COMPARISON OF KINETIC VARIABLES AND MUSCLE ACTIVITY DURING A SQUAT VS. A BOX SQUAT
COMPARISON OF KINETIC VARIABLES AND MUSCLE ACTIVITY DURING A SQUAT VS. A BOX SQUAT
复制标题
DOI：
10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181f6399a
复制
发表时间：
2010-12-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Kirby, Tyler J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McBride, Jeffrey M.;Skinner, Jared W.;Kirby, Tyler J.
McBride， JM, Skinner， JW, Schafer， PC, Haines， TL和Kirby， TJ。深蹲与盒式深蹲的动力学变量和肌肉活动的比较。[J] .力量杂志，24(12):3195- 3199,2010 -本研究的目的是确定在深蹲和盒式深蹲的比较中，动力变量和肌肉活动是否存在差异。盒式深蹲消除了深蹲中拉伸缩短周期的成分，因此，盒式深蹲对同心相位性能的可能影响令人感兴趣。8名接受阻力训练的男性（身高：179.61 +/- 13.43 cm；体重：107.65 +/- 29.79 kg；年龄：24.77 +/- 3.22岁；1次最大重复[1RM]: 200.11 +/- 58.91 kg）以随机方式使用60%、70%和80%的1RM重复1次深蹲和箱子深蹲。受试者站在测力板上完成运动，测力板上附有2个线性位置传感器。力和速度被用来计算功率。根据力-时间曲线和功率-时间曲线确定了升降过程中的峰值力和峰值功率。记录股外侧肌、股内侧肌、股二头肌和最长肌的肌肉活动（肌电图）。结果表明，深蹲和箱子深蹲的峰值力和峰值功率相似。然而，在70%的1RM试验中，深蹲产生的峰值力明显低于盒式深蹲（深蹲= 3269 +/- 573 N，盒式深蹲= 3364 +/- 575 N）。此外，在80%的1RM试验中，深蹲产生的峰值功率明显低于箱蹲（深蹲= 2050 +/- 486 W，箱蹲= 2197 +/- 544 W）。与蹲式相比，蹲式的肌肉活动通常更高。总之，在深蹲和箱子深蹲之间的动力学变量和肌肉活动观察到最小的差异。在深蹲中去除拉伸-缩短循环（使用盒子）似乎对表现的负面影响有限。
McBride, JM, Skinner, JW, Schafer, PC, Haines, TL, and Kirby, TJ. Comparison of kinetic variables and muscle activity during a squat vs. a box squat. J Strength Cond Res 24(12): 3195-3199, 2010-The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there was a difference in kinetic variables and muscle activity when comparing a squat to a box squat. A box squat removes the stretch-shortening cycle component from the squat, and thus, the possible influence of the box squat on concentric phase performance is of interest. Eight resistance trained men (Height: 179.61 +/- 13.43 cm; BodyMass: 107.65 +/- 29.79 kg; Age: 24.77 +/- 3.22 years; 1 repetition maximum [1RM]: 200.11 +/- 58.91 kg) performed 1 repetition of squats and box squats using 60, 70, and 80% of their 1RM in a randomized fashion. Subjects completed the movement while standing on a force plate and with 2 linear position transducers attached to the bar. Force and velocity were used to calculate power. Peak force and peak power were determined from the force-time and power-time curves during the concentric phase of the lift. Muscle activity (electromyography) was recorded from the vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, biceps femoris, and longissimus. Results indicate that peak force and peak power are similar between the squat and box squat. However, during the 70% of 1RM trials, the squat resulted in a significantly lower peak force in comparison to the box squat (squat = 3,269 +/- 573 N, box squat = 3,364 +/- 575 N). In addition, during the 80% of 1RM trials, the squat resulted in significantly lower peak power in comparison to the box squat (squat = 2,050 +/- 486 W, box squat = 2,197 +/- 544 W). Muscle activity was generally higher during the squat in comparison to the box squat. In conclusion, minimal differences were observed in kinetic variables and muscle activity between the squat and box squat. Removing the stretch-shortening cycle during the squat (using a box) appears to have limited negative consequences on performance.