Article

Male and female gluteal muscle activity and lower extremity kinematics during running

East Carolina University, Department of Physical Therapy, Greenville, NC 27858, USA
Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) (Impact Factor: 1.88). 09/2012; 27(10). DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2012.08.008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain is one of the most common lower extremity overuse injuries in runners and is significantly more common in females. This study evaluated differences in the timing and magnitude of gluteal muscle activity as well as hip and knee joint frontal and transverse plane kinematics between male and female runners in the context of this gender bias. METHODS: Twenty healthy male and 20 healthy female runners were participants. Three-dimensional lower extremity kinematics, and gluteus medius and gluteus maximus muscle activation were recorded using motion analysis and electromyography as subjects ran at 3.7m/s (+/-5%). Comparisons of hip and knee joint kinematic and gluteus muscle activation data were made using independent t-tests (α=0.05). FINDINGS: Females ran with 40% greater peak gluteus maximus activation level (P=0.028, effect size=0.79) and 53% greater average activation level (P=0.013, effect size=0.93) than males. Female runners also displayed greater hip adduction (P=.001, effect size=1.20) and knee abduction (P=0.011, effect size=0.87) angles at initial contact, greater hip adduction at peak vertical ground reaction force (P<0.001, effect size=1.31), and less knee internal rotation excursion than males (P=0.035, effect size=0.71). INTERPRETATION: Greater gluteus maximus activation levels during running may predispose females to earlier gluteus maximus fatigue, promoting altered lower extremity running kinematics thought to be associated with the etiology of patellofemoral pain. Gender differences in transverse and frontal plane hip and knee kinematics observed in this study may also contribute to the gender bias for patellofemoral pain among females.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Thomas W Kernozek, Jul 19, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
433 Views
  • Source
    • "As hypothesized, running, sprinting, and climbing produced greater muscle activity in the gluteals compared with walking (Figs. 3 and 4). Unlike previous studies (Chumanov et al., 2008; Willson et al., 2012), we found no difference in GMAX muscle activity between males and females (all P-values 0.863). Therefore, we pooled the data for further analysis. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It has been suggested that the uniquely large gluteus maximus (GMAX) muscles were an important adaptation during hominin evolution based on numerous anatomical differences between humans and extant apes. GMAX electromyographic (EMG) signals have been quantified for numerous individual movements, but not across the range of locomotor gaits and speeds for the same subjects. Thus, comparing relative EMG amplitudes between these activities has not been possible. We assessed the EMG activity of the gluteal muscles during walking, running, sprinting, and climbing. To gain further insight into the function of the gluteal muscles during locomotion, we measured muscle activity during walking and running with external devices that increased or decreased the need to control either forward or backward trunk pitch. We hypothesized that 1) GMAX EMG activity would be greatest during sprinting and climbing and 2) GMAX EMG activity would be modulated in response to altered forward trunk pitch demands during running. We found that GMAX activity in running was greater than walking and similar to climbing. However, the activity during sprinting was much greater than during running. Further, only the inferior portion of the GMAX had a significant change with altered trunk pitch demands, suggesting that the hip extensors have a limited contribution to the control of trunk pitch movements during running. Overall, our data suggest that the large size of the GMAX reflects its multifaceted role during rapid and powerful movements rather than as a specific adaptation for a single submaximal task such as endurance running. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 01/2014; 153(1). DOI:10.1002/ajpa.22419 · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "As hypothesized, running, sprinting, and climbing produced greater muscle activity in the gluteals compared with walking (Figs. 3 and 4). Unlike previous studies (Chumanov et al., 2008; Willson et al., 2012), we found no difference in GMAX muscle activity between males and females (all P-values 0.863). Therefore, we pooled the data for further analysis. "
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare running gait in children with and without developmental coordination disorder (DCD). Fourteen boys with DCD (9.5±1 yr) and 14 typically developing (TD) controls (9.6±1 yr) ran at a velocity of 2.44±0.25m/s along a 15m track, with kinematic and kinetic data of the trunk and lower limb obtained for three cycles of each limb using a 12-camera Vicon MX system and AMTI force plate. Although features of the kinematic and kinetic trajectories were similar between groups, the DCD group displayed decreased peak knee extension compared with the TD group prior to initial foot contact (p=0.016). Furthermore, the DCD group displayed increased variability in sagittal plane kinematics at the hip and ankle during toe off compared with the TD group. Kinetic analysis revealed that children with DCD displayed significantly reduced knee extensor moments during the stance phase of the running cycle (p=0.033). Consequently, peak knee power absorption and ankle power generation was significantly lower in the DCD group (p=0.041; p=0.017). Furthermore, there was a trend for children with DCD to have shorter strides (p=0.052, ES=0.499) and a longer stance period than the TD controls (p=0.06, ES=0.729). These differences may have implications for the economy of running and subsequently the planning of targeted intervention programs to improve running gait in children with DCD.
    Gait & posture 12/2012; 38(2). DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.11.028 · 2.30 Impact Factor
Show more