CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 81Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesSports Performance and TrainingKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques

Comparison of the angles and corresponding moments in the knee and hip during restricted and unrestricted squats

Lorenzetti, Silvio, Gülay, Turgut, Stoop, Mirjam, List, Renate, Gerber, Hans, Schellenberg, Florian, Stüssi, Edgar·2012·Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
DOI 10.1519/jsc.0b013e318267918b
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Lorenzetti, S, Gülay, T, Stoop, M, List, R, Gerber, H, Schellenberg, F, and Stüssi, E. Comparison of the angles and corresponding moments in the knee and hip during restricted and unrestricted squats. J Strength Cond Res 26(10): 2829–2836, 2012—The aim of this study was to compare the angles and corresponding moments in the knee and hip during squats. Twenty subjects performed restricted and unrestricted squats with barbell loads that were 0, ¼, and ½ their body weight. The experimental setup consisted of a motion capture system and 2 force plates. The moments were calculated using inverse dynamics. During the unrestricted squats, the maximum moments in the knee were significantly higher, and those in the hip were significantly lower than during restricted squats. At the lowest position, the maximum knee flexion angles were approximately 86° for the restricted and approximately 106° for the unrestricted techniques, whereas the maximum hip flexion angle was between 95° and 100°. The higher moments in the hip during restricted squats suggest a higher load of the lower back. Athletes who aim to strengthen their quadriceps should consider unrestricted squats because of the larger knee load and smaller back load.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1519/jsc.0b013e318267918b

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.

    “Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.9,10,16–18”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

  • During a typical squat, the resultant ground reaction force vector passes anterior to the hip and posterior to the knee, thereby creating flexion moments at both joints.

    “During a typical squat, the resultant ground reaction force vector passes anterior to the hip and posterior to the knee, thereby creating flexion moments at both joints (Figure 1).9”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

  • The moments at the hip and knee during squatting are highly influenced by the orientation of the trunk, which in turn affects the center of mass of the body.

    “The moments at the hip and knee during squatting are highly influenced by the orientation of the trunk, which in turn affects the center of mass of the body.9,10”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

  • Moving the tibia from a more upright position to a more forward position shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment during squatting.

    “Moving the tibia from a more upright position (Figure 3A) to more forward position (Figure 3B) shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment.”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lorenzetti, S., Gülay, T., Stoop, M., List, R., Gerber, H., Schellenberg, F., & Stüssi, E.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Lorenzetti, Silvio
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2012-10
Volume
26
Issue
10
Pages
2829-2836
ISSN
1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1519/jsc.0b013e318267918b
OpenAlex
W2004537925
Cited by
81
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Keywords
squatting, knee joint angle, hip joint angle, knee joint moments, hip joint moments, quadriceps strengthening, squat technique
MeSH terms
Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Female, Hip, Humans, Knee, Male, Posture, Weight Lifting, Quadriceps Muscle, Muscle Strength, Young Adult

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