ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2024
Are Anthropometric Measures, Range of Motion, or Movement Control Tests Associated with Lumbopelvic Flexion during Barbell Back Squats?
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Resistance training with the barbell back squat (BBS) exercise is practiced in sports, recreation, and rehabilitation. Although extensively debated, it is commonly believed and recommended that maintaining a neutral lumbopelvic alignment during BBS is an important technical aspect that might reduce the risk of injury. There is limited knowledge of how objectively measurable factors affect the extent to which the lumbopelvic region moves into flexion during a BBS. Purpose: The aim of the study was to investigate the association among anthropometric measurements, range of motion in the hips and ankle joints, lumbopelvic movement control tests, and flexion of the lumbopelvic region during execution of the BBS. Study design: Observational, cross sectional. Methods: Eighteen experienced powerlifters and Olympic weightlifters were included and measurements of lumbopelvic movements were collected with inertial measurement units during BBS performed at 70 % of 1RM. Examination of anthropometric properties, range of motion in the hip and ankle joints, and lumbopelvic movement control tests were collected as independent variables. Linear regression analysis was used to investigate which independent variables were associated with lumbopelvic flexion during a BBS. Results: The linear regression showed that a higher range of motion in ankle dorsiflexion could statistically significantly explain an increased amplitude of lumbopelvic flexion during the BBS. Anthropometrics, range of motion of the hips, and performance in lumbopelvic movement control tests did not show any statistically significant associations. Conclusions: The results suggest that strength and conditioning professionals and clinicians who instruct and assess lifting technique in the BBS and/or use the BBS to assess performance or as an intervention should recognize that a higher range of motion in the ankle joints might affect lumbopelvic flexion during the BBS. In practice, the value of an individual assessment of lifting technique focusing on the goal of the movement should be emphasized. Level of Evidence: 3.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.