Bullock Garrett S, Schmitt Abigail C, Shutt Jason M, Cook Gray, Butler Robert J
Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2017 Jun;12(3):324-332.
Kettlebell (KB) and indian club swings (ICS) are used diversely for developing strength and power. It has been proposed that multiple swing techniques can be used interchangeably to elicit similar adaptations within performance training. Hypothesis/Purpose: It was hypothesized that there will be not be a difference in peak joint angles between types of swings. Furthermore, given the nature of the overhead kettlebell swing (OKS), it was hypothesized that the OKS will be associated with a greater cycle time and a greater vertical impulse compared to shoulder height swing (SKS) and ICS. The purpose of this study was to analyze the kinematics and kinetics of the SKS, OKS, and ICS.
Cross-sectional cohort.
Fifteen healthy subjects underwent 3D biomechanical analysis for assessment of kinematic and kinetic data. Subjects performed two trials of ten repetitions at full effort for each swing in a randomized order using either a standard set of 0.45 kg indian clubs or sex specific KB loads (Female = 12kg, Male = 20kg). Lower extremity sagittal plane kinematics and kinetics were analyzed for peak values during the down and up portions of the swing patterns. Statistical analyses were carried out utilizing one-way ANOVAs (<.05) and effect size indices.
Cycle time for the OKS was 34% longer than the SKS and ICS (<.001; ESI = 2.09, ESI=1.92). In general, ankle (SKS: 0.82 ± 0.16; OKS: 0.90 ± 0.21; ICS: 0.60 ± 0.15 BWBH) and hip joint moments (SKS: 2.34 ± 0.68; OKS: 2.32 ± 0.53; ICS: 1.84 ± 0.47 BWBH) and joint powers, along with peak vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF) (SKS: 0.98 ± 0.14; OKS: 0.96 ± 0.10; ICS: 0.86 ± 0.11 BW/s), were higher in the SKS and OKS than the ICS (<.001; ankle: ESI=0.43, ESI=1.42; hip: ESI=0.03, ESI=0.87; vGRF: ESI=1.80, ESI=0.20). There were no observed differences found in peak joint angles between the movements.
Although these swings are kinematically similar, the differing kinetic demands of these exercises may be important in selecting the right training modality for specific strength and power training.
壶铃（KB）摆动和印度棒摆动（ICS）在力量和爆发力训练中有多种用途。有人提出，多种摆动技术可以互换使用，以在体能训练中引发相似的适应性变化。假设/目的：假设不同类型摆动之间的峰值关节角度没有差异。此外，鉴于过头壶铃摆动（OKS）的特点，假设与肩高摆动（SKS）和ICS相比，OKS将具有更长的周期时间和更大的垂直冲量。本研究的目的是分析SKS、OKS和ICS的运动学和动力学。
横断面队列研究。
15名健康受试者接受了三维生物力学分析，以评估运动学和动力学数据。受试者使用一套标准的0.45千克印度棒或根据性别确定的壶铃重量（女性=12千克，男性=20千克），以随机顺序对每种摆动全力进行两组，每组十次重复动作。分析下肢矢状面运动学和动力学在摆动模式的下降和上升部分的峰值。使用单因素方差分析（<.05）和效应量指标进行统计分析。
OKS的周期时间比SKS和ICS长34%（<.001；效应量指标ESI=2.09，ESI=1.92）。一般来说，踝关节（SKS：0.82±0.16；OKS：0.90±0.21；ICS：0.60±0.15体重×身高）和髋关节力矩（SKS：2.34±0.68；OKS：2.32±0.53；ICS：1.84±0.47体重×身高）以及关节功率，连同峰值垂直地面反作用力（vGRF）（SKS：0.98±0.14；OKS：0.96±0.10；ICS：0.86±0.11体重/秒），在SKS和OKS中比ICS更高（<.001；踝关节：ESI=0.43，ESI=1.42；髋关节：ESI=0.03，ESI=0.87；vGRF：ESI=1.80，ESI=0.20）。各动作之间未观察到峰值关节角度的差异。
尽管这些摆动在运动学上相似，但这些练习不同的动力学要求对于为特定的力量和爆发力训练选择合适的训练方式可能很重要。
2级。
