Changes in muscle coactivation during running: a comparison between two techniques, forefoot vs rearfoot / Cambios en la coactivación muscular durante la carrera: una comparación entre dos técnicas (antepié vs retropié)
Arch. med. deporte
; Arch. med. deporte;38(205): 332-336, Sep. 2021. tab, graf
Article
in En
| IBECS
| ID: ibc-218185
Responsible library:
ES1.1
Localization: ES15.1 - BNCS
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Surface electromyography has been a technique used to describe muscle activity during running. However, there is little literature that analyses the behaviour of muscle coactivation in runners, describing the effect between two techniques associated with the initial contact, such as the use of rearfoot (RF) and forefoot (FF). Material and method: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle coactivation levels developed in the lower limb during two running techniques, FF vs RF. Fourteen amateur runners were evaluated (eight men, six women; age= 23.21 ± 3.58 years, mass= 63.89 ± 8.13 kg, height= 1.68 ± 0.08m). Surface electromyography was used to measure muscle activity during both running techniques evaluated on a treadmill, considering the muscle pairs: Rectus femoris- Biceps femoris (RFe-BF), Lateral GastrocnemiusTibialis Anterior (LG-TA), and Medial Gastrocnemius - Tibialis Anterior (MG-TA). These were calculated in three windows considering ten running cycles (0-5%, 80-100%, and 0-100%). To compare FF vs RF t-student test for paired data was used. Results: It was observed significant differences in the MG-TA pair (FF= 18.42 ± 11.84% vs RF = 39.05 ± 13.28%, p = 0.0018 during 0-5%, and RFe-BF pair (FF = 42.38 ± 18.11% vs RF = 28.37 ± 17.2%, p = 0.0331) during 80-100% of the race. Conclusion: Our findings show that the behaviour of muscle coactivation is different between FF vs RF techniques if we analyze little windows in the running cycle. This could be associated with an increase in the joint stability between these short intervals, represented in the initial and final regions of the running cycle.(AU)
RESUMEN
Introducción: La electromiografía de superficie ha sido una técnica usada para describir la actividad muscular durante la carrera. Sin embargo, hay poca literatura que analice el comportamiento de la coactivación muscular en corredores, describiendo el efecto entre dos técnicas asociadas al contacto inial, tal como el uso de retropié y antepié. Material y método: El propósito de este estudio fue comparar los niveles de coactivación desarrollados en la extremidad inferior, utilizando dos técnicas de carrera, antepié (FF) vs retropié (RF). Catorce corredores amateurs fueron evaluados (8 hombres, 6 mujeres; edad = 23,21 ± 3,58 años, masa = 63,89± 8,13 kg, estatura = 1,68 ± 0,08 m). Se utilizó electromiografía de superficie para medir la actividad muscular al momento de ejecutar ambas técnicas de carrera sobre una trotadora, considerando los siguientes pares musculares: Recto Femoral- Bíceps Femoral (RFe-BF), Gastrocnemio Lateral Tibial Anterior (LG-TA) y Gastrocnemio Medial - Tibial Anterior (MG-TA). Estos se calcularon en tres ventanas considerando diez ciclos de ejecución (0-5%, 80-100% y 0-100%). Para comparar FF vs RF se utilizó la prueba t-student para datos pareados. Resultados: Se observan diferencias significativas en el par MG-TA (FF = 18,42 ± 11,84% vs RF = 39,05 ± 13,28%, p = 0,0018) durante el 0-5%, y el par RFe-BF (FF = 42,38 ± 18,11% vs RF = 28,37 ± 17,2%, p = 0,0331) durante el 80-100% de la carrera. Conclusión: Nuestros hallazgos muestran que el comportamiento de la coactivación muscular es diferente entre las técnicas de FF y RF si analizamos pequeñas ventanas en el ciclo de carrera. Esto podría estar asociado con un aumento de la estabilidad articular entre estos cortos intervalos, representados en la región inicial y final del ciclo de carrera.(AU)
Key words
Full text:
1
Collection:
06-national
/
ES
Database:
IBECS
Main subject:
Running
/
Forefoot, Human
/
Lower Extremity
/
Electromyography
/
-Performance Tests
/
Athletes
/
Musculoskeletal System
Limits:
Adult
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
Language:
En
Journal:
Arch. med. deporte
Year:
2021
Document type:
Article