Sentences with phrase «compared erector spinae»

Comparing the back squat and the sled, Maddigan et al. (2014) compared the erector spinae muscle activity during the back squat performed with 10RM and the weighted sled push at a 20 step maximum.

Exploring stability at the hand, Maeo et al. (2014) compared erector spinae muscle activity when performing push ups on the ground or utilising a suspension system.

Not exact matches

Comparing free weight and machine squats, while some researchers have reported lower erector spinae muscle activity in the Smith machine squat than in the free weight back squat, with both the same absolute (Anderson and Behm, 2005) and relative (Fletcher and Bagley, 2014) loads, Schwanbeck et al. (2009) found no differences (using the same relative loads).

Comparing upper and lower body exercises, Comfort et al. (2011) explored lower erector spinae muscle activity in the back, squat front squat and the standing barbell press with a load of 40 kg.

Jackson et al. (2008) compared the COV of the EMG amplitude (linear envelope) in the thoracic and lumbar erector spinae between MVICs and SVICs, during prone, seated, and standing trunk flexion tasks.

Additionally, they reported superior lower erector spinae muscle activity during the bent over row and inverted row compared to the standing cable row.

Comparing the effect external resistance type, Saeterbakken et al. (2014) explored erector spinae muscle activity during the back squat with 6RM loads using either a barbell or a combination of a barbell and elastic resistance (where elastic resistance comprised between 25 — 40 % total load, depending on the phase of the lift).

Furthermore, both upper and lower erector spinae muscle activity were higher in the descending phase compared to the ascending phase at knee joint angles of 90 — 61 degrees (lift - off and lower third).

Erector spinae muscle activity was superior in the front squat and the superman exercises compared to the other exercises, and the back squat produced greater erector spinae muscle activity compared to the standing barbell press.

Willardson et al. (2009) reported that the erector spinae displayed significantly greater muscle activity compared to the back squat but this depended upon the exact region measured and this was unclear.

Comparing compound and stability exercises, Comfort et al. (2011) explored lower erector spinae muscle activity during the back squat, front squat, the standing barbell press, plank and superman on a swiss ball.

Exploring the kettlebell swing, Andersen et al. (2015) compared the kettlebell swing performed with 1 or 2 hands on erector spinae muscle activity.

They reported superior erector spinae muscle activity in the front squat compared to the back squat, possibly because of the difference in relative load.

Comparing a range of compound exercises, McAllister et al. (2014) explored erector spinae muscle activity during the leg curl, good morning, glute - ham raise, and Romanian deadlift with 85 % of 1RM.

The deadlift produced the greatest erector spinae muscle activity compared to all other exercises.

Nuzzo et al. (2008) compared the upper (at L1) and lower (at L5) erector spinae muscle activity during the birddog, hip bridge with feet on swiss ball, and back extension from a swiss ball.

Additionally, isolation exercises such as the glute - ham raise and prone leg curl appear to be effective (and in some cases) superior exercises for producing high levels of erector spinae muscle activity compared with some other isolation and compound exercises.

Comparing the back squat and deadlift, Hamlyn et al. (2007) explored erector spinae muscle activity using 80 % of 1RM load.

Comparing the effect of external resistance type, Vinstrup et al. (2015) explored erector spinae muscle activity during a machine trunk rotation exercise and a standing torso twist exercise with elastic resistance.

Comparing the effect of load, Vigotsky et al. (2014) explored the muscle activity of the lumbar (at L3) and thoracic (at T9) erector spinae during the good morning exercise performed with varying relative loads (50 — 90 % of 1RM).

They reported erector spinae muscle activity was markedly reduced when using the foam cushion compared to the when using the floor.

Comparing the effect of exercise variation, Fenwick et al. (2009) compared rowing exercises with varying degrees of spinal loading on upper and lower erector spinae muscle activity.

They reported that the upper and lower instability condition produced superior erector spinae muscle activity compared to the upper body instability condition (23 ± 28 % vs. 7 ± 4 % MVIC).

Therefore, even when using low loads, compound exercises display superior erector spinae muscle activity compared to front and side plank exercises.

The squat and deadlift exercise produce superior erector spinae muscle activity compared to unloaded core exercises such as the front and side plank, superman and quadruped arm - and - leg lift regardless of the stability requirement.

They reported superior upper (at T9) erector spinae muscle activity when performing the bench press compared with the standing cable press.

Upper erector spinae displays greater muscle activity in the deadlift compared to the back squat.

Therefore, it appears that erector spinae muscle activity is higher during deeper squats compared to shallower squats.

In contrast, upper erector spinae (L1 and L2) displayed superior muscle activity in the conventional deadlift when compared to the back squat.

Assessing the effect of bar velocity, Manabe et al. (2007) found that performing the back squat with quicker speeds with the same relative load increased erector spinae muscle activity when compared to slower speeds.

They reported that erector spinae muscle activity was superior in the elastic resistance condition compared with to the machine condition.

Despite greater 10RM loads in the partial squat (78.4 ± 4.6 kg) compared to the parallel squat (51.2 ± 3.1 kg), erector spinae muscle activity was superior when performing the parallel squat condition.

They reported that erector spinae muscle activity was greater in the ascending phase compared to the descending phase but there was no difference between squat conditions.

In contrast, Comfort et al. (2011) compared the front and back squat with the same absolute load of 40 kg to the superman exercise and reported no difference in lower erector spinae muscle activity.

Comparing two different velocities using an isokinetic machine deadlift, Noe et al. (1992) found no differences in erector spinae muscle activity between two different bar speeds (45.7 vs. 30.5 cm / s).

Similarly, Andersen et al. (2014) compared the back squat and split squat with the same relative loads (6RM) and also found no difference in erector spinae muscle activity between conditions.

The erector spinae muscle activity was significantly greater at all loads when performing the back squat compared with the overhead squat.

When comparing the bent over row to the inverted row they reported superior muscle activity in the lower erector spinae in the bent over row but no differences between exercises in the upper erector spinae.

Therefore, it appears that the erector spinae displays greater muscle activity in the upper region in the deadlift compared to the back squat, but it is unclear whether a difference in muscle activity exists between the deadlift and the back squat in the lower erector spinae.

During the 1 handed swing, the opposite side (from the kettlebell hand) upper erector spinae displayed superior muscle activity compared to the kettlebell side (35 ± 15 vs. 42 ± 13 %), while there was no difference in lower erector spinae muscle activity between sides.

Exploring the effect of stability on erector spinae muscle activity, Saeterbakken et al. (2013) compared the bench press performed with loads equal to the 6RM on a stable bench, a balance cushion and a swiss ball.

Comparing barbell squat variations, Aspe et al. (2014) explored the erector spinae during back squats and overhead squats with loads equal to 60, 75 and 90 % of 3RM.

Similarly, Hamlyn et al. (2007) found that the back squat and deadlift performed with 80 % of 1RM produced superior erector spinae muscle activity compared to the side plank.

Finally, comparing the Romanian deadlift with various other exercises, McAllister et al. (2014) reported that erector spinae muscle activity was lower in the Romanian deadlift than in the glute - ham raise but similar in the Romanian deadlift and good morning exercises.