Electromyographic Comparison of Squash Backhand Shot After Midcourt and Frontcourt Traditional Movement Patterns | ||
| Journal of Applied Sports Science | ||
| Article 10, Volume 6, Issue 3, September 2016, Pages 78-85 PDF (331.83 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/jass.2016.84579 | ||
| Author | ||
| Tarek Gamal Alaaeldien | ||
| Faculty of Physical Education for Boys, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Electromyography of sixteen muscles of the lower limb, trunk, and upper limb muscles were compared between Backhand shot after traditional midcourt movement pattern and traditional frontcourt movement pattern of a three female squash players (age: 14.5±0.5 years old; height 1.48±0.15 m; mass: 44.67±1.53 Kg), ranked in the Squash National Egyptian team. Surface electromyographic (sEMG) electrodes were placed according to SENIAM guidelines on the skin, superficial to right-sided postural proximal of the trapezius, posterior deltoid, anterior deltoid, triceps brachii, biceps brachii, pectoralis major, serratus anterior, rectus abdominis, external abdominal, glutaeus medius, gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, rectus femoris, tibialis anterior, gastrocnemius, and soleus muscle. EMG data were 16 bit A/D converted at 1000 Hz and stored on computer. EMG signals were amplified (gain of 400), band pass filtered (10 to 500Hz), full wave rectified using root mean square average, and normalized to the isometric maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). Mean and standard deviation of the muscles activity (%MVC) and work-loading (% Total activity area) were calculated from the start of the two tasks to the end of Backhand shot recovery phase. The results showed that there were significant differences between both tasks in muscle activity of biceps brachii and gluteus maximus muscle, and the percentage of work-loading of rectus abdominis, gluteus maximus and biceps femoris. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Muscle activity; Backhand; Court movement patterns; Squash | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 180 PDF Download: 434 |
||
