Cited by 35Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesSports Dynamics and BiomechanicsSports Performance and Training

Biomechanics of the squat exercise using a modified center of mass bar

LANDER, JEFFREY E., BATES, BARRY T., DEVITA, PAUL·1986·Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of load height on selected performance characteristics of a squat exercise. A lower center of mass bar was designed that allowed the integrity of the squat exercise to be maintained while possibly reducing the chances of injury. Five trials were performed with the center of mass of the bar was set at shoulder height (C1) and lowered 18% (C2) and 36% (C3) of the subject's height below the normal bar position using the inverted "U" bar. All trials were filmed as the subjects lifted on a force platform. A balloon catheter was inserted into the subject's recta to monitor intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). High correlations were found between IAP, joint moment, and force data. Many of the critical parameters occurred just after the lowest squat position. Significant differences (P less than 0.05) in trunk angle excursion and trunk angular velocity indicated a greater ease of hip extension for the center of mass bar conditions. No differences were observed between conditions for thigh and knee angles and joint moments indicating kinematic similarity for the lower extremity. IAP was always least for C2 and C3, while compression, shear, and back muscle forces did not differ. It was estimated that the greater IAP was responsible for relieving back muscle forces and compression by up to 15 and 21%, respectively, and increased stress with the weight at shoulder height stimulated a response for greater IAP to help alleviate the stresses on the spine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1249/00005768-198608000-00017

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To the best of the authors' knowledge, no previous study has considered how angular and linear kinematics of the back squat vary at different load intensities.

    “However, these studies have evaluated the biomechanics of different types of squats but, to the best of our knowledge, none of these have considered how these can vary at different load intensities.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
LANDER, J. E., BATES, B. T., & DEVITA, P.
Affiliations
University of Oregon (US)
Venue
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
1986-08
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
469???478
ISSN
0195-9131 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087358544
Cited by
34
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
Keywords
squatting, load height, intra-abdominal pressure, trunk kinematics, hip extension, spinal compression, joint moments, lower limb kinematics
MeSH terms
Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Physical Exertion, Humans, Joints, Male, Movement, Muscle Contraction, Muscles, Pressure, Spine, Sports, Weight Lifting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review