Advertisement

Co-activation of Knee Muscles in Female vs. Male Adults

  • Francesco Di NardoEmail author
  • Annachiara Strazza
  • Andrea Tigrini
  • Guido Mascia
  • Stefano Cardarelli
  • Alessandro Mengarelli
  • Federica Verdini
  • Sandro Fioretti
Conference paper
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 76)

Abstract

During walking, knee joint mechanics is primarily regulated by thigh-muscle group, i.e. hamstrings and quadriceps femoris. Research purpose was to assess gender-related differences in concomitant recruitment of antagonist knee-joint muscles during ground walking. To this aim, Statistical gait analysis was performed on surface-electromyographic (sEMG) signals from vastus lateralis (VL) and medial hamstrings (MH) in 15 female (F-group) and 15 male (M-group) age-matched able-bodied young adults. sEMG signals from numerous strides (average value ± SD of 452 ± 102 strides for F-group and 440 ± 106 strides for M-group) were analyzed for each subject. Results showed that the same three VL/MH co-activations were found in the gait cycle, irrespective of gender: during early stance (ES), push-off (PO), and swing (SW) phase. No significant gender-related differences (p > 0.05) were observed in co-activity duration. Differently, an increase of occurrence frequency was observed in F-group for VL/MH co-activation during PO phase, with respect to M-group (21.9 ± 13.6% vs. 11.3 ± 8.6% of strides, p = 2.5 × 10−3). This increased occurrence of co-activations suggests a more complex muscular recruitment for knee-joint stabilization in females, in particular in PO phase when the control of balance is more awkward because of the final phase of single support. In conclusion, the present study indicates gender as a not negligible factor in evaluating knee-muscle co-activation during walking.

Keywords

Muscle co-activation Statistical gait analysis Surface EMG Human walking 

References

  1. 1.
    Da Fonseca, S.T., Silva, P.L.P., Ocarino, J.M., et al.: Analyses of dynamic co-contraction level in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament injury. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 14, 239–247 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kellis, E.: Quantification of quadriceps and hamstring antagonist activity. Sport Med. 25, 37–62 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strazza, A., Mengarelli, A., Fioretti, S., et al.: Surface-EMG analysis for the quantification of thigh muscle dynamic co-contractions during normal gait. Gait Posture 51, 228–233 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olney, S.J.: Quantitative evaluation of cocontraction of knee and ankle muscles in normal walking. In: Biomechanics IX: International Congress of Biomechanics, pp. 431–436 (1983)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosa, M.C.N., Marques, A., Demain, S., et al.: Methodologies to assess muscle co-contraction during gait in people with neurological impairment - a systematic literature review. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 24, 179–191 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schmitz, A., Silder, A., Heiderscheit, B., et al.: Differences in lower-extremity muscular activation during walking between healthy older and young adults. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 19, 1085–1091 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hortobágyi, T., Solnik, S., Gruber, A., et al.: Interaction between age and gait velocity in the amplitude and timing of antagonist muscle coactivation. Gait Posture 29, 558–564 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frost, G., Dowling, J., Dyson, K., Bar-Or, O.: Cocontraction in three age groups of children during treadmill locomotion. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 7, 179–186 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bohannon, R.W.: Comfortable and maximum walking speed of adults aged 20–79 years: reference values and determinants. Age Ageing 26, 15–19 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oberg, T., Karsznia, A., Oberg, K.: Basic gait parameters: reference data for normal subjects, 10–79 years of age. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 30, 210–223 (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kerrigan, D.C., Todd, M.K., Della Croce, U.: Gender differences in joint biomechanics during walking: normative study in young adults. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 77, 2–7 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hurd, W.J., Chmielewski, T.L., Axe, M.J., et al.: Differences in normal and perturbed walking kinematics between male and female athletes. Clin. Biomech. 19, 465–472 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chumanov, E.S., Wall-Scheffler, C., Heiderscheit, B.C.: Gender differences in walking and running on level and inclined surfaces. Clin. Biomech. 23, 1260–1268 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Di Nardo, F., Mengarelli, A., Maranesi, E., et al.: Gender differences in the myoelectric activity of lower limb muscles in young healthy subjects during walking. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 19, 14–22 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chiu, M.C., Wang, M.J.: The effect of gait speed and gender on perceived exertion, muscle activity, joint motion of lower extremity, ground reaction force and heart rate during normal walking. Gait Posture 25, 385–392 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mengarelli, A., Maranesi, E., Burattini, L., et al.: Co-contraction activity of ankle muscles during walking: a gender comparison. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 33, 1–9 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hermens, H.J., Freriks, B., Disselhorst-Klugm, C., Rau, G.: Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 10, 361–374 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agostini, V., Balestra, G., Knaflitz, M.: Segmentation and classification of gait cycles. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 22, 946–952 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bonato, P., D’Alessio, T., Knaflitz, M.: A statistical method for the measurement of muscle activation intervals from surface myoelectric signal during gait. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 45, 287–299 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Di Nardo, F., Mengarelli, A., Strazza, A., et al.: A new parameter for quantifying the variability of surface electromyographic signals during gait: the occurrence frequency. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 36, 25–33 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Di Nardo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Annachiara Strazza
    • 1
  • Andrea Tigrini
    • 1
  • Guido Mascia
    • 1
  • Stefano Cardarelli
    • 1
  • Alessandro Mengarelli
    • 1
  • Federica Verdini
    • 1
  • Sandro Fioretti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information EngineeringUniversità Politecnica delle MarcheAnconaItaly

Personalised recommendations