A Biomechanical Comparison Between the Safety-Squat Bar and Traditional Barbell Back Squat

被引:0
|
作者
Johansson, David G. [1 ]
Marchetti, Paulo H. [1 ]
Stecyk, Shane D. [1 ]
Flanagan, Sean P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Calif State Univ, Dept Kinesiol, Northridge, CA 95819 USA
关键词
biomechanics; inverse dynamics; lower extremity; exercise; SPRINT PERFORMANCE; STRENGTH; FRONT; VELOCITY; MODEL; JUMP;
D O I
10.1519/JSC.0000000000004719
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
The primary objectives for this investigation were to compare the kinematic and kinetic differences between performing a parallel back squat using a traditional barbell (TB) or a safety-squat bar (SSB). Fifteen healthy, recreationally trained male subjects (23 + 4 years of age) performed the back squat with a TB and an SSB at 85% of their respective 1 repetition maximum with each barbell while instrumented for biomechanical analysis. Standard inverse dynamics techniques were used to determine joint kinematic and kinetic measures. A 2 x 3 (exercise x joint) factorial analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to determine the kinetic and kinematic differences between the squats while using the different barbells. Fisher's least significant difference post hoc comparisons showed that the TB resulted in significantly greater maximum hip flexion angle (129.33 +/- 11.8 degrees vs. 122.11 +/- 12.1 degrees; p < 0.001; d = 1.80), peak hip net joint extensor torque (2.54 +/- 0.4 Nm<middle dot>kg-1 vs. 2.40 +/- 0.4 Nm<middle dot>kg-1; p = 0.001; d = 1.10), hip net extensor torque mechanical energy expenditure (MEE; 2.81 +/- 0.5 Nm<middle dot>kg-1 vs. 2.58 +/- 0.6 Nm<middle dot>kg-1; p = 0.002; d = 0.97), and ankle net joint plantar flexor torque MEE (0.32 +/- 0.09 J<middle dot>kg-1 vs. 0.28 +/- 0.06 J<middle dot>kg-1; p = 0.029; d = 0.63), while also lifting significantly (123.17 +/- 20.8 kg vs. 117.17 +/- 20.8 kg; p = 0.005; d = 0.858) more weight than the SSB. The SSB resulted in significantly higher maximum knee flexion angles (116.82 +/- 5.8 degrees vs. 115.65 +/- 5.6 degrees; p = 0.011; d = 0.75) than the TB, with no significant difference in kinetics at the knee. The TB may be preferred to the SSB for developing the hip extensors and lifting higher maximum loads. The SSB may be advantageous in situations where a more upright posture or a lower load is preferred while creating a similar demand for the knee joint.
引用
收藏
页码:825 / 834
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A Biomechanical Comparison of the Back Squat and Hexagonal Barbell Deadlift
    Stahl, Cody A.
    Regni, Giancarlo
    Tanguay, Jonathan
    Mcelfresh, Maddie
    Trihy, Eoghan
    Diggin, David
    King, Deborah L.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2024, 38 (05) : 815 - 824
  • [2] A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF THE TRADITIONAL SQUAT, POWERLIFTING SQUAT, AND BOX SQUAT
    Swinton, Paul A.
    Lloyd, Ray
    Keogh, Justin W. L.
    Agouris, Ioannis
    Stewart, Arthur D.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2012, 26 (07) : 1805 - 1816
  • [3] The Barbell Back Squat Exercise
    Ronai, Peter
    Gendron, Kevin
    ACSMS HEALTH & FITNESS JOURNAL, 2023, 27 (04) : 65 - 73
  • [4] Comparison of muscle activation of hip belt squat and barbell back squat techniques
    Gulick, Dawn T.
    Fagnani, James A.
    Gulick, Colleen N.
    ISOKINETICS AND EXERCISE SCIENCE, 2015, 23 (02) : 101 - 108
  • [5] BIOMECHANICAL, ANTHROPOMETRIC, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DETERMINANTS OF BARBELL BACK SQUAT STRENGTH
    Vigotsky, Andrew D.
    Bryanton, Megan A.
    Nuckols, Greg
    Beardsley, Chris
    Contreras, Bret
    Evans, Jessica
    Schoenfeld, Brad J.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2019, 33 : S26 - S35
  • [6] A Comparison of Back Squat & Safety Squat Bar on Measures of Strength, Speed, and Power in NCAA Division I Baseball Players
    Meldrum, Richard
    DeBeliso, Mark
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2019, 51 (06): : 919 - 919
  • [7] EFFECTS OF THE SAFETY SQUAT BAR ON TRUNK AND LOWER-BODY MECHANICS DURING A BACK SQUAT
    Hecker, Kara A.
    Carlson, Lara A.
    Lawrence, Michael A.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2019, 33 : S45 - S51
  • [8] A REVIEW OF THE BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH-BAR AND LOW-BAR BACK-SQUAT
    Glassbrook, Daniel J.
    Helms, Eric R.
    Brown, Scott R.
    Storey, Adam G.
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2017, 31 (09) : 2618 - 2634
  • [9] Thoracolumbar and Lumbopelvic Spinal Alignment During the Barbell Back Squat: A Comparison Between Men and Women
    Bengtsson, Victor
    Berglund, Lars
    Ohberg, Fredrik
    Aasa, Ulrika
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2023, 18 (04): : 820 - 830
  • [10] The Comparison of Velocity between Front Squat, Back Squat, Sumo and Conventional Deadlift
    Kasovic, Jovana
    Martin, Benjamin
    Fahs, Christopher A.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2019, 51 (06): : 46 - 46