Cargando…

A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine

This study compared two different body positions at the finish of a stroke during stationary rowing exercise on physiological and kinematic measurements. Nine male and five female rowers volunteered for the study: mean age (± SD), body height and body mass were 27 ±9 yrs, 180.5 ±12.3 cm and 81.2 ±14...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bell, Gordon, Bennett, Jack, Reynolds, William, Syrotuik, Daniel, Gervais, Pierre
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego w Katowicach 201
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3796848/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24146710
http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2478/hukin-2013-0030
_version_ 1782287541183971328
author Bell, Gordon
Bennett, Jack
Reynolds, William
Syrotuik, Daniel
Gervais, Pierre
author_facet Bell, Gordon
Bennett, Jack
Reynolds, William
Syrotuik, Daniel
Gervais, Pierre
author_sort Bell, Gordon
collection PubMed
description This study compared two different body positions at the finish of a stroke during stationary rowing exercise on physiological and kinematic measurements. Nine male and five female rowers volunteered for the study: mean age (± SD), body height and body mass were 27 ±9 yrs, 180.5 ±12.3 cm and 81.2 ±14.2 kg. The two body positions at the finish were controlled at an upright posture or a novel greater lean back position. All subjects completed 3 different experimental trials on a Concept IID rowing machine at 3 different exercise intensities and comparisons were made between the lean back position at the same stroke rate and the same power output as the upright trial. Power output, heart rate, oxygen uptake, energy expenditure and % efficiency were higher (p<0.05) with the greater lean back position at the same stroke rate compared to all other conditions. Range of motion at the hip, ankle, and elbow and the handle velocity and distance moved were greater (p<0.05) with the lean back position. In conclusion, a greater lean back posture at the finish during stationary rowing produces a higher power output and improved efficiency at the same stroke rate but at an elevated physiological cost compared to a more upright position. Despite the higher energy expenditure, the relative gain in power output and efficiency with no negative kinematic changes suggests that a greater lean back position at the finish will enhance performance during stationary rowing exercise.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3796848
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 201
publisher Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego w Katowicach
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37968482013-10-21 A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine Bell, Gordon Bennett, Jack Reynolds, William Syrotuik, Daniel Gervais, Pierre J Hum Kinet Research Article This study compared two different body positions at the finish of a stroke during stationary rowing exercise on physiological and kinematic measurements. Nine male and five female rowers volunteered for the study: mean age (± SD), body height and body mass were 27 ±9 yrs, 180.5 ±12.3 cm and 81.2 ±14.2 kg. The two body positions at the finish were controlled at an upright posture or a novel greater lean back position. All subjects completed 3 different experimental trials on a Concept IID rowing machine at 3 different exercise intensities and comparisons were made between the lean back position at the same stroke rate and the same power output as the upright trial. Power output, heart rate, oxygen uptake, energy expenditure and % efficiency were higher (p<0.05) with the greater lean back position at the same stroke rate compared to all other conditions. Range of motion at the hip, ankle, and elbow and the handle velocity and distance moved were greater (p<0.05) with the lean back position. In conclusion, a greater lean back posture at the finish during stationary rowing produces a higher power output and improved efficiency at the same stroke rate but at an elevated physiological cost compared to a more upright position. Despite the higher energy expenditure, the relative gain in power output and efficiency with no negative kinematic changes suggests that a greater lean back position at the finish will enhance performance during stationary rowing exercise. Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego w Katowicach 2013 -07- 05 /pmc/articles/PMC3796848/ /pubmed/24146710 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2478/hukin-2013-0030 Text en © Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
Bell, Gordon
Bennett, Jack
Reynolds, William
Syrotuik, Daniel
Gervais, Pierre
A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title_full A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title_fullStr A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title_full_unstemmed A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title_short A Physiological and Kinematic Comparison of two Different Lean Back Positions During Stationary Rowing on a Concept II Machine
title_sort physiological and kinematic comparison of two different lean back positions during stationary rowing on a concept ii machine
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3796848/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24146710
http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2478/hukin-2013-0030
work_keys_str_mv AT bellgordon aphysiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT bennettjack aphysiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT reynoldswilliam aphysiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT syrotuikdaniel aphysiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT gervaispierre aphysiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT bellgordon physiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT bennettjack physiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT reynoldswilliam physiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT syrotuikdaniel physiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine
AT gervaispierre physiologicalandkinematiccomparisonoftwodifferentleanbackpositionsduringstationaryrowingonaconceptiimachine