Functional resistance training during walking: do biomechanical and neural effects differ based on targeted joints?
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to compare the effects of functional resistance training (FRT) during walking when resistance was applied to the knee alone versus both the hip and knee joints.
Results Summary
Adding resistance to the hip increased hip flexion moment and concentric power during swing phase but did not significantly differ from knee-only resistance in muscle activation, aftereffects, peripheral fatigue, or corticospinal excitability. Both configurations produced similar changes in these variables.
Population
Fourteen non-disabled individuals.
Effective Dosage
Not specified.
Duration
Separate visits (acute setting).
Interactions
None mentioned.
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | increase | hip flexion moment | non-disabled individuals | - | increased | #1 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | increase | hip concentric power during the swing phase | non-disabled individuals | - | increased | #2 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | no change | muscle activation | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #3 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | no change | kinematic aftereffects | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #4 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | no change | peripheral fatigue | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #5 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | no change | corticospinal excitability | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #6 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the knee | no change | muscle activation | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #7 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the knee | no change | kinematic aftereffects | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #8 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the knee | no change | peripheral fatigue | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #9 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the knee | no change | corticospinal excitability | non-disabled individuals | - | did not result in significant differences | #10 |
functional resistance training (FRT) during walking configured to resist the hip and knee | no change | walking with resistance | non-disabled individuals | - | was not different from resisting the knee | #11 |
Devices for functional resistance training (FRT) during walking are often configured to resist the knee or both the hip and knee joints. Adding resistance to the hip in addition to the knee should alter the effects of training; however, these configurations have not been directly compared. We examined how FRT during walking differs during the knee or hip and knee conditions. Fourteen non-disabled individuals received FRT during treadmill walking with a device configured to provide a viscous resistance to the knee or the hip and knee during separate visits. Between these configurations, we compared gait kinetics, muscle activation, kinematic aftereffects, peripheral fatigue, and corticospinal excitability. Adding resistance to the hip increased hip flexion moment and concentric power during the swing phase. However, this did not result in significant differences in muscle activation, aftereffects, peripheral fatigue, or corticospinal excitability between the configurations. Instead, both configurations produced similar changes in these variables. These results indicate that, aside from kinetics, walking with resistance at the hip and knee was not different from resisting the knee in the acute setting. However, further research is needed to determine if long-term training with resistance at the hip induces differential effects than resisting the knee alone.