Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the barbell hip thrust exercise is widely performed in resistance training programs, evidence on its effectiveness to inducing glutes muscle hypertrophy is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of performing 45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift (L-S) vs. performing 45º leg press, stiff-leg deadlift plus barbell hip thrust (L-S-BHT) on gluteus maximus muscle size.
METHODS: The participants were 33 untrained young women randomly separated into 2 resistance training groups: L-S (n = 15) and L-S-BHT (n = 18). The muscle thickness of the gluteus maximus was assessed through B-mode ultrasound before and after 30 resistance training sessions. The resistance training program was carried out over 10 weeks, 3 days week-1.
RESULTS: Both training regimens elicited significant increases in gluteus maximus muscle thickness from pre to posttraining (P < 0.001). Notably, L-S-BHT had superior augments (L-S-BHT = +9.3% vs. L-S = +6.0%, P = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: The current results suggest that performing barbell hip thrust, in addition to 45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift, enhances muscle hypertrophy of the gluteus maximus compared to performing exclusively 45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift.

Full text

Addition of The Barbell
Hip Thrust Elicits Greater
Increases in Gluteus
Maximus Muscle Thickness
in Untrained Young Women
Witalo Kassiano1, Gabriel Kunevaliki1, Bruna Costa1, João Pedro Nunes1,2, Pâmela Castro-E-Souza1, Ian
Tricoli1, Alex S. Ribeiro3 and Edilson S. Cyrino1
1Metabolism, Nutrition and Exercise Laboratory, Physical Education and Sport Center, State University of Londrina,
Londrina, PR, Brazil, 2School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia,
3University of Coimbra, FCDEF, Coimbra, Portugal
Kassiano, W., Kunevaliki, G., Costa, B., Nunes, J. P., Castro-E-Souza, P., Tricoli, I., Ribeiro, A.
S., & Cyrino, E. S. (2024). Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in Gluteus
Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women.
International Journal of Strength and Conditioning
https://doi.org/10.47206/ijsc.v4i1.284
ABSTRACT
Background: Although the barbell hip thrust exercise
is widely performed in resistance training programs,
evidence on its effectiveness to inducing glutes
muscle hypertrophy is limited. Therefore, this study
aimed to compare the effects of performing 45º leg
press and stiff-leg deadlift (L-S) vs. performing 45º
leg press, stiff-leg deadlift plus barbell hip thrust
(L-S-BHT) on gluteus maximus muscle size.
Methods: The participants were 33 untrained young
women randomly separated into 2 resistance
training groups: L-S (n = 15) and L-S-BHT (n = 18).
The muscle thickness of the gluteus maximus was
assessed through B-mode ultrasound before and
after 30 resistance training sessions. The resistance
training program was carried out over 10 weeks, 3
days week-1.
Results: Both training regimens elicited signicant
increases in gluteus maximus muscle thickness
from pre to post-training (P < 0.001). Notably, L-S-
BHT had superior augments (L-S-BHT = +9.3% vs.
L-S = +6.0%, P = 0.016).
Conclusion: The current results suggest that
performing barbell hip thrust, in addition to 45º
leg press and stiff-leg deadlift, enhances muscle
hypertrophy of the gluteus maximus compared to
performing exclusively 45º leg press and stiff-leg
deadlift.
Keywords: resistance training, muscle thickness,
ultrasound, exercise selection.
INTRODUCTION
Superior muscle hypertrophy is frequently observed
when performing higher resistance training
volumes (24); training volume herein operationally
dened as the number of sets per muscle group
performed to or near task failure (1). Based on this,
it is reasonable that increasing resistance training
volume by adding sets of different resistance
exercises to target a specic musculature would
enhance muscle growth—e.g., performing barbell
hip thrust in addition to leg press to increase gluteus
maximus hypertrophy. However, controversy exists
as to whether this strategy in fact elicits superior
increases in muscle hypertrophy (23). For instance,
in a recent meta-analysis, Rosa et al. (23) reported
trivial differences when comparing multi-joint versus
multi-joint plus single joint resistance exercises,
even with greater number of sets for multi-joint
and single-joint condition. Importantly, only seven
studies met the inclusion criteria, leading to a
relatively imprecise estimate of the magnitude of
the effect (23). Thus, additional studies on the topic
are needed to draw stronger general inferences;
especially regarding the hypertrophic effects of
exercise addition on other muscles, such as the
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
gluteus maximus.
The gluteus maximus is a large muscle primarily
responsible for hip extension (27), which plays an
important role in improving performance, health,
and aesthetics (19). In this regard, practitioners and
athletes have been interested in how to optimize
adaptations in this muscle. Exercises often included
in hypertrophy-oriented training programs are
squat, lunge, 45º leg press, stiff-leg deadlift, and
barbell hip thrust (4, 5, 8, 13). There are indications
that squat, and leg press effectively induce gluteus
maximus hypertrophy (14, 22). In contrast, ndings
are limited for the other exercises, as is the case
for the barbell hip thrust. Notably, the gluteus
maximus excitation is superior during the barbell
hip thrust compared to the squat (5, 7). However,
muscle excitation, per se, may not correspond to
an exercise’s hypertrophic potential (26). Thus, the
efcacy of the barbell hip thrust in inducing gluteus
maximus hypertrophy remains to be determined.
Since resistance exercises may stimulate the same
muscle differently, it is possible to speculate that
their combination would optimize the hypertrophy of
specic targeted musculature. Thus, we compared
the effects of performing exclusively leg press
and stiff-leg deadlift vs. leg press, stiff-leg deadlift
plus barbell hip thrust on gluteus maximus muscle
thickness. We hypothesized that leg press and
stiff-leg dead-lift would induce gluteus maximus
hypertrophy but adding barbell hip thrust would
further enhance the gains.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participants
This study’s sample comprised a total of 33 healthy
untrained young women (L-S, n = 15 [22.6 ± 3.7
years, 59.4 ± 7.6 kg, 163.2 ± 5.7 cm]; L-S-BHT,
n = 18 [22.3 ± 4.4 years, 60.0 ± 13.9 kg, 161.9
± 5.3 cm]). Volunteers were contacted through
dissemination on social media and folders on
the campus of the local University. All volunteers
underwent a clinical anamnesis and answered the
physical activity readiness questionnaire (PAR-Q).
The inclusion criteria were not responding “yes”
to one or more PAR-Q questions; not having
osteoarticular problems that could compromise the
performance of the resistance training program;
not being a user of anabolic steroids and/or dietary
supplements (self-reported information); and not
being engaged in resistance training for at least
6 months before starting the participation. All
subjects were instructed to maintain their routines
and habitual eating habits. This investigation was
conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki
and the project was approved by the Institution’s
Ethics Committee of State University of Londrina
(protocol number: 3.930.966). All subjects were
informed of the inherent risks and benets and
signed an informed consent form.
Study Design
This was a between-group repeated measures
design in which subjects were randomly allocated
to one of two possible resistance training regimens:
45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift (L-S) or 45º
leg press, stiff-leg deadlift plus barbell hip thrust
(L-S-BHT). This study is part of a larger research
project designed to analyze the effects of a whole-
body resistance training protocol on untrained
young women. In this sense, subjects performed
lat pull-down and bench press in addition to the
lower-limbs exercises (same training protocol for
both groups). Before the training intervention,
subjects performed 2 weeks of familiarization (6
training sessions interspersed by 48 hours) with the
specic resistance exercises. Seventy-two hours
after the nal familiarization session, the muscle
thickness of the gluteus maximus was measured.
The resistance training period was initiated, with
groups performing their respective training regimen
(i.e., L-S or L-S-BHT). The resistance training
program was performed three times a week, for
10 weeks, totalling 30 training sessions. Each
training session was composed of 2 sets of 10–15
repetitions maximum in each specic resistance
exercise. Reassessments of muscle thickness were
performed at an interval of 72–120 hours after the
nal training session (session 30).
Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness Measurement
The muscle thickness measurements of the gluteus
maximus were taken via B-mode ultrasound (Logiq
P5, GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) with a 7.5-
MHz linear probe (8L-RS; GE Healthcare). Before
starting the assessment, subjects were placed
in a prone position on a stretcher and rested for
10 minutes before the start of the assessment.
Gluteus maximus muscle thickness measurement
was performed at 50% of the distance between
the sacral vertebra and the greater trochanter of
the femur. A generous quantity of water-soluble
transmission gel was applied over the assessed
muscle, without compressing the skin. Two
assessors, blinded to group allocation, participated
in measurement procedures, so the rst handled
Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in
Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women
2
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Kassiano, W., Kunevaliki, G., Costa, B., Nunes, J. P., Castro-E-
Souza, P., Tricoli, I., Ribeiro, A. S., & Cyrino, E. S.
the probe, and the second was responsible for
freezing the images. When the image quality
was deemed to be satisfactory, it was stored and
analyzed using the Image J software, version 1.46
(National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).
The same evaluators performed baseline and post-
training measurements. The depth of the images
was adjusted according to the thickness of the
muscle of each subject and ranged between 10.0
and 14.0 cm. All conguration parameters were
kept constant (frequency = 7.5-MHz, dynamic
range = 75 dB, gain = 49 dB). Images were saved
for posterior analysis in a blinded fashion, with the
researcher unaware of the subjects’ names and their
training group. Representative muscle thickness of
gluteus maximus from one subject is presented in
Figure 1. Twelve subjects were randomly chosen
to be evaluated on two days separated by 72
hours to determine the reliability of the muscle
thickness measurements. The intraclass correlation
coefcient for the gluteus maximus was 0.975; the
coefcient of variation was 1.9%; the standard error
of measurement was 0.073 cm.
Resistance Training Program
The resistance training program was performed
thrice weekly (Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fri-
days) in the afternoon for 10 weeks. The 45º leg
press was performed in a specic device (Ipi-
ranga®, Presidente Prudente, SP, Brazil) with
weight plates. The stiff-leg deadlift was performed
with barbell and weight plates. During the 45º leg
press and stiff-leg deadlift, the feet were positioned
between hip- and shoulder-width apart, with the
toes pointed slightly outward (9). The hip thrust was
performed with barbell and weight plates, having
the subjects’ upper backs on a bench. The barbell
was padded with a thick bar pad and placed over
the subjects’ hips. During the barbell hip thrust,
subjects’ feet were slightly wider than shoulder-
width apart, with toes pointed slightly outward
(5). Representative photos of the initial and nal
phase of each lower limb exercise are presented
in Figure 2. These exercises were interspersed
by lat pull-down and bench press in the following
order: 45º leg press, lat pull-down, stiff-leg deadlift,
bench press, and barbell hip thrust (only the L-S-
BHT group performed it). The resistance exercises
were performed in 2 sets of 10–15 repetitions,
executed until momentary concentric failure (i.e.,
the point where, despite trying to do so, subjects
cannot complete a concentric muscle action) (25).
Whenever the subjects reached 15 repetitions in a
given set and reported that they could perform ≥
1 repetition, the weight was increased by 5–10%
for the next set to ensure that the participants
kept performing the sets to (or very near to) failure
3
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
Figure 1. Typical ultrasound image of gluteus maximus.
Note. Image of a participant with the following characteristics: body mass = 58.6
kg, height = 166.0 cm, body mass index = 21.2 kg/m2.

4
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in
Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women
Figure 2. Illustrative photos of 45º leg press (A), stiff-leg deadlift (B), and barbell hip thrust (C) exercises.

International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Kassiano, W., Kunevaliki, G., Costa, B., Nunes, J. P., Castro-E-
Souza, P., Tricoli, I., Ribeiro, A. S., & Cyrino, E. S.
5
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
in the established repetition range. A 2-min rest
interval was given between sets and 3-min between
exercises. Exercises were performed in a tempo of
1/1/2/0 (concentric, concentric-eccentric transition,
eccentric, and eccentric-concentric transition
phases, respectively). Subjects performed all
training sessions under specialized supervision
(1:2 participant: supervisor ratio) to ensure proper
technique and safety.
Statistical Analysis
Data distribution and variance homogeneity were
veried through Shapiro-Wilk’s and Levene’s tests,
respectively. The independent t-test was used to
compare the baseline characteristics and training
attendance between groups. The effects of different
resistance training programs (L-S vs. L-S-BHT) on
gluteus maximus muscle thickness were compared
using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of the
raw difference between baseline and post-training
values with the baseline score as a covariate.
Bonferroni’s post hoc test was used to identify the
differences between pre and post-training raw data
when the F-ratio was signicant. The P values for
group comparisons were also presented. The effect
of time was interpreted from the 95% condence
interval (95% CI) of the mean difference pre to post-
training (i.e., there was a signicant difference when
the inferior and superior condence limits did not
cross zero). The effect size (ES) was calculated as
post-training group mean minus the pre-training
mean, divided by the groups-pooled pre-training
standard deviation (3). For all statistical analyses,
signicance was accepted at P < 0.05. The data
were stored and analyzed using Jeffreys’s Amazing
Statistics Program (JASP) software (version 0.14.1,
Amsterdam, NL). The data are presented as mean
and standard deviations.
RESULTS
Baseline and training attendance comparisons
No signicant differences were found between
groups at baseline for any of the compared variables
(P ≥ 0.41). Training session attendance was 88.2 ±
5.0% for the L-S, and 89.0 ± 5.4% for the L-S-BHT,
with no difference between the groups (P = 0.64).
Muscle thickness of gluteus maximus
There was signicant increase in muscle thickness
of the gluteus maximus from pre to post-training
for L-S (meandiff = 0.25 cm [95% CI: 0.14; 0.35],
P < 0.01) and L-S-BHT (meandiff = 0.40 cm [95%
CI: 0.31; 0.49], P < 0.01). A signicant group effect
was observed for the changes in gluteus maximus
muscle thickness (F = 6.45; P = 0.01), indicating
greater increases for L-S-BHT (between-groups
meandiff = 0.15 cm [95% CI: 0.03; 0.27]). Pre and
post-training muscle thickness were as follows: L-S
= 4.26 ± 0.46 and 4.51 ± 0.49; L-S-BHT = 4.40 ±
0.50 and 4.80 ± 0.51. Figure 3 shows the individual
relative changes in the gluteus maximus muscle
thickness (L-S = +6.0%, ES = 0.52; L-S-BHT =
+9.3%, ES = 0.83).
Repetitions and load
Table 1 shows the number of repetitions and weight
in the rst and last training session.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to examine the
Figure 3. Changes from pre to posttraining period for glu-
teus maximus muscle thickness.
Note. †P < 0.05 vs. L-S. The horizontal lines represent
mean and 95% condence intervals, whereas each circle
represents individual responses. L-S = 45º leg press and
stiff-leg deadlift (n = 15); L-S-BHT = 45º leg press, stiff-leg
deadlift plus barbell hip thrust (n = 18).

International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in
Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women
6
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
effects of two different resistance training regimens
(L-S and L-S-BHT) on changes in muscle thickness
of the gluteus maximus in untrained young women.
The main nding of this study was that adding
a hip-focused resistance exercise to a lower-
limb resistance training regime inuenced the
magnitude of increases in muscle thickness of the
gluteus maximus. Specically, both training groups
increased muscle thickness of the gluteus maximus
in response to 10 weeks of regimented resistance
training. Importantly, the L-S-BHT (i.e., performing
45º leg press, stiff-leg deadlift plus barbell hip thrust)
elicited greater gains on the gluteus maximus size
compared to the L-S (i.e., performing exclusively
45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift). Therefore,
our hypotheses that a) performing exclusively 45º
leg press and stiff-leg deadlift effectively induces
gluteus maximus hypertrophy and b) adding barbell
hip thrust would elicit greater gains were conrmed.
Potential mechanisms and explanations for our
results are presented following.
The rst nding of the present study was that
exclusively performing the 45º leg press and stiff-
leg deadlift was effective in inducing muscle
hypertrophy of the gluteus maximus. Regarding the
45º leg press, our results are in line with a previous
study that observed hypertrophy of the gluteus
maximus after 8 weeks of leg press training in non-
resistance trained young men (22). Given that the
glutes are primarily hip extensors, it is probably one
of the main muscles to contribute during the stiff-
leg deadlift (17). This corroborates with the ndings
suggesting similar muscle excitation (measured by
surface electromyography [sEMG]) of the gluteus
maximus during the stiff-leg deadlift and squat (17).
Thus, it is plausible to suggest that 45º leg press
and stiff-leg deadlift acted synergistically to elicit
gluteus maximus hypertrophy. Interestingly, based
on the greater perpendicular distance between the
axis of rotation and the line of force, both exercises
likely impose peak forces in the position where the
gluteus maximus is at longer lengths (i.e., at the
start of the concentric phase). Thus, it is reasonable
to suggest that the results observed in the present
investigation—as well as in previous studies with
leg press (22) and squat (14)—may be attributable
to the combination of high peak forces imposed
while the gluteus maximus is more elongated.
Indeed, growing evidence suggests that training
specic muscles at longer muscle lengths optimizes
hypertrophy (10, 16). For example, a previous study
observed that full squat training which trains gluteus
maximus at longer lengths was more effective in
inducing gluteus maximus hypertrophy than half
squat training in non-resistance trained individuals
(14). Among the potential explanations for these
ndings, one that stands out is based on the length-
tension relationship (11, 27). Specically, muscles
that have bers that work on the descending
limb of the length-tension curve may experience
greater overall mechanical tension (due to the sum
of forces from the active and passive elements)
when trained at longer muscle lengths (15) and,
as a consequence, experience stretch-mediated
hypertrophy (11, 20). This conceivably helps to
explain, at least in part, the muscle hypertrophy of
the gluteus maximus observed in the group that
performed exclusively 45º leg press and stiff-leg
deadlift. However, it is important to note that, to
the best of our knowledge, the working sarcomere
length ranges of the gluteus maximus have not yet
been measured (21). Therefore, this explanation
needs investigations to verify its support with
empirical data.
The second nding of the present study was that
adding the barbell hip thrust enhanced muscle
growth of the gluteus maximus. Notably, sEMG
studies have reported heightened muscle excitation
of the gluteus maximus during the barbell hip thrust,
comparable to or greater than other exercises such
as squats (5, 7). Importantly, concerns have arisen
Table 1. Means and standard deviation of pre (rst-session) and post-intervention (last session) repetitions and load.
45º leg press Stiff-leg deadlift Barbell hip thrust
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
L-S Load (kg) 65.3 ± 32.8 105.8 ±
39.5 17.3 ± 4.4 29.2 ± 6.2 *** ***
Reps (n) 12.1 ± 2.1 14.0 ± 1.4 14.1 ± 1.7 14.3 ± 1.2 *** ***
L-S-BHT Load (kg) 66.7 ± 30.8 105.9 ±
36.9 15.3 ± 3.3 29.4 ± 5.1 27.0 ± 5.6 64.9 ± 15.4
Reps (n) 12.8 ± 2.4 14.2 ± 1.0 14.3 ± 1.3 14.0 ± 1.2 13.8 ± 1.3 14.8 ± 1.6
Note. We averaged across sets; the values represent the average per set within session. L-S = 45º leg press and
stiff-leg deadlift; L-S-BHT = 45º leg press, stiff-leg deadlift plus barbell hip thrust.

7
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Kassiano, W., Kunevaliki, G., Costa, B., Nunes, J. P., Castro-E-
Souza, P., Tricoli, I., Ribeiro, A. S., & Cyrino, E. S.
regarding the effectiveness of sEMG amplitude as
a valid indicator of the hypertrophic potential of
an exercise (26); denoting the importance of long-
term investigations. For example, a muscle may
exhibit greater sEMG amplitude at shortened than
at lengthened muscle length (26), however greater
hypertrophy is often observed when muscles
are trained at longer muscle lengths (11). In this
sense, our study adds an important nding to the
literature when presenting the hypertrophic effects
of performing the barbell hip thrust. Regarding the
potential explanations for the increased hypertrophy
with the addition of the barbell hip thrust, we
highlight exercise biomechanics. The barbell hip
thrust imposes high forces throughout the entire
lifting phase (2, 6) with substantial peak forces at
the full hip extension. Interestingly, the gluteus
maximus has a greater internal moment arm length
with increasing proximity to full hip extension (27).
Therefore, the resistance prole of the barbell hip
thrust ts with the ability of the gluteus maximus
to produce force and contribute to hip extension
torque. This may have enhanced the stimulus for
the glutes and led to the noted greater hypertrophy
for the gluteus maximus.
This t between the resistance prole of the
barbell hip thrust and the contribution capacity
of the gluteus maximus is important because
other muscles (such as hamstrings, and adductor
magnus) play an important role during the task of
hip extension (18, 27). Notably, the contribution of
the hamstrings and adductor magnus is greater
with increased hip exion and lower with increased
hip extension (18, 27). Therefore, it is likely that
during the performance of the barbell hip thrust, the
gluteus maximus plays a greater role than during
other exercises involving peak forces with increased
hip exion (e.g., leg press, stiff-leg deadlift, squat,
etc.). Moreover, it is interesting to note that in the top
portion of the barbell hip thrust, the gluteus maximus
is at shorter muscle lengths. Of note, this factor
conicts with the previously raised hypothesis that
the gluteus maximus bers work on the descending
limb of the length-tension curve. In this sense, it is
plausible to suggest that the gluteus maximus has
bers that work on the descending limb as well as
in the plateau portion (21). This conceivably helps
to reconcile the fact that the gluteus maximus
hypertrophies in longer and shorter lengths.
Our study has limitations that need to be addressed.
First, in both groups, the subjects performed a
combination of exercises; for the L-S group, 45º leg
press and stiff-leg deadlift, for the L-S-BHT group,
45º leg press, and stiff-leg deadlift, plus barbell hip
thrust. This characteristic of the training program
prevents us from inferring how much each exercise,
in particular, contributed to the hypertrophy
observed in the present study. Especially when
trying to determine how much hypertrophy was
induced by the 45º leg press and the stiff leg
deadlift individually. Therefore, future studies should
compare the hypertrophic effects of these exercises
separately. It is important to note that hypertrophy-
oriented resistance training programs are commonly
comprised of a variety of exercises (8, 12). This
highlights the external validity of our study. Second,
we measured the changes in muscle thickness at
one site of the gluteus maximus to express muscle
hypertrophy; a more valid substitute would be
the change in total muscle volume. Furthermore,
given that the gluteus has different subdivisions,
measurements in different regions could indicate
whether the hypertrophy could be regional. Finally,
we measured exclusively untrained young women.
Thus, future studies should consider testing subjects
of different ages, sexes, and training statuses.
CONCLUSION
Our ndings highlight that adding a hip-focused
exercise inuences the magnitude of gluteus
maximus muscle hypertrophy in response to
regimented resistance training. More specically, in
the present study, both regimens—i.e., performing
exclusively 45º leg press and stiff-leg deadlift
and performing 45º leg press, stiff-leg deadlift,
plus barbell hip thrust—were effective in eliciting
gluteus maximus muscle hypertrophy after 10
weeks of resistance training in untrained young
women. Notably, muscle size growth was greater
with the addition of the barbell hip thrust. From a
practical perspective, strength and conditioning
professionals and practitioners should consider the
inclusion of barbell hip thrust in gluteus maximus
hypertrophy-orientated training program.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors certify that there is no conict of interest
with any nancial organization regarding the
material discussed in the manuscript.
FUNDING
The authors report no involvement in the research

International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Addition of The Barbell Hip Thrust Elicits Greater Increases in
Gluteus Maximus Muscle Thickness in Untrained Young Women
8
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
by the sponsor that could have inuenced the
outcome of this work.
AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS
Author WK and author JPN have given substantial
contributions to the conception or the design of the
manuscript, all authors contributed to acquisition,
analysis, and interpretation of the data. All authors
have participated to drafting the manuscript and
revised it critically. All authors read and approved
the nal version of the manuscript.
REFERENCES
1. Baz-Valle E, Fontes-Villalba M, and Santos-Concejero
J. Total number of sets as a training volume
quantication method for muscle hypertrophy: a
systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 35: 870-878,
2018.
2. Brazil A, Needham L, Palmer JL, and Bezodis IN. A
comprehensive biomechanical analysis of the barbell
hip thrust. PLoS One 16: e0249307, 2021.
3. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 112: 155-159,
1992.
4. Contreras B, Cronin J, and Schoenfeld BJ. Barbell
hip thrust. Strength Cond J 33: 58-61, 2011.
5. Contreras B, Vigotsky AD, Schoenfeld BJ,
Beardsley C, and Cronin J. A comparison of gluteus
maximus, biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis
electromyographic activity in the back squat and
barbell hip thrust exercises. J Appl Biomech 31: 452-
458, 2015.
6. Contreras B, Vigotsky AD, Schoenfeld BJ,
Beardsley C, and Cronin J. A comparison of gluteus
maximus, biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis
electromyography amplitude for the barbell, band,
and american hip thrust variations. J Appl Biomech
32: 254-260, 2016.
7. Delgado J, Drinkwater EJ, Banyard HG, Haff GG,
and Nosaka K. Comparison between back squat,
romanian deadlift, and barbell hip thrust for leg and
hip muscle activities during hip extension. J Strength
Cond Res 33: 2595-2601, 2019.
8. Hackett DA. Training, supplementation, and
pharmacological practices of competitive male
bodybuilders across training phases. J Strength
Cond Res 36: 963-970, 2022.
9. Haff GG and Triplett NT. Essentials of strength
training and conditioning. 4th ed. Champaign, IL:
Human kinetics, 2015.
10. Kassiano W, Costa B, Kunevaliki G, Soares D,
Zacarias G, Manske I, Takaki Y, Ruggiero MF,
Stavinski N, Francsuel J, Tricoli I, Carneiro MAS,
and Cyrino ES. Greater gastrocnemius muscle
hypertrophy after partial range of motion training
performed at long muscle lengths. J Strength Cond
Res 37: 1746-1753, 2023.
11. Kassiano W, Costa B, Nunes JP, Ribeiro AS,
Schoenfeld BJ, and Cyrino ES. Which ROMs lead to
Rome? A systematic review of the effects of range of
motion on muscle hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res
37: 1135-1144, 2023.
12. Kassiano W, Nunes JP, Costa B, Ribeiro AS,
Schoenfeld BJ, and Cyrino ES. Does varying
resistance exercises promote superior muscle
hypertrophy and strength gains? a systematic review.
J Strength Cond Res 36: 1753-1762, 2022.
13. Kawama R, Takahashi K, and Wakahara T. Effect of
hip joint position on electromyographic activity of the
individual hamstring muscles during stiff-leg deadlift.
J Strength Cond Res 35: S38-s43, 2021.
14. Kubo K, Ikebukuro T, and Yata H. Effects of squat
training with different depths on lower limb muscle
volumes. Eur J Appl Physiol 119: 1933-1942, 2019.
15. Lieber RL and Ward SR. Skeletal muscle design to
meet functional demands. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B
Biol Sci 366: 1466-1476, 2011.
16. Maeo S, Wu Y, Huang M, Sakurai H, Kusagawa
Y, Sugiyama T, Kanehisa H, and Isaka T. Triceps
brachii hypertrophy is substantially greater after
elbow extension training performed in the overhead
versus neutral arm position. Eur J Sport Sci 23: 1240-
1250, 2023.
17. McCurdy K, Walker J, and Yuen D. Gluteus maximus
and hamstring activation during selected weight-
bearing resistance exercises. J Strength Cond Res
32: 594-601, 2018.
18. Neumann DA. Kinesiology of the hip: a focus on
muscular actions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 40: 82-
94, 2010.
19. Niinimäki S, Härkönen L, Nikander R, Abe S, Knüsel
C, and Sievänen H. The cross-sectional area of the
gluteus maximus muscle varies according to habitual
exercise loading: Implications for activity-related and
evolutionary studies. Homo 67: 125-137, 2016.
20. Nishikawa K. Titin: a tunable spring in active muscle.
Physiology (Bethesda) 35: 209-217, 2020.
21. Ottinger CR, Sharp MH, Stefan MW, Gheith RH, de
la Espriella F, and Wilson JM. Muscle hypertrophy
response to range of motion in strength training:
a novel approach to understanding the ndings.
Strength Cond J 45: 162-176, 2023.
22. Popov DV, Swirkun DV, Netreba AI, Tarasova OS,
Prostova AB, Larina IM, Borovik AS, and Vinogradova
OL. Hormonal adaptation determines the increase
in muscle mass and strength during low-intensity
strength training without relaxation. Human Physiol
32: 609-614, 2006.
23. Rosa A, Vazquez G, Grgic J, Balachandran AT,
Orazem J, and Schoenfeld BJ. Hypertrophic effects
of single- versus multi-joint exercise of the limb
muscles: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Strength Cond J 45: 49-57, 2023.
24. Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, and Krieger JW. Dose-
response relationship between weekly resistance
training volume and increases in muscle mass: a

9
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee IUSCA, London, UK. This article is an
open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
International Journal of Strength and Conditioning. 2024
Kassiano, W., Kunevaliki, G., Costa, B., Nunes, J. P., Castro-E-
Souza, P., Tricoli, I., Ribeiro, A. S., & Cyrino, E. S.
systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci
35: 1073-1082, 2017.
25. Steele J, Fisher J, Giessing J, and Gentil P. Clarity in
reporting terminology and denitions of set endpoints
in resistance training. Muscle Nerve 56: 368-374,
2017.
26. Vigotsky AD, Halperin I, Trajano GS, and Vieira TM.
Longing for a longitudinal proxy: acutely measured
surface EMG amplitude is not a validated predictor of
muscle hypertrophy. Sports Med 52: 193-199, 2022.
27. Ward SR, Winters TM, and Blemker SS. The
architectural design of the gluteal muscle group:
implications for movement and rehabilitation. J
Orthop Sports Phys Ther 40: 95-102, 2010.