نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه بیومکانیک و آسیب شناسی ورزشی، دانشکده تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار بیومکانیک ورزشی، دانشکده تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه مازندران، مازندران
3 استادیار بیومکانیک ورزشی، دانشکده تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران
4 استادیار بیومکانیک ورزشی، دانشکده تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه مازندران، مازندران
چکیده
هدف مطالعة حاضر، مقایسة هماهنگی و تغییرپذیری مفاصل اندام فوقانی در پاروکشی کایاک مردان جوان نیمه‌حرفه‌ای و نخبه بود. تعداد هشت مرد جوان کایاکران در دو گروه نخبه و نیمه‌حرفه‌ای قرار گرفتند. با تقسیم چرخة پاروکشی به چهار مرحلة اصلی، میانگین و تغییرپذیری فاز نسبی پیوسته برای هر مرحله محاسبه شد. نتایج آزمون تی مستقل برای هماهنگی مفاصل بین دو گروه، تفاوت بیشتر در خم‌کردن شانه و آرنج سمت چپ مرحلة چهارم و خم‌کردن آرنج و دورکردن شانة سمت چپ مرحلة اول را نشان داد. با توجه به نتایج، در تمام مراحل سمت راست، گروه نخبه تغییرپذیری بیشتری نسبت به سمت چپ داشتند؛ درحالی‌که در گروه نیمه‌حرفه‌ای تغییرپذیری الگوی نامنظمی داشت. به‌طورکلی، در مقایسة پاروکشی کایاک بین دو گروه نخبه و نیمه‌حرفه‌ای، تفاوت معناداری در فاز نسبی پیوسته و تغییرپذیری آن مشاهده نشد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Comparison of Upper Extremity Joints Coordination and its Variability in Kayak Paddling Technique of Elite and Intermediate Young Males
نویسندگان [English]
- Mahdi Baghaeian 1
- mansour eslami 2
- Ali Abbasi 3
- Mehdi Khaleghi Tazji 3
- Seyed Esmaeil Hosseini Nejad 4
1 Sport Biomechanics Department, Faculty of Physical Education & Sport Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor in Sports Biomechanics, Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Mazandaran University, Mazandaran
3 Assistant Professor in Sports Biomechanics, Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran
4 Assistant Professor in Sports Biomechanics, Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Mazandaran University, Mazandaran
چکیده [English]
The aim of this study was to compare the coordination and variability of upper limb joints in elite and intermediate young men during Kayak paddling technique. Eight young Kayak paddlers were classified into two elite and intermediate groups. After dividing the stroke cycle into four phases, the mean and variability of continuous relative phase were calculated for each phase. The results of the independent t-test for coordination of joints between the two groups showed significant differences in the shoulder and elbow flexion on the left side in fourth phase and elbow flexion and shoulder abduction at left side in first phase. According to the results, in the all phase, the elite group variability was more in right side than the left, while the intermediate group variability has Irregular patterns. Generally, comparison Continuous Relative Phase and its Variability between elite and intermediate Kayak paddler showed no significant differences.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Kayak
- Paddling
- Continuous Relative Phase
- Variability
2. Kendal SJ, Sanders RH. The technique of elite flatwater kayak paddlers using the wing paddle. Int J Sport Biomech. 1992;8(3):233–50.
3. Ong K, Elliott B, Ackland T, Lyttle A. Performance tolerance and boat set‐up in elite sprint Kayaking. Sport Biomech. 2006;5(1):77–94.
4. Baker J, Rath D, Sanders R, Kelly B. A three-dimensional analysis of male and female elite sprint kayak paddlers. ISBS-conference proceedings archive. Michigan: International Society of Biomechanics in Sports; 1999.
5. Vaquero-Cristóbal R, Alacid F, López-Plaza D, Muyor JM, López-Miñarro PA. Kinematic variables evolution during a 200-m maximum test in young paddlers. J Hum Kinet. 2013;38:15–22.
6. Mann R V, Kearney JT. A biomechanical analysis of the Olympic-style flatwater kayak stroke. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1979;12(3):183–8.
7. Alacid F, López-Minarro PA, Vaquero R. Speed and cycle frequency of young paddlers in 1000m races. Rev Kronos. 2010;9(17).
8. Bondarenko KK, Khikhlukha DA, Bondarenko AE, Shilko S V. Effect of muscle exhaustion on kinematics of kayak rowing. Russian J Biomech. 2010;14(1):47–54
9. Wassinger CA, Myers JB, Sell TC, Oyama S, Rubenstein EN, Lephart SM. Scapulohumeral kinematic assessment of the forward kayak stroke in experienced whitewater kayakers. Sport Biomech. 2011;10(02):98–109.
10. López CL, Serna JR. Quantitative analysis of kayak paddling technique: Definition of an optimal stroke profile. Rev Andal Med Deporte. 2011;4(3):91-95
11. Miller RH, Chang R, Baird JL, Van Emmerik REA, Hamill J. Variability in kinematic coupling assessed by vector coding and continuous relative phase. J Biomech. 2010;43(13):2554–60.
12. Miller RH, Meardon SA, Derrick TR, Gillette JC. Continuous relative phase variability during an exhaustive run in runners with a history of iliotibial band syndrome. J Appl Biomech. 2008;24(3):262–70.
13. Haddad JM, van Emmerik REA, Wheat JS, Hamill J, Snapp-Childs W. Relative phase coordination analysis in the assessment of dynamic gait symmetry. J Appl Biomech. 2010;26(1):109–13.
14. Hein T, Schmeltzpfenning T, Krauss I, Maiwald C, Horstmann T, Grau S. Using the variability of continuous relative phase as a measure to discriminate between healthy and injured runners. Hum Mov Sci. 2012;31(3):683–94.
15. Gittoes M, Applied CW-J. Intralimb joint coordination patterns of the lower extremity in maximal velocity phase sprint running. J Hum kinet. 2010;26(2):188–195.
16. Seifert L, Leblanc H, Chollet D, Delignières D. Inter-limb coordination in swimming: effect of speed and skill level. Hum Mov Sci. 2010;29(1):103–13.
17. Chiu S-L, Chou L-S. Variability in inter-joint coordination during walking of elderly adults and its association with clinical balance measures. Clin Biomech. 2013;28(4):454–8.
18. Burgess-Limerick R, Abernethy B, Neal RJ. Relative phase quantifies interjoint coordination. J Biomech. 1993;26(1):91–4.
19. Hamill J, van Emmerik REA, Heiderscheit BC, Li L. A dynamical systems approach to lower extremity running injuries. Clin Biomech. 1999;14(5):297–308.
20. Hurmuzlu Y, Basdogan C, Carollo JJ. Presenting joint kinematics of human locomotion using phase plane portraits and Poincare maps. J Biomech. 1994;27(12):1495–9.
21. Seay JF, Van Emmerik REA, Hamill J. Low back pain status affects pelvis-trunk coordination and variability during walking and running. Clin Biomech. 2011;26(6):572–8.
22. Hamill J, Palmer C, Van Emmerik REA. Coordinative variability and overuse injury. Sport Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol. 2012;4(1):45-53.
23. Drewes LK, McKeon PO, Paolini G, Riley P, Kerrigan DC, Ingersoll CD, et al. Altered ankle kinematics and shank-rear-foot coupling in those with chronic ankle instability. J Sport Rehabil. 2009;18(3):375–88.
24. Floria P, Sanchez-Sixto A, Ferber R, Harrison AJ. Gait Coordination Variability between Trained Runners and Non-Runners. In: ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive. Tsukuba: International Society of Biomechanics in Sports. 2016.
25. Cazzola D, Pavei G, Preatoni E. Can coordination variability identify performance factors and skill level in competitive sport? The case of race walking. J Sport Heal Sci. 2016;5(1):35–43.
26. Hamill J, Haddad JM, Van Emmerik REA. Using coordination measures for movement analysis. ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive. 2005.
27. Stergiou N. Innovative analyses of human movement. Cloth: Human Kinetics Champaign, IL; 2004. p. 176.
28. Fleming N, Donne B, Fletcher D. Effect of kayak ergometer elastic tension on upper limb EMG activity and 3D kinematics. J Sports Sci Med. 2012;11(3):430-437.
29. Robertson G, Caldwell G, Hamill J, Kamen G, Whittlesey S. Research methods in biomechanics, 2E. New York: Human Kinetics; 2013. p. 303.
30. Cusack WF, Patterson R, Thach S, Kistenberg RS, Wheaton LA. Motor performance benefits of matched limb imitation in prosthesis users. Exp Brain Res. 2014;232(7):2143–54.
31. Van Emmerik REA, Den Brinker B, Vereijken B, Whiting HTA. Preferred tempo in the learning of a gross cyclical action. Q J Exp Psychol Sect A. 1989;41(2):251–62.
32. Hagemann G, Rijke AM, Mars M. Shoulder pathoanatomy in marathon kayakers. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(4):413–7.
)