Display options
Cite
Perchthaler D, Hauser S, Heitkamp HC, et al. Acute effects of whole-body vibration on trunk and neck muscle activity in consideration of different vibration loads. J Sports Sci Med. 2015;14(1):155-62
Perchthaler, D., Hauser, S., Heitkamp, H. C., Hein, T., & Grau, S. (2015). Acute effects of whole-body vibration on trunk and neck muscle activity in consideration of different vibration loads. Journal of sports science & medicine, 14(1), 155-62.
Perchthaler, Dennis, et al. "Acute effects of whole-body vibration on trunk and neck muscle activity in consideration of different vibration loads." Journal of sports science & medicine vol. 14,1 (2015): 155-62.
Perchthaler D, Hauser S, Heitkamp HC, Hein T, Grau S. Acute effects of whole-body vibration on trunk and neck muscle activity in consideration of different vibration loads. J Sports Sci Med. 2015 Mar 01;14(1):155-62. eCollection 2015 Mar. PMID: 25729303; PMCID: PMC4306767.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Sports Sci Med. 2015 Mar 01;14(1):155-62. eCollection 2015 Mar.

Acute effects of whole-body vibration on trunk and neck muscle activity in consideration of different vibration loads.

Journal of sports science & medicine

Dennis Perchthaler, Simon Hauser, Hans-Christian Heitkamp, Tobias Hein, Stefan Grau

Affiliations

  1. Department of Sports Medicine, Medical Clinic, University of Tuebingen , Germany.
  2. Department of Food and Nutrition, and Sport Science, Biomechanics, University of Gothenburg , Sweden.

PMID: 25729303 PMCID: PMC4306767

Abstract

The intention of this study was to systematically analyze the impact of biomechanical parameters in terms of different peak-to-peak displacements and knee angles on trunk and neck muscle activity during whole-body vibration (WBV). 28 healthy men and women (age 23 ± 3 years) performed four static squat positions (2 peak-to-peak displacements x 2 knee angles) on a side alternating vibration platform with and without vibration stimulus. Surface electromyography (EMG) was used to record the neuromuscular activity of the erector spinae muscle, the rectus abdominis muscle, and of the splenius muscle. EMG levels normalized to maximal voluntary contractions ranged between 3.2 - 27.2 % MVC during WBV. The increase in muscle activity caused by WBV was significant, particularly for the back muscles, which was up to 19.0 % MVC. The impact of the factor 'condition' (F-values ranged from 13.4 to 132.0, p ≤ 0.001) and of the factor 'peak-to-peak displacement' (F-values ranged from 6.4 to 69.0 and p-values from < 0.001 to 0.01) were statistically significant for each muscle tested. However, the factor 'knee angle' only affected the back muscles (F-value 10.3 and 7.3, p ≤ 0.01). The results of this study should give more information for developing effective and safe training protocols for WBV treatment of the upper body. Key pointsThe maximum levels of muscle activity were significantly reached at high amplitudes at a vibration frequency of 30 Hz.WBV leads to a higher muscle activation of the lower back muscles than of the abdominal muscles.Both knee angles of 30° and 45° have similar effects on the vibration load and represent safe positions to prevent any actual harm.Certain combinations of the biomechanical variables have similar effects on the level of muscle activity.

Keywords: Vibration; electromyography; paraspinal muscles; torso

References

  1. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Nov;23(8):2317-25 - PubMed
  2. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2010 Dec;20(6):1186-95 - PubMed
  3. J Strength Cond Res. 2006 Feb;20(1):124-9 - PubMed
  4. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2005 Apr;17(2):157-63 - PubMed
  5. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Oct;39(10):1794-800 - PubMed
  6. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011 Feb;21(1):1-12 - PubMed
  7. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2003 Jan;31(1):3-7 - PubMed
  8. J Sci Med Sport. 1999 Oct;2(3):211-26 - PubMed
  9. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2009 Aug;19(4):710-8 - PubMed
  10. J Sports Sci Med. 2011 Mar 01;10(1):169-74 - PubMed
  11. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2007 Feb;17(1):12-7 - PubMed
  12. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Sep;39(9):1642-50 - PubMed
  13. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010 Sep;110(1):143-51 - PubMed
  14. Int J Sports Med. 2014 Apr;35(4):330-8 - PubMed
  15. Phys Ther. 2001 May;81(5):1096-101 - PubMed
  16. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Jun;35(6):1033-41 - PubMed
  17. Med Eng Phys. 2009 Oct;31(8):937-44 - PubMed
  18. Sports Med. 2005;35(1):23-41 - PubMed
  19. J Sports Sci. 1994 Dec;12(6):561-6 - PubMed
  20. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010 Mar;108(5):877-904 - PubMed
  21. J Physiol. 1976 Oct;261(3):695-711 - PubMed
  22. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Aug;17(3):621-4 - PubMed
  23. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Feb;86(2):303-7 - PubMed
  24. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Mar;24(3):866-70 - PubMed
  25. Int J Sports Med. 2009 Feb;30(2):124-9 - PubMed
  26. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002 Sep;34(9):1523-8 - PubMed
  27. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Jan;113(1):1-11 - PubMed
  28. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1987;15:95-151 - PubMed
  29. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Sep 1;27(17):1829-34 - PubMed
  30. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011 Jun;21(3):450-7 - PubMed
  31. J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Nov;18(4):828-32 - PubMed
  32. Br J Sports Med. 2005 Sep;39(9):585-9; discussion 589 - PubMed
  33. Brain Res. 1966 Aug;2(2):201-3 - PubMed
  34. Maturitas. 2013 Mar;74(3):276-8 - PubMed
  35. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2013 Sep;15(9):771-4 - PubMed
  36. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005 Apr;262(4):307-13 - PubMed
  37. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2000 Sep;1(1):61-5 - PubMed
  38. Sportverletz Sportschaden. 2001 Mar;15(1):1-7 - PubMed
  39. J Sports Sci Med. 2013 Sep 01;12(3):439-46 - PubMed
  40. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Dec 1;28(23):2621-7 - PubMed
  41. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2010 Sep;10(3):193-8 - PubMed
  42. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2013 Feb;23(1):84-95 - PubMed
  43. Keio J Med. 2007 Mar;56(1):28-33 - PubMed

Publication Types