Table 3 Methodological details and main findings of studies that examined the influence of hip and knee joint angle on muscle activities of the hamstrings during knee flexion tests (hip neutral position = 0° in prone, unless stated otherwise, knee full extension = 0°)
Participants | Normalization | Contraction | Angular position differences in EMG | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study | (n, Sex) | EMG Type | (hip, knee angle) | (angular velocity, °/s) | Hip (°) | Knee (°) | BFlh | ST | SM |
Hip angle effects (greater angle–longer length) | |||||||||
Mohamed et al. [127] | 19F | IM | MMT | ISOM | 0, 90 | 90, 45, 0 | NS | NS | 0 < 90 |
Guex et al. [144] | 10 (5 M-5F) sprinters | S | Raw | ISOM | 0,30,60,90 | 45 | 30 > 90 | NS | |
Lunnen et al. [143] | 16 (12F-4 M) PE students | S | Raw | ISOM | 0 (supine), 45,90,135 | 60 | 0 > 135 | ||
Worrell et al. [130] | 50 (25F, 25 M) | S | Max at any angle | ISOM | 0 | 0,30,60,90 | NS | ||
Kellis et al. [145] | 20 (10F-10 M) | S | MVC (0, 45) | CON, ECC 60,150 | 0,45,90 | 0–90 | NS | NS | |
Guex et al. [144] | 10 (5 M-5F) sprinters | S | Raw | CON, ECC 60,150 | 0,30,60,90 | 90–0 | NS | NS | - |
Sarabon et al. [147] | 18 (13 M-5F) active | S | MVC (0, 90) | NHE | 0,25,50,75 | 20–90 | 0 > all angles | 0 > all angles | |
Hegyi et al. [146] | 13 amateur athletes | HD | MVC (0, 30) | NHE | 0,90 | 90–15 | 0 > 90 | 0 > 90 | |
Black et al. [148] | 24 (12F, 12 M) | S | Raw | CON30 | 10 (Supine), 80 | N/A | NS | ||
Knee angle effects (smaller angle- greater length) | |||||||||
Mohamed et al. [127] | IM | As above | ISOM | 0, 90 | 90, 45, 0 | NS | Hip0: NS Hip90: 90, 45 > 0 | NS | |
Kirk and Rice [149] | 11 M | S | EMG at peak torque | ISOM | 0 | 20, 90 | 90 > 20 at 50% MVC | ||
Kirk and Rice [149] | 11 M | IM | ISOM | 0 | 20, 90 | 90 > 20 at 50 and 100% MVC | |||
Onishi et al. [128] | 10 M | IM | MVC (90,90) | ISOM | 0 | 60, 90 | 90 > 60 | 90 > 60 | 90 > 60 |
Kellis and Katis [150] | 9 M | S | Raw | ISOM | 90 | 0,45,90 | 90 < 45,0 | 90 < 45 > 0 | |
Kumazaki et al. [79] | 10 F-M | S | Raw | ISOM | 0 | 0, 30, 60, 90 | 90, 30, 60 < 0 | NS | 90 > 60,30, 0 |
Worrell et al. [130] | 50 (25F, 25 M) | S | Max at any angle | ISOM | 0, 30, 60, 90 | 0, 30, 60, 90 | 90 < 30–60 > 0 (“hamstrings”) | ||
Read et al. [151] | 10 M soccer players | S | MVC (0, 0) | ISOM | 0 (Supine) | 30, 90 | 90 < 30 | NS | |
Marchetti et al. [152] | 15 M resistance trained | S | Raw | ISOM | 15 | 0, 90 | NS | ||
Avrillon et al. [125] | 15 M (jumpers–sprinters) | S | Raw | ISOM, submaximal | 90 | 45 | |||
Chapman et al. [92] | 10 M | S | Raw | ISOM | 0–10 | 30,60 | NS | NS | |
Kellis and Baltzopoulos [153] | 12F | S | MVC (90, 35) | CON, ECC | 90 | 0–90 | 30–40 | ||
Beyer et al. [154] | 20 M (Sport science students) | S | MVC (0, 90) | ISOM | 0 | 90, 75, 60, 45, 30, 15 | 90 < 30 | NS | |
Kawama et al. [155] | 16 M (active) | S | Max at any angle | ISOM | 0 | 30,60,90 | NS | 90 < 60, 30 | 90 < 60, 30 |
Motomura et al. [156] | 20 M | S | Max at same angle | ISOM, submaximal | 45 | 10 80 | 80 > 10 | 80 > 10 | |
Hirose and Tsuruike [132] | 16 M (active) | S | MVC (90, 90) | ISOM submaximal | 0 | 30, 60, 90, 120 | 120, 90 < 60, 30 | 120 > all angles 90 > 60,30 | 120, 90 < 60, 30 |
Hirose and Tsuruike [132] | 16 M (active) | S | MVC (90, 90) | ISOM bridge submaximal | 0 | 30, 60, 90, 120 | 120,90 < 60, 30 | 120, 90 < 60,30 | 120, 90 < 60, 30 |
Andriacchi et al. [157] | 4 M | S | Max at any trial | Isotonic | 0 (Supine) | 40–0 | 40 > 0 | 40 > 0 | 40 > 0 |
Onishi et al. [128] | 10 M | ITRM | EMG between 75° and 90° | CON30 | 0 | 120–0 | 120 to 0 ↑ | 120 to 0: ↓ | 120 to 0: ↓ |
Higashihara et al. [158] | 10 M | S | Max at any trial | ECC10, 60, 180, 300 | 0 | 90–0 | 90–16 < 0–15 | NS | NS |
Croce and Miller [159] | 13 M | S | CON 100 to 400 | 0 | 0–15, 25–40 55–70, 75–90 | Middle ROM greater than end ROMs * | |||
Boyer et al. [160] | 18 (10 M, 8F) active | S | Max (K90) | NHE | 0 | 90–0 | 70–80% of motion | ||
Boyer et al. [160] | 18 (10 M, 8F) active | S | Max (K90) | Stiff-leg deadlift | 0–90 | 70–80% of motion | |||
Hegyi et al. [146] | 13 amateur athletes | HD | NHE | 0,90 | 90–15 | 90 to ~ 30: ↑ | 90 to ~ 30: ↑ | ||
Monajati et al. [161] | 10F soccer players | S | MVC (0, 30) | NHE Ball leg curls | 60–0 | 60 to 0 ↓ | 60 to 0 ↓ | ||
Combinations of hip and knee angle effects | |||||||||
Mohamed et al. [127] | 19F | IM | MMT | ISOM | 0, 90 | 90, 45, 0 | NS | H0-K90 > H90-K0 | NS |
Other conditions | |||||||||
Keerasomboon et al. [162] | 22 M (active) | S | MVC (0 or 30) | ISOM, CON, ECC with 5-kg load | 0, 45 | 0, 45, 90 | Hip extension superimposed to knee flexion increased EMG compared to hip extension alone 90, 45 > 0 | ||
Hegyi et al. [163] | 21 M | HD | Raw | ISOM | 0 | 30 | Hip extension superimposed to knee flexion increased EMG compared to knee flexion alone | ||
Hirose et al. [164] | 20 M | S | MVC (H0, K30, 60, 90) | ISOM NHE | ~ 0–15 | 30–0 50–0 90–0 | 90–0 > 50–0, 30–0 | ||