Does restricting arm motion compromise short sprint running performance?

Synchronized arm and leg motion are characteristic of human running. Leg motion is an obvious gait requirement, but arm motion is not, and its functional contribution to running performance is not known. Because arm-leg coupling serves to reduce rotation about the body’s vertical axis, arm motion ma...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gait & posture 2022-05, Vol.94, p.114-118
Hauptverfasser: Brooks, Lance C., Weyand, Peter G., Clark, Kenneth P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Synchronized arm and leg motion are characteristic of human running. Leg motion is an obvious gait requirement, but arm motion is not, and its functional contribution to running performance is not known. Because arm-leg coupling serves to reduce rotation about the body’s vertical axis, arm motion may be necessary to achieve the body positions that optimize ground force application and performance. Does restricting arm motion compromise performance in short sprints? Sprint performance was measured in 17 athletes during normal and restricted arm motion conditions. Restriction was self-imposed via arm folding across the chest with each hand on the opposite shoulder. Track and field (TF, n = 7) and team sport (TS, n = 10) athletes completed habituation and performance test sessions that included six counterbalanced 30 m sprints: three each in normal and restricted arm conditions. TS participants performed standing starts in both conditions. TF participants performed block starts with extended arms for the normal condition and elevated platform support of the elbows for the crossed-arm, restricted condition. Instantaneous velocity was measured throughout each trial using a radar device. Average sprint performance times were compared using a Repeated Measures ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc tests for the entire group and for the TF and TS subgroups. The 30 m times were faster for normal vs. restricted arm conditions, but the between-condition difference was only 1.6% overall and
ISSN:0966-6362
1879-2219
DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2022.03.001