返回Google圖書搜尋

A Comparison of Quadriceps Activation Between Upright and Recumbent Bicycles in the Healthy Adult Female Population

Gary A. DespresMaria E. MattrickJacqueline R. Nault

出版	Springfield College, 2006
URL	http://books.google.com.hk/books?id=sV8aOAAACAAJ&hl=&source=gbs_api

註釋Abstract: PURPOSE: The purpose ofthe current study was to compare the volitional activity of the VMO muscle on a recumbent versus an upright cycling ergometer. SUBJECTS: Thirty-seven volunteers between the ages of 19-25 years who were students at Springfield College participated in this study. Subjects were excluded if they had any specific muscular performance health history that would indicate they had a current orthopedic issue in the right knee. METHODS: Subjects were directed to refrain from strenuous activity 24 hours prior to testing. Each subject was tested on both an upright and recumbent cycle ergometer and randomly assigned for the first trial. A surface electrode was placed on the VMO to read electromyographic (EMG) data. The distance measured from the floor to the greater trochanter established the subject's trochanter length and saddle height was adjusted to 100% trochanteric length. Hip angles were established at 82 degrees of hip flexion for the recumbent position and 90 degrees of hip flexion for the upright position. The subject pedaled at a constant rate of60 rpm with 1 kg of resistance for a maximum of95 seconds. RMS-EMG measurements were recorded at a sampling rate of 500 Hz for 5 seconds at 30 second intervals. Peak and average EMG data were determined. ANALYSES: A paired samples t-test was used to compare the mean EMG average and mean EMG peak values for VMO activity. An alpha level of 0.05 was used to test for significance. RESULTS: The mean peak VMO activation for the upright and recumbent ergometer was 0.29 mV ± 0.16; 0.26 mV ± 0.16, respectively. The mean average VMO activation for the upright and recumbent ergometer was 0.04 m V ± 0.02; 0.03 mV ± 0.02, respectively. A significant difference of the mean was found for average VMO activation (t36 = 2.471, P = .018). Average VMO activation was higher in the upright cycling position than the recumbent position. No significant mean difference was determined for peak VMO activation between the upright position and the recumbent position (t36 = 2.008; P = .052). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of the current study indicate an increase in muscle activity in the VMO occurring in an upright cycling position compared to the recumbent position. Existing literature has examined the physiological effects of a change in cycling position, yet little research exists on the clinical application of the physiology. We suggest future clinical research to determine the efficacy of rehabilitation of the upright versus recumbent ergometer for strengthening the VMO, specifically in women with ACL deficient knees.