Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40497251›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Biomechanical analysis of conventional and sumo deadlift.

N C Hanen, K Ben Mansour, G N Ertel, Y Duchene, G C Gauchard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

N C HanenUniversité de Lorraine, UR 3450 DevAH, Nancy, France.
K Ben MansourUniversité de Lorraine, UR 3450 DevAH, Nancy, France.
G N ErtelUniversité de Lorraine, UR 3450 DevAH, Nancy, France.
Y DucheneUniversité de Lorraine, UR 3450 DevAH, Nancy, France.
G C GauchardUniversité de Lorraine, UR 3450 DevAH, Nancy, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The conventional (CDL) and sumo (SDL) deadlifts are two fundamental techniques used in competitive lifting and as effective exercises for strengthening the knee and hip muscles. This study aims to investigate their biomechanical differences through a comprehensive analysis of joint kinematics, joint kinetics, and muscle activation. Materials and Methods: Thirty experienced male lifters performed both CDL and SDL at 85% of their one repetition maximum (1-RM). Lower limb joint range of motion (ROM), internal joint moments, and muscle activation of key lower limb and spinal muscles were recorded and analyzed. Paired t-tests and Statistical parametric mapping (SPM) were used to compare parameters between lifting techniques (p < 0.025). Results: SDL showed greater ROM in the frontal and transverse planes, particularly at the hip and knee, whereas CDL involved greater hip flexion and ankle dorsiflexion. CDL generated higher hip extension moments, while SDL produced greater frontal and transverse plane joint moments at the hip and knee. Additionally, SDL induced a greater ankle inversion moment. In the transverse plane, ankle moments were higher in CDL during phase 1 and became greater in SDL in phase 2. Regarding EMG peak values, the biceps femoris exhibited greater activation in CDL across both phases. The tibialis anterior and the erector spinae thoracis demonstrated greater activation in CDL during phase 1 and phase 2, respectively. Conversely, the vastus lateralis exhibited higher peak activation in SDL, but only during phase 1. Conclusion: CDL is more effective for targeting posterior chain, particularly the hip extensors, while SDL emphasizes anterior chain involvement and induces greater mediolateral stabilization demands. SDL may be particularly beneficial for knee reinforcement and increases frontal plane demands, supporting its relevance in rehabilitation contexts that require enhanced mediolateral stability. These findings highlight the importance of selecting the appropriate deadlift technique according to specific training or rehabilitation objectives.

Indexed as

biomechanicsdynamicEMGjointpowerliftingSPMstrength

Identifiers

PMID40497251
PMCPMC12148905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.