Comparison of Isolated Lumbar Extension Strength in Competitive and Noncompetitive Powerlifters, and Recreationally Trained Men

Determining the optimal maximal and submaximal voluntary contraction tests for normalizing the erector spinae muscles

Background

This study aimed to identify which maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) and sub-MVIC tests produce the highest activation of the erector spinae muscles and the greatest reduction in inter-individual variability, to put them forward as reference normalization maneuvers for future studies.

Methods

Erector spinae EMG activity was recorded in 38 healthy women during five submaximal and three maximal exercises.

Results

None of the three MVIC tests generated the maximal activation level in all the participants. The maximal activation level was achieved in 68.4% of cases with the test performed on the roman chair in the horizontal position (96.3 ± 7.3; p < 0.01). Of the five submaximal maneuvers, the one in the horizontal position on the roman chair produced the highest percentage of activation (61.1 ± 16.7; p < 0.01), and one of the lowest inter-individual variability values in the normalized signal of a trunk flexion-extension task.

Conclusions

A modified Sorensen MVIC test in a horizontal position on a roman chair and against resistance produced the highest erector spinae activation, but not in 100% of participants, so the execution of several normalization maneuvers with the trunk at different inclinations should be considered to normalize the erector spinae EMG signal. A modified Sorensen test in a horizontal position without resistance is the submaximal maneuver that produces the highest muscle activation and the greatest reduction in inter-individual variability, and could be considered a good reference test for normalization.

The effects of a 4-week mesocycle of barbell back squat or barbell hip thrust strength training upon isolated lumbar extension strength

Objectives

Common exercises such as the barbell back squat (BBS) and barbell hip thrust (BHT) are perceived to provide a training stimulus to the lumbar extensors. However, to date there have been no empirical studies considering changes in lumbar extension strength as a result of BBS or BHT resistance training (RT) interventions.

Purpose

To consider the effects of BBS and BHT RT programmes upon isolated lumbar extension (ILEX) strength.

Methods

Trained male subjects (n = 14; 22.07 ± 0.62 years; 179.31 ± 6.96 cm; 79.77 ± 13.81 kg) were randomised in to either BBS (n = 7) or BHT (n = 7) groups and performed two training sessions per week during a 4-week mesocycle using 80% of their 1RM. All subjects were tested pre- and post-intervention for BBS and BHT 1RM as well as isometric ILEX strength.

Results

Analyses revealed that both BBS and BHT groups significantly improved both their BBS and BHT 1RM, suggesting a degree of transferability. However, the BBS group improved their BBS 1RM to a greater degree than the BHT group (p = 0.050; ∼11.8 kg/10.2% vs. ∼8.6 kg/7.7%, respectively). And the BHT group improved their BHT 1RM to a greater degree than the BBS group (p = 0.034; ∼27.5 kg/24.8% vs. ∼20.3 kg/13.3%, respectively). Neither BBS nor BHT groups significantly improved their isometric ILEX strength.

Conclusions

The present study supports the concept of specificity, particularly in relation to the movement mechanics between trunk extension (including pelvic rotation) and ILEX. Our data suggest that strength coaches, personal trainers, and trainees can self-select multi-joint lower-body trunk extension exercises based on preference or variety. However, evidence suggests that neither the BBS nor BHT exercises can meaningfully increase ILEX strength. Since strengthening these muscles might enhance physical and sporting performance we encourage strength coaches and personal trainers to prescribe ILEX exercise.