PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2016

Characteristics of lower limb muscle activity during upper limb elevation in badminton players.

Yujiro Masu, Masanori Nagai

PMID 27799681

WHAT IT FOUND

Experienced badminton players lifted the dominant arm faster and used the opposite leg muscle more strongly than non-players.

The leg difference was not seen when they lifted the non-dominant arm.

Key findings

01When experienced players lifted the dominant arm, the opposite leg showed markedly higher muscle activity than the same-side leg, while non-players did not show this difference.

02The elevation phase took 0.22 ± 0.03 seconds for experienced players and 0.27 ± 0.06 seconds for non-players when lifting the dominant arm, and the experienced group was significantly shorter.

03In both groups, same-side leg muscle activity appeared before opposite-leg muscle activity during arm elevation.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 14 experienced male badminton players and 14 non-players were studied, so the sample is small and does not directly show what happens in women or clinical patients. The groups were compared at one time; the study did not test whether badminton training caused the muscle patterns. The task was a simple overhead arm lift, not a badminton smash or rally. The outcomes were muscle activity and timing, not injury, function, or clinical balance scores. The authors say the method's usefulness for evaluating athletes and people in rehabilitation still needs further testing.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read these muscle patterns as proof that badminton training improves balance or that they apply to patients. The study compared 14 experienced male players with 14 non-players during a laboratory arm-lift task, did not test an intervention, and did not report clinical outcomes.

Read it on PubMed →