Electromyographic Analysis of Selected Muscles during Sitting Push-ups: Effects of Position and Sex Debra S Anderson, Martha F Jackson, Debra S Kropf and Gary L Soderberg PHYS THER. 1984; 64:24-28. The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, can be found online at: http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/64/1/24 Collections This article, along with others on similar topics, appears in the following collection(s): Kinesiology/Biomechanics Therapeutic Exercise e-Letters To submit an e-Letter on this article, click here or click on "Submit a response" in the right-hand menu under "Responses" in the online version of this article. E-mail alerts Sign up here to receive free e-mail alerts Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 Electromyographic Analysis of Selected Muscles during Sitting Push-ups Effects of Position and Sex DEBRA S. ANDERSON, MARTHA F. JACKSON, DEBRA S. KROPF, and GARY L. SODERBERG The purpose of this study was to determine if differences in EMG activity of the latissimus dorsi, pectoralis major and triceps brachii occurred between muscles and between the 16 male and 16 female subjects performing push-ups from three different sitting positions. Surface electrodes and associated instrumentation recorded a linear envelope during seated push-ups performed 1) in a wheelchair, 2) in a long-sit position with elbows at 90 degrees, and 3) in a long-sit position with maximum elbow flexion and shoulder abduction. Results showed that women produced greater mean EMG activity than men in all muscles at all positions. Altering the exercise position did not have a consistent effect on level of activity recorded from either sex. The study concludes that use of these exercises should be based on a knowledge of the differences in muscle activity in exercise positions for men and women before treatment objectives can be effectively accomplished. Key Words: Elbow, Electromyography, Men, Muscle contraction, Shoulder, Women. Effective use of therapeutic exercise is of importance and of interest to physical therapists. The selection of specific exercise techniques may significantly influence achievement of the treatment goal. One commonly used exercise, the sitting push-up, has been observed to be widely used before crutch ambulation and transfer activities of the spinal cordinjured patient. Strength training purportedly accomplished by this exercise may also benefit patients with lower extremity amputations, total joint replacements, ligamentous repairs, and fractures. The standard sitting push-up is used for all patients, even though men and women have known differences in Ms. Anderson, Ms. Jackson, and Ms Kropf were students in their final year of the Certificate Program in Physical Therapy at The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 when this study was done. Ms. Anderson is currently a physical therapist, Schoitz Medical Center, Waterloo, IA 50702 (USA). Ms. Jackson is currently a physical therapist, Walter Boswell Memorial Hospital, Sun City, AZ 85372. Ms. Kropf is currently a physical therapist, Blessing Hospital, Quincy, IL 62301. Dr. Soderberg is Associate Professor and Associate Director of Physical Therapy Education at the University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242. This article was submitted March 10, 1983; was with the authors for revision five weeks; and was accepted July 21, 1983. strength.1 (pl23) Virtually no information is available on how strength differences might influence performance during exercise tasks. Other variables, such as sitting height and upper-extremity ranges of motion, may also create different muscular demands. Although several studies have investigated the function of scapulohumeral muscles during single plane or diagonal motions, researchers do not understand how the selection of position influences the degree of muscle activity.2-6 In spite of different biomechanical requirements, virtually no work has assessed the effect of different exercise positions for men and women. Based on known anatomical and functional characteristics, however, glenohumeral adductor and elbow extensor muscles appear to play a primary role in the performance of sitting push-ups.7 Because no published studies have reported use of EMG to assess the performances of several muscles during the seated push-up, this study was designed to determine if differences in EMG from the latissimus dorsi (LD), pectoralis major (PM), and triceps brachii (TB) muscles occurred between male and female subjects performing push-ups from three different sitting positions. METHOD Subjects Sixteen healthy men and 16 healthy women signed a consent form before voluntarily participating in this study. Men ranged in height from 1.7 m to 2.0 m with an average of 1.8 m (5.6 ft to 6.6 ft, average 5.9 ft). Their weight ranged from 63.6 kg to 106.8 kg, averaging 72.7 kg (140.2 lb to 235.5 lb, average 160.3 lb). Women averaged 59.0 kg in weight and 1.67 m in height (130 lb, 5.5 ft). Their respective ranges were 50.0 kg to 68.2 kg (110.2 lb to 150.4 lb) and 1.6 m to 1.8 m (5.3 ft to 5.9 ft). Age of both men and women ranged from 21 to 31 years. Instrumentation Instrumentation included three bipolar surface electrode assemblies with related signal conditioners. The electrode assemblies,* which measured 33 mm x 17 mm x 10 mm (1.3 in x 0.7 in x 0.4 in), contained circuitry for preampliiication with a gain of 35. Each assembly *Rehabilitation Engineering Center, Moss Rehabilitation Hospital, 12th St & Tabor Rd, Philadelphia, PA 19141. 24 PHYSICAL THERAPY Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 Fig. 1. Subject positioned to perform, from left to right, the standard-wheelchair, mid-position and elevated-sitting push-ups. held two silver-silver chloride electrodes that were 8 mm (0.3 in) in diameter with a 20 mm (0.8 in) distance between centers. After lightly scrubbing the sub jects' skin with alcohol-soaked gauze, each electrode assembly was fitted with double-sided foam adhesive tape. Holes in the tape over the electrode sites were filled with conductive gel before the tape was attached to the skin. High input impedance of the EMG system and the onsite preamplifier made measurement of skin resistance impractical and un necessary. All subjects reported right-hand dom inance, and all recordings were taken from the right side of the body. In all instances, the electrode assembly was aligned in the center of and parallel to the direction of the muscle fibers. The TB muscle electrode was located 30 per cent of the distance from the olecranon process to the posterior aspect of the acromion process. The electrode for the PM muscle was located 50 percent of the distance from the anterior-most bor der of the axilla to the center of the sternum. For all subjects, the LD muscle electrode was applied 25 percent of the distance from the inferior angle of the scapula to the superior aspect of the iliac crest. A common ground electrode was positioned over the muscle-free portion of the distal ulna, and electrode leads were plugged into main amplifiers. The combined preamplifier and main amplifier system provided a gain from 100 to 10,000 with a bandwidth of 7 Hz to 6 kHz. Input resistance was less than 15 pF in parallel with 2 mΩ. After am plification, the EMG signals were fullwave rectified and subjected to low-pass filtering with a cut-off frequency of 8 Hz. The result was a linear envelope. The EMG signals were cabled to an Interdata 7/16 digital computer,† which † Interdata, 2 Crescent Place, Oceanport, NJ 07757. sampled each data channel at a rate of 10 samples per second. The analog to digital converter voltage range was 0 to plus 1.28 V with resolution of .05 per cent of full scale. Signals were simulta neously monitored for offsets and arti facts on a four-channel oscilloscope. A separate main amplifier channel was used to provide raw EMG for purposes of making periodic checks of the quality of the signals coming from each pream plifier. Procedure After we applied the electrodes, we seated the subjects in a standard wheel chair. Each was told to perform maxi mum contractions during isometric test ing. The EMG recordings were made during three trials of isometric contrac tions of each muscle. During these rec ordings, subject instruction and data sampling were computer controlled. After a teletype keystroke by the inves tigator, the computer executed these following functions: 1) displayed "READY" on the display screen for two seconds, 2) displayed "SET" for two sec onds (during which the subject prepared for movement), 3) displayed "GO" for three seconds while simultaneously sampling the three EMG channels, 4) displayed "REST" until a new trial be gan, and 5) calculated and printed the average value for each EMG signal for the last two seconds of the contraction period. Occasionally in the early trials, amplifier gains for each muscle had to be adjusted so that EMG signals would be maintained within the 1.28 V limi tation of the computer's analog-to-digi tal converter. Because we normalized EMG values, each subject's maximum two-second av eraged EMG was selected from the high est value produced during three trials of maximum isometric effort of each mus cle. Test positions were based on pilot work and adapted so that each could be performed by a person sitting in a wheel chair. Contraction of PM muscle was achieved by crossing the arms in front of the body and pressing laterally against the opposite wheelchair arm. The TB muscle contraction was obtained by flexing the shoulder approximately 45 degrees and connecting a strap from the distal forearm to the highest portion of the right upright of the wheelchair. For this test, the elbow was 90 degrees from the completely extended position. Con traction of LD muscle occurred by ex tending the humerus against the poste rior upright of the wheelchair. In an attempt to achieve maximal contrac tion, the investigator verbally encour aged the subjects during the trials. The sequence of all isometric exercises was randomized. After the investigator collected iso metric data from the subjects, they per formed three push-ups from each of three positions. Order of the positions was randomized. Instruction was given and practice allowed so that the subject could demonstrate a constant velocity and still complete elbow extension in the required three seconds. Figure 1 shows that the standard (S) push-up was performed from a seated position in a conventional wheelchair. For the mid (M) position, the subject sat with legs extended (long sit) on the floor with push-up blocks positioned to cause the elbows to assume 90 degrees of flexion. Forearms were perpendicular to the floor. For the elevated (E) position, the subject, again in a long-sit position, per formed a push-up from the highest point possible on the push-up blocks. In po sitions M and E, the push-up blocks were aligned in a coronal plane with the subject's trunk. In all three positions, the subjects were instructed not to use their legs to assist with the push-up. Data Analysis The data set used in the analysis were the normalized values, in percentages, Volume 64 / Number 1, January 1984 Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 25 TABLE 1 Means and Standard Errors for All Muscles Expressed as a Percentage of Isometric Maximum Values (N = 16 men, 16 women) Position Muscle Subject Triceps brachii (SE = 1.81)a Pectoralis major (SE = 1.83)a Latissimus dorsi (SE = 2.34)a men women men women men women a Standard Mid Elevated 76.33 102.25 24.39 53.04 41.80 61.33 44.39 78.21 26.22 39.19 56.08 74.88 73.08 104.49 36.20 60.31 50.30 85.27 Pooled across groups and positions. to the maximum for each muscle for the three trials from each of the three exercise positions. Means and standard deviations were computed on EMG data according to sex, muscle, and position. Differences in between-sex and withinmuscle/between-push-up positions were tested with a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Bonferroni adjusted t tests were used for all post hoc analyses.8 RESULTS Descriptive and ANOVA summary data for all muscles for each position are shown in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. Analysis of variance for the TB muscle revealed no significant interaction between sex and position. The main effects for position, subject, and sex were significant. The t tests, used to compare differences between positions, revealed that push-ups performed in the S and E positions did not produce significantly different EMG activity in the TB muscle. Activity evoked in the S and E positions were, however, significantly greater than EMG evoked in the M position. Data are represented graphically in Figure 2. Analyses of variance for PM and LD muscles showed significant interaction for sex by exercise position (Tab. 2). In all cases, activity levels were higher for the women. Comparisons by post hoc t test revealed significant differences in the men for PM muscles between positions S and E and between positions M and E (E had higher levels). Women showed significant differences between all positions; M evoked the least activity and E the greatest. For LD muscles in the men, the S position produced significantly less activity than either the M or E positions. LD muscle activity in the men was significantly different for all position comparisons; S was the lowest and E the highest in EMG activity. Data for the PM and LD muscles are shown in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. DISCUSSION In interpreting data from this study, we took care to use a well-established method for analyzing EMG data. Normalization to each individual's maximum value is a commonly accepted procedure and indicates the general level of activity evoked. The method used in this study is the best method available to compare various activities even though isotonic movements confound the linear and nonlinear relationships established for EMG and isometric tension.9 The differences between the sexes were clearly demonstrated when levels of activity were assessed by muscle. Specific comparisons could not be made because of the confounding effect of position, but in general, the values were 20 to 30 percent higher for women (Tab. 1). The fact that strength in women, when corrected for body size, is only 80 percent of the strength of men probably accounts for the higher levels of tension that result in greater EMG values.1 Therapists should note that only for TB muscles in women was the maximum test EMG exceeded in positions S and E. Because EMG is a strong indicator of level of tension produced, the relatively low values for men in Table 1 indicate that significant resistive loads would need to be added to the trunk before the levels of muscular activity would be consistent with increased muscle strength in other muscles and in other positions and consistent with the effort produced by women. Although we did not assess specific physiological variables, the data may demonstrate between-sex differences in mechanical efficiency of work, that is, increased EMG yields decreased work efficiency.1(p99) The between-muscle differences may reflect compensation or redistribution of the relative contribution each muscle makes to the different tasks required by the different positions. In other words, the position may bias the particular muscle to be more or less TABLE 2 Analysis of Variance Summary: Normalized EMGa for Three Different Muscles According to Sex and Push-up Positionb Source of Variation df SS MS F P 1 30 2 2 252 66,472 106,844 49,255 785 39,468 66,472.0 3,561.5 24,627.5 392.5 156.6 18.66c 22.74 157.26 2.51 .0002 .0001 .0001 NS 1 30 2 2 252 34,556 78,285 11,807 3,123 40,337 34,556.0 2,609.5 5,903.5 1,561.5 160.1 13.24c 16.30 36.87 9.75 .001 .0001 .0001 .0001 1 30 2 2 252 42,983 215,254 14,780 4,005 66,456 42,983.0 7,175.1 7,390.0 2,002.5 263.7 5.99c 27.21 28.02 7.59 .0205 .0001 .0001 .0006 Triceps brachii Sex Subject (sex)d Position Sex x position Error Pectoralis Major Sex Subject (sex)d Position Sex x position Error Latissimus Dorsi Sex Subject (sex)d Position Sex x position Error a Test data were expressed as a percentage of EMG evoked during maximal isometric contraction. b Three push-up positions: standard wheelchair position (S); long sit with elbows flexed 90° (M); long sit with maximum elbow and shoulder abduction (E). c Subject (sex) used as error term. d Includes all male and female subjects. PHYSICAL THERAPY 26 Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 active. Because women have less muscle mass than men, greater tension in the available fibers would be required to perform the push-ups.10 Depending on treatment objectives, more optimal or difficult exercise positions may be selected. Examination of the "total" percent EMG produced shows that for women, position E clearly demanded the greatest activity. Men, however, did not appear to have marked differences across positions. The exercise positions used in this study were based on clinical applicability and the mechanical requirements necessary to perform the exercises. The differences demonstrated between positions were to be expected. None of the muscles, however, demonstrated identical sequences of increase in activity level. For example, the PM muscle increased in activity from position S to M to E for women. For the PM muscle in men, however, the order was position M followed by positions S and E. The data did not explain why these differences between muscle activity in sexes occurred, but therapeutic intervention and accomplishment of treatment goals may depend on selecting the most effective exercise for each sex. Height as a possible factor did not explain the difference in muscle activity between sexes because sitting height negated much of the difference in the subject groups. In addition, for the M position, the push-up blocks were adjusted so that the elbows were at 90 degrees of flexion. Therefore, height was taken into account. In the E position, the subjects performed push-ups from an extreme elevation and if women had a greater range of motion, greater EMG may have been produced. Observation of subjects' performances, however, would not support this argument for higher EMG levels in position E. Body weight may also have been an explanation but can hardly be considered because of the greater weights of male subjects. According to Astrand and Rodahl, height and weight are more important considerations during growth.1(p123) The results of this study are interesting when assessing the data according to position and sex. Although significant interactions occurred for the analysis of the PM and LD muscles, in every comparison between men and women of exercise by position, the women produced greater percentages of EMG (Figs. 2-4). This finding is remarkable, considering that electrode locations were standardized across subjects in terms of Fig. 2. Triceps brachii muscle activity for female subjects (F) and male subjects (M). S = standard wheelchair position; M = long sit with elbows flexed 90 degrees; E = long sit with maximum elbow flexion and shoulder abduction; EMG = percentage of activity evoked during maximum voluntary contraction.a Significant differences between female subjects and male subjects, p < .01; b Significant differences between positions, p < .01, for female subjects (F) and male subjects (M). Fig. 3. Pectoralis major muscle activity. All position notations are same as for Figure 2. Significant differences across position are represented for women by a solid line and for men by a dotted line. percentage of limb length. Furthermore, every attempt was made to control body alignment and the associated mechanics during the course of the exercise. Minor variations in the S and E positions were found, however, because of sitting height and shoulder range of motion. Greater glenohumeral abduction and elbow flexion occurred from position S to M to E (Fig. 1). The angular changes, approximately 20 to 30 degrees between positions, produced some variation in muscle length but apparently had no consistent effect on the results. Although torque requirements were different for the positions, this effect also demonstrated no consistent pattern either for men or women (Tab. 1). Because both Volume 64 / Number 1 , January 1984 Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 27 not be ordered for level of difficulty from standard wheelchair push-ups to a position requiring greater glenohumeral abduction and elbow flexion. Placing subjects in a position requiring a combination of maximum shoulder abduction and elbow extension for training does not necessarily evoke maximum levels of EMG for the TB, LD, and PM muscles. Therefore, therapists should be cognizant of the effect of position and the patient's sex, as demonstrated in this study, before selecting the exercise most likely to yield the best treatment outcome. Future studies are needed to compare the levels of activity produced during therapeutic exercises with functional activities such as transfers and crutch ambulation. Fig. 4. Latissimus dorsi muscle activity. All position notations are same as for Figure 2. Significant differences across position are represented for women by a solid line and for men by a dotted line. sexes completed the exercises from the same positions, the muscle length and mechanical requirements cannot explain why the women always produced greater percentages of EMG. The muscles studied are those most responsible for generating simultaneous shoulder and elbow extension. This function for these muscles has been well established in studies by Jonsson et al,5 Broome and Basmajian,11 Shevlin et al,3 Scheving and Pauly,2 and Reeder.4 Shevlin et al3 noted differences in sternal versus clavicular fibers in the PM muscle, and Reeder4 and Ito et al12 noted differences in levels of activity between the lower and upper LD muscle fibers. Caution must be applied when interpreting the former studies, however, because neither the analysis by Reeder4 nor by Ito et al12 appear to make acrosschannel comparisons that could be regarded as legitimate. The current study accepted the functions of the muscles assessed and made no attempt to assess level of activity on a muscle segment basis. Others have previously established that individual muscles are capable of functioning as separate segments.13. 14 Beam has assessed several muscles in the shoulder but used no methods that required the performance of functional activities.15 The most relevant work seems to have been performed during the EMG study by Ito et al on the latissimus dorsi muscle.12 The study compared 26 activities, including long-sit push-ups and transfer activities, performed by healthy subjects and nine subjects with T l to L1 spinal cord injuries. As might be expected from the level of injury, the pattern and level of activity evoked from the patients was similar to the healthy subjects. The standard long-sit push-ups or the transfer activities produced only light to moderate activity. By comparison, the present study has reported EMG values that ranged from 50 to 85 percent of maximum when the exercise was done in the S or E position. We recommend applying additional resistance if treatment goals are to include muscle strengthening. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Several clinical implications result from this study. Data clearly show that for the muscles and exercises assessed, varied amounts of tension, as measured by EMG, were required. The level of exercise difficulty was considered to be greater when greater EMG was recorded. If therapists are using these exercises for accomplishing increased muscle strength, greater loads need to be added to the trunk; men, particularly, require greater loads on the trunk to produce maximum muscle activity. Data also point out the effect of specificity of exercise. Table 1 shows that the exercise positions used in this study can- REFERENCES 1. Astrand P, Rodahl K: Textbook of Work Physiology. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill, Inc, 1977 2. Scheving LE, Pauly JE: An electromyographic study of some muscles acting on the upper extremity of man. Anat Rec 135:239-246, 1959 3. Shevlin M G, Lehmann JF, Lucci JA: Electromyographic study of the function of some muscles crossing the gleno-humeral joint. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 50:264-270,1969 4. Reeder G: Electromyographic study of the latissimus dorsi muscle. Phys Ther 43:165-172, 1963 5. Jonsson B, Olofsson BM, Steffnox L: Function of the teres major, latissimus dorsi and pectoralis major muscles. Acta Morphol Neerl Scand 9:275-280,1971 6. Ekholm J, Arboreliu UP, Hillerel L, et al: Shoulder muscle EMG and resisting moment during diagonal exercise movements resisted by weight-and-pulley circuit. Scand J Rehabil Med 10:179-185,1978 7. Warwick R, Williams PL (eds): Gray's Anatomy: 36th British Edition. Philadelphia, PA, WB Saunders Co, 1980, pp 534-542 8. Neter J, Wasserman W: Applied Linear Statistical Models. Homewood, IL, Richard D Irwin Inc, 1974, p 777 9. Moritani T, DeVries HA: Re-examination of the relationship between the surface integrated IEMG and force of isometric contraction. Am J Phys Med 57:263-277, 1978 10. Costill DL, Daniels W, Evans W, et al: Skeletal muscle enzymes and fiber composition in male and female track athletes. J Appl Physiol 40:149-154,1976 11. Broome HL, Basmajian JV: The function of the teres major muscle: An electromyographic study. Anat Rec 170:309-310,1971 12. Ito H, Iwasaki T, Yamada M, et al: Electromyography of latissimus dorsi muscle. Rinsho Rigaka Ryoko (Journal of Japanese Physical Therapy Association) 3:23-36, 1976 (translated by Paul D. Andrew) 13. Soderberg GL, Dostal WF: Electromyographic study of three parts of the gluteus medius muscle during functional activities. Phys Ther 58:691-696,1978 14. Pare E, Stern JT, Schwartz JM: Functional differentiation within the tensor fasciae latae. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 63:1457-1471,1981 15. Beam JG: An electromyographic study of the trapezius, deltoid, pectoralis major, biceps and triceps muscle during static loading of the upper limb. Anat Rec 140:103-108,1961 28 PHYSICAL THERAPY Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014 Electromyographic Analysis of Selected Muscles during Sitting Push-ups: Effects of Position and Sex Debra S Anderson, Martha F Jackson, Debra S Kropf and Gary L Soderberg PHYS THER. 1984; 64:24-28. http://ptjournal.apta.org/subscriptions/ Subscription Information Permissions and Reprints http://ptjournal.apta.org/site/misc/terms.xhtml Information for Authors http://ptjournal.apta.org/site/misc/ifora.xhtml Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on August 29, 2014
© Copyright 2024