Single-Leg Squat Delicacies-The Position of the Nonstance Limb is an Important Consideration

Smartphone Technology to Remotely Measure Postural Sway during Double- and Single-Leg Squats in Adults with Femoroacetabular Impingement and Those with No Hip Pain

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the demand for utilising telehealth as a major mode of healthcare delivery, with increasing interest in the use of tele-platforms for remote patient assessment. In this context, the use of smartphone technology to measure squat performance in people with and without femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome has not been reported yet. We developed a novel smartphone application, the TelePhysio app, which allows the clinician to remotely connect to the patient's device and measure their squat performance in real time using the smartphone inertial sensors. The aim of this study was to investigate the association and test-retest reliability of the TelePhysio app in measuring postural sway performance during a double-leg (DLS) and single-leg (SLS) squat task. In addition, the study investigated the ability of TelePhysio to detect differences in DLS and SLS performance between people with FAI and without hip pain.

METHODS

A total of 30 healthy (nfemales = 12) young adults and 10 adults (nfemales = 2) with diagnosed FAI syndrome participated in the study. Healthy participants performed DLS and SLS on force plates in our laboratory, and remotely in their homes using the TelePhysio smartphone application. Sway measurements were compared using the centre of pressure (CoP) and smartphone inertial sensor data. A total of 10 participants with FAI (nfemales = 2) performed the squat assessments remotely. Four sway measurements in each axis (x, y, and z) were computed from the TelePhysio inertial sensors: (1) average acceleration magnitude from the mean (aam), (2) root-mean-square acceleration (rms), (3) range acceleration (r), and (4) approximate entropy (apen), with lower values indicating that the movement is more regular, repetitive, and predictable. Differences in TelePhysio squat sway data were compared between DLS and SLS, and between healthy and FAI adults, using analysis of variance with significance set at 0.05.

RESULTS

The TelePhysio aam measurements on the x- and y-axes had significant large correlations with the CoP measurements (r = 0.56 and r = 0.71, respectively). The TelePhysio aam measurements demonstrated moderate to substantial between-session reliability values of 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.81), 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.91), and 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.82) for aamx, aamy, and aamz, respectively. The DLS of the FAI participants showed significantly lower aam and apen values in the medio-lateral direction compared to the healthy DLS, healthy SLS, and FAI SLS groups (aam = 0.13, 0.19, 0.29, and 0.29, respectively; and apen = 0.33, 0.45, 0.52, and 0.48, respectively). In the anterior-posterior direction, healthy DLS showed significantly greater aam values compared to the healthy SLS, FAI DLS, and FAI SLS groups (1.26, 0.61, 0.68, and 0.35, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The TelePhysio app is a valid and reliable method of measuring postural control during DLS and SLS tasks. The application is capable of distinguishing performance levels between DLS and SLS tasks, and between healthy and FAI young adults. The DLS task is sufficient to distinguish the level of performance between healthy and FAI adults. This study validates the use of smartphone technology as a tele-assessment clinical tool for remote squat assessment.

Muscle Activation During Single-Legged Squat Is Affected by Position of the Nonstance Limb

CONTEXT

The single-legged squat (SLS) is appropriate for targeting activation, strengthening, and neuromuscular retraining of the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, and quadriceps. However, the effects of different nonstance-limb positions on muscle activity have not been fully evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the muscle activity of selected stance-limb hip muscles during the SLS using 3 nonstance-limb positions: in front (SLS-Front), in the middle (SLS-Middle), and in back (SLS-Back).

DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

SETTING

Biomechanics laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

A total of 17 healthy adults (8 men, 9 women; age = 22.6 ± 3.6 years, height = 173.3 ± 10.7 cm, mass = 71.2 ± 11.0 kg) participated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Surface electromyographic data of the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, lateral hamstrings, medial hamstrings, rectus femoris, and tensor fascia lata (TFL) as well as kinetic data of the hip and knee were collected while participants performed the 3 SLS tasks. Mean muscle-activation levels during the descent and ascent phases for the selected hip muscles and hip and knee kinetics in all 3 planes were compared for the 3 tasks. Each variable of interest was analyzed using a separate linear regression model with a generalized estimating equations correction.

RESULTS

Muscle-activation levels of the gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, medial hamstrings, rectus femoris, and TFL for the stance limb during descent (P ≤ .04) and the medial hamstrings and TFL during ascent (P ≤ .002) were different among the SLS tasks. The greatest number of differences occurred between SLS-Front and SLS-Back. During descent, gluteal muscle activity was greater in SLS-Front (P ≤ .03) and SLS-Middle (P = .03) than in SLS-Back. For both phases, TFL activity was greater during SLS-Front than during both SLS-Middle and SLS-Back (P ≤ .006). Kinetic differences at the hip and knee between SLS tasks were also observed (P values ≤ .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The 3 SLS tasks had different muscle-activation and kinetic profiles. Clinicians and researchers can vary nonstance-limb position during the SLS to manipulate muscle-activation levels and tailor the exercise to assist with goals at different stages of rehabilitation.

Three-dimensional joint kinematic and two-dimensional quality of movement comparison between lateral and forward step-downs

OBJECTIVES

While lateral and forward step-down tasks are commonly used, they may have different kinematic and performance demands that could influence clinical assessment and rehabilitation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare 3D lower extremity kinematics and 2D quality of movement between the tasks.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional comparative study.

SETTING

Research laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty healthy adults (18 females, age = 23.2 ± 1.4 years, BMI = 23.9 ± 2.2 kg/m²).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participants underwent 3D and 2D motion analysis. 3D variables were peak hip, knee, and ankle angles. Dichotomous clinical criteria were used for 2D assessment. An alpha level of 0.05 was used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

In the sagittal plane, the forward step-down averaged 7° more knee flexion (p < 0.001, d = 2.30) and 4° more ankle dorsiflexion (p < 0.001, d = 1.72), but 2° less hip flexion (p = 0.001, d = 0.64). In the frontal plane, forward step-downs averaged 1° more hip adduction (p = 0.006, d = 0.54) and 1° more ankle eversion (p < 0.001, d = 1.04). The forward step-down elicited 2D movement faults more often (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The increased knee flexion and ankle dorsiflexion demands of the forward step-down were accompanied by increases in frontal plane aberrations. The forward step-down may be more challenging for individuals with reduced tolerance to loaded knee flexion and/or limited ankle mobility.

Drop Jump? Single-Leg Squat? Not if You Aim to Predict Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury From Real-Time Clinical Assessment: A Prospective Cohort Study Involving 880 Elite Female Athletes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether visually assessed performances of the single-leg squat (SLS) and vertical drop jump (VDJ) were associated with future noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.

DESIGN

Prognostic accuracy cohort study.

METHODS

Elite female handball and football (soccer) athletes (n = 880) were tested from 2007 to 2014 and tracked through 2015. Trained physical therapists visually rated each leg during a SLS and overall control during a VDJ. Receiver operating characteristic curve, Pearson chi-square, and logistic regression analyses were used to determine the prognostic accuracy of the 2 screening tests.

RESULTS

Sixty-five noncontact ACL injuries occurred during the follow-up period. Fourteen percent of athletes who sustained an ACL injury had poor SLS performance, compared to 17% of the noninjured athletes (P = .52 and .67 for hip and knee ratings, respectively). Side-to-side asymmetry in the SLS was not different between injured and noninjured athletes (P = .10 and .99 for hip and knee asymmetry, respectively). Twenty-one percent of athletes who sustained an ACL injury had a poor VDJ rating, compared to 27% of the noninjured athletes (P = .09). Furthermore, area under the curve values ranged from 0.43 to 0.54 for the SLS and VDJ, demonstrating no to poor prognostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION

Neither SLS nor VDJ test performance distinguished between athletes who sustained a subsequent noncontact ACL injury and those who did not. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(7):372-378. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10170.

Mechanical Energy Expenditure at Lumbar Spine and Lower Extremity Joints During the Single-Leg Squat Is Affected by the Nonstance Foot Position

Hirsch, SM, Chapman, CJ, Frost, DM, and Beach, TAC. Mechanical energy expenditure at lumbar spine and lower extremity joints during the single-leg squat is affected by the nonstance foot position. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-Previous research has shown that discrete kinematic and kinetic quantities during bodyweight single-leg squat (SLS) movements are affected by elevated foot positioning and sex of the performer, but generalizations are limited by the high-dimensional data structure reported. Using a 3D inverse dynamical linked-segment model, we quantified mechanical energy expenditure (MEE) at each joint in the kinetic chain, the total MEE (sum of MEE across aforesaid joints), and the relative contribution of each joint to total MEE during SLSs performed with elevated foot positioned beside stance leg (SLS-Side), and in-front of (SLS-Front) and behind (SLS-Back) the body. Total MEE differed between SLS variations (p = 0.002), with the least amount observed in the SLS-Back (effect size [ES] = 0.066-0.069). Approximately 50% of total MEE was contributed by the knee joint in each SLS variation, whereas MEE at the ankle, hip, and lumbar spine (in absolute and relative terms) varied complexly as a function of the elevated foot position. Total MEE (p = 0.0192, ES = 0.852) and the absolute MEE at the knee and spine was greater in men across the SLS variations performed (p = 0.025-0.036, ES = 0.715-0.766), but only the lumbar spine contribution to total MEE was larger in men across all SLS variations (p = 0.045, ES = 0.607). Otherwise, there were no other sex-specific responses observed. Biomechanically, SLS movements are generally "knee-dominant," but changing elevated foot position effectively redistributes MEE among other joints in the linkage. Consistent with the previous conclusions reached based on discrete kinematic and kinetic data, not all SLSs are equal.