexing (STflex) or not flexing the arms (STno-flex) or the EZ barbell flexing (EZflex) or not flexing the arms (EZno-flex). The ascending and descending phases were separately analyzed using the normalized root mean square (nRMS) collected using surface electro-myography. For the biceps brachii, during the ascending phase, a greater nRMS was observed in STno-flex vs. EZno-flex (+1.8%, effect size [ES]: 0.74), in STflex vs. STno-flex (+17.7%, ES: 3.93) and in EZflex vs. EZno-flex (+20.3%, ES: 5.87). During the descending phase, a greater nRMS was observed in STflex vs. EZflex (+3.8%, ES: 1.15), in STno-flex vs. STflex (+2.8%, ES: 0.86) and in EZno-flex vs. EZflex (+8.1%, ES: 1.81). The anterior deltoid showed distinct excitation based on the arm flexion/no-flexion. A slight advantage in biceps brachii excitation appears when using the straight vs. EZ barbell. Flexing or not flexing the arms seems to uniquely excite the biceps brachii and anterior deltoid. Practitioners should consider including different bilateral biceps barbell curls in their routine to vary the neural and mechanical stimuli.

Front vs Back and Barbell vs Machine Overhead Press: An Electromyographic Analysis and Implications For Resistance Training.

Overhead press is commonly performed to reinforce the muscles surrounding the shoulders. However, many overhead press variations can be executed, thus varying the stimuli to each muscle. Therefore, the current study compared the muscles excitation during overhead press performed with the barbell passing in front or behind the head or using a shoulder press machine. Eight competitive bodybuilders performed in random order front (front-BMP) or back barbell military press (back-BMP), and front (front-MSP) with neutral handgrip or back machine shoulder press (back-MSP). Normalized surface electromyographic root mean square (RMS) of anterior, medial and posterior deltoid, upper trapezius, pectoralis major and triceps brachii was recorded during both the ascending and descending phases. During the ascending phase, anterior deltoid showed greater RMS in back-BMP than back-MSP [ES: 1.42, (95% confidence interval 0.32/2.51)]. Medial deltoid showed greater RMS in back-BMP than front-BMP [ES: 3.68 (2.07/5.29)], and back-MSP [ES: 7.51 (4.73/10.29)]. Posterior deltoid showed greater RMS in back-BMP than front-BMP [ES: 9.00 (5.73/12.27)]. Pectoralis major showed greater RMS in front-BMP than back-BMP [ES: 3.11 (1.65-4.56)] and in front-MSP than back-MSP [ES: 20.52 (13.34/27.70)]. During the descending phase, anterior deltoid was more excited in back-BMP compared to front-BMP [ES: 7.66 (4.83/10.49). Medial deltoid showed greater RMS in back-BMP than front-BMP [ES: 4.56 (2.70/6.42)]. Posterior deltoid showed greater RMS in back-BMP than front-BMP [ES: 8.65 (5.50/11.80)]. Pectoralis major showed greater RMS in front-BMP than back-BMP [ES: 4.20 (2.44/5.95)]. No between-exercise difference was observed for upper trapezius. Performing back overhead press enhances the excitation of medial and posterior and partly anterior deltoid, while front overhead favors pectoralis major. Overhead press performed using barbell excites muscles more than using machine to stabilize the trajectory of the external load. Different variations of overhead press appear to provide different stimuli to the shoulder muscles and may be used accordingly during the training routine.

An Electromyographic Analysis of Romanian, Step-Romanian, and Stiff-Leg Deadlift: Implication for Resistance Training.

The present study examined the posterior chain muscle excitation in different deadlift variations. Ten competitive bodybuilders (training seniority of 10.6 ± 1.8 years) performed the Romanian (RD), Romanian standing on a step (step-RD), and stiff-leg deadlift (SD) with an 80% 1-RM. The excitation of the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, biceps femoris, semitendinosus, erector spinae longissimus, and iliocostalis was assessed during both the ascending and descending phases. During the ascending phase, the RMS of the gluteus maximus was greater in the step-RD than in the RD (effect size (ES): 1.70, 0.55/2.84) and SD (ES: 1.18, 0.11/2.24). Moreover, a greater RMS was found in the SD than in the RD (ES: 0.99, 0.04/1.95). The RMS of the semitendinosus was greater in the step-RD than in the RD (ES: 0.82, 0.20/1.44) and SD (ES: 3.13, 1.67/4.59). Moreover, a greater RMS was found in the RD than in the SD (ES: 1.38, 0.29/2.48). The RMS of the longissimus was greater in the step-RD than in the RD (ES: 2.12, 0.89/3.34) and SD (ES: 3.28, 1.78/4.78). The descending phase had fewer differences between the exercises. No further differences between the exercises were found. The step-RD increased the overall excitation of the posterior chain muscles, possibly because of the greater range of movement and posterior muscle elongation during the anterior flexion. Moreover, the RD appeared to target the semitendinosus more than the SD, while the latter excited the gluteus maximus more.

The Effects of Verbal Instructions on Lower Limb Muscles' Excitation in Back-Squat.

The present study investigated whether or not verbal instruction affects the electromyographic (EMG) amplitude of back-squat prime movers. Fifteen resistance-trained men performed back-squat at 50%1-RM and 80%1-RM and received external (EF) or internal focus (IF) on lower-limb posterior muscles. EMG amplitude of gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, gastrocnemius medialis, vastus lateralis, and tibialis anterior was recorded during both concentric and eccentric phases. During the concentric phase, the gluteus maximus and biceps femoris EMG amplitude was greater in IF vs EF at 50% [effect size (ES): 0.63 (95%CI 0.09/1.17) and 0.49 (0.10/0.78), respectively] and 80% [ES: 1.30 (0.29/2.21) and 0.59 (0.08/1.10)]. The gastrocnemius medialis EMG amplitude was greater in IF vs EF during the eccentric phase at 50% [ES: 0.73 (0.13/1.33)] and at 80% [ES: 0.72 (0.10/1.34)]. Concomitantly, vastus lateralis EMG amplitude was lower at 50% [ES: -0.71 (-1.38/-0.04)] and 80% [ES: -0.68 (-1.33/-0.03)]. During the eccentric phase, the tibialis anterior EMG amplitude was greater in IF vs EF at 50% [ES: 0.90 (0.12 to 1.68)] and 80% [ES: 0.74 (0.13/1.45)]. Irrespective of the load, in the thigh muscles the internal focus promoted a different motor pattern, increasing the hip extensors and reducing the knee extensor excitation during the concentric phase. Concomitantly, both ankle muscles were more excited during the eccentric phase, possibly to increase the anterior-posterior balance control. The internal focus in back-squat seems to have phase-dependent effects, and it is visible at both moderate and high loads.

The Activation of Gluteal, Thigh, and Lower Back Muscles in Different Squat Variations Performed by Competitive Bodybuilders: Implications for Resistance Training.

The present study investigated the activation of gluteal, thigh, and lower back muscles in different squat variations. Ten male competitive bodybuilders perform back-squat at full (full-BS) or parallel (parallel-BS) depth, using large feet-stance (sumo-BS), and enhancing the feet external rotation (external-rotated-sumo-BS) and front-squat (FS) at 80% 1-RM. The normalized surface electromyographic root-mean-square (sEMG RMS) amplitude of gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, adductor longus, longissimus, and iliocostalis was recorded during both the ascending and descending phase of each exercise. During the descending phase, greater sEMG RMS amplitude of gluteus maximus and gluteus medius was found in FS vs. all other exercises (p < 0.05). Additionally, FS elicited iliocostalis more than all other exercises. During the ascending phase, both sumo-BS and external-rotated-sumo-BS showed greater vastus lateralis and adductor longus activation compared to all other exercises (p < 0.05). Moreover, rectus femoris activation was greater in FS compared to full-BS (p < 0.05). No between-exercise difference was found in vastus medialis and longissimus showed no between-exercise difference. FS needs more backward stabilization during the descending phase. Larger feet-stance increases thigh muscles activity, possibly because of their longer length. These findings show how bodybuilders uniquely recruit muscles when performing different squat variations.

An Electromyographic Analysis of Lateral Raise Variations and Frontal Raise in Competitive Bodybuilders.

The present study examined the muscle activation in lateral raise with humerus rotated externally (LR-external), neutrally (LR-neutral), internally (LR-internal), with flexed elbow (LR-flexed) and frontal raise during both the concentric and eccentric phase. Ten competitive bodybuilders performed the exercises. Normalized surface electromyographic root mean square (sEMG RMS) was obtained from anterior, medial, and posterior deltoid, pectoralis major, upper trapezius, and triceps brachii. During the concentric phase, anterior deltoid and posterior deltoid showed greater sEMG RMS in frontal raise (effect size (ES)-range: 1.78/9.25)) and LR-internal (ES-range: 10.79/21.34), respectively, vs. all other exercises. Medial deltoid showed greater sEMG RMS in LR-neutral than LR-external (ES: 1.47 (95% confidence-interval-CI: 0.43/2.38)), frontal raise (ES: 10.28(95% CI: 6.67/13.01)), and LR-flexed (ES: 6.41(95% CI: 4.04/8.23)). Pectoralis major showed greater sEMG RMS in frontal raise vs. all other exercises (ES-range: 17.2/29.5), while upper trapezius (ES-range: 2.66/7.18) and triceps brachii (ES-range: 0.41/3.31) showed greater sEMG RMS in LR-internal vs. all other exercises. Similar recruitment patterns were found during the eccentric phase. When humerus rotates internally, greater activation of posterior deltoid, triceps brachii, and upper trapezius occurs. Humerus external rotation increases the activation of anterior and medial deltoid. Frontal raise mainly activates anterior deltoid and pectoralis major. LR variations and frontal raise activate specifically shoulders muscles and should be proposed accordingly.

Specific prime movers' excitation during free-weight bench press variations and chest press machine in competitive bodybuilders.

The current study compared the muscle excitation in free-weight bench press variations and chest press machine. Ten competitive bodybuilders were recruited. The EMG-RMS amplitude of clavicular and sternocostal head of pectoralis major, long head of triceps brachii and anterior and lateral deltoid was recorded while performing horizontal (BP), inclined (45°) (IBP) or declined (-15°) bench press (DBP) and chest press machine (CP). Four non-exhaustive repetitions were performed using 80% of 1-repetition maximum of each exercise. Both concentric and eccentric phases were recorded. During the concentric phase, [d effect size: 2.78/7.80] clavicular head was more excited in IBP and less excited in CP (d: -9.69/-4.39) compared to all other exercises. The sternocostal head was similarly excited in DBP vs. BP and BP vs. CP and more excited (d: 2.42/9.92) compared to IBP. Triceps brachii excitation was overall greater (d: 2.01/6.75) in BP and DBP compared to all other exercises. Anterior deltoid was less excited (d: 3.84/19.77) in DBP compared to all other exercises. Lateral deltoid excitation was greater (d: 0.96/3.10) in BP, IBP and DBP compared to CP. Muscle excitation during the eccentric phase followed a similar pattern, with the exception of the greater (d: 3.89/11.32) excitation in the clavicular head in BP compared to all other exercises. The present outcomes showed that the excitation of the clavicular and sternocostal head of pectoralis major depends on the bench inclination angle. The use of BP variations vs. CP allows overall greater triceps brachii and lateral deltoid excitation, due to the greater instability.