Analysis of Surface EMG Parameters in the Overhead Deep Squat Performance
<b>Background and Objective:</b> This study aimed to examine the possibility of using surface electromyography (sEMG) to aid in assessing the correctness of overhead deep squat performance. Electromyography signals were recorded for 20 athletes from the lower (rectus femoris (RF), vastus...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/14/7749 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <b>Background and Objective:</b> This study aimed to examine the possibility of using surface electromyography (sEMG) to aid in assessing the correctness of overhead deep squat performance. Electromyography signals were recorded for 20 athletes from the lower (rectus femoris (RF), vastus medialis (VM), biceps femoris (BF), and gluteus (GM)) and upper (deltoid (D), latissimus dorsi (L)) muscles. The sEMG signals were categorized into three groups based on physiotherapists’ evaluations of deep squat correctness. <b>Methods:</b> The raw sEMG signals were filtering at 10–250 Hz, and then the mean frequency, median frequency, and kurtosis were calculated. Next, the maximum excitation of the muscles expressed in percentage of maximum voluntary contraction (%MVC) and co-activation index (<i>CAI</i>) were estimated. To determine the muscle excitation level, the pulse interference filter and variance analysis of the sEMG signal derivative were applied. Next, analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests, that is, nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis and post hoc tests, were performed. <b>Results:</b> The parameter that most clearly differentiated the groups considered turned out to be %MVC. The statistically significant difference with a large effect size in the excitation of RF & GM (<i>p</i> = 0.0011) and VM & GM (<i>p</i> = 0.0002) in group 3, where the correctness of deep squat execution was the highest and ranged from 85% to 92%, was pointed out. With the decrease in the correctness of deep squat performance, an additional statistically significant difference appeared in the excitation of RF & BF and VM & BF for both groups 2 and 1, which was not present in group 3. However, in group 2, with the correctness of the deep squat execution at 62–77%, the statistically significant differences in muscle excitation found in group 3 were preserved, in contrast to group 1, with the lowest 23–54% correctness of the deep squat execution, where the statistical significance of these differences was not confirmed. <b>Conclusions:</b> The results indicate that sEMG can differentiate muscle activity and provide additional information for physiotherapists when assessing the correctness of deep squat performance. The proposed analysis can be used to evaluate the correctness of physical exercises when physiotherapist access is limited. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2076-3417 |