Author: Mingyu Liu#1, Cuihan Li#1, Xiongfeng Li1, Jianwei Zhang1, Haojie Li1, Yameng Li2, Qiuyang Wei3, Zaihao Chen1, Jiahao Fu4, Yanying Li5, Meize Cui1, Lujia Li1, Peng Zhang1, Yuerong Huang1, Yuxin Ma1, Jianan Xu1, Shaojun Lyu1, Yunchao Ma1
Affiliation: <sup>1</sup> College of P.E. and Sports, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
<sup>2</sup> Department of Physical Education, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, ShanXi, China.
<sup>3</sup> Sports Department, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China.
<sup>4</sup> College of Physical Education, Zhejiang Guangsha Vocational and Technical University of Construction, Jinhua, Zhejiang, China.
<sup>5</sup> Sports Department of Leisure Health Teaching and Research Section, Hainan Medical University, Haikou, Hainan, China.
Conference/Journal: PeerJ
Date published: 2024 Aug 28
Other:
Volume ID: 12 , Pages: e17839 , Special Notes: doi: 10.7717/peerj.17839. , Word Count: 474
Background:
The objective of this study was to compare and analyze the representative opening and closing movement of Tai Chi elastic band exercise with the reverse fly movement of elastic band resistance training. The aim was to explore the biomechanical differences between the two exercises and provide theoretical support for the application of Tai Chi elastic band exercise in health intervention.
Methods:
A total of 26 male participants were recruited and randomly divided into two groups in a 1:1 ratio. There were 13 participants in each Tai Chi elastic band exercise group and elastic band resistance training group. Both groups of participants used an elastic band to perform movement in the experiment. Experimental data were collected using the Vicon infrared motion capture system and Delsys surface EMG system. The AnyBody software was utilized to simulate the creation of a musculoskeletal model for both exercises.
Result:
The study found that the Tai Chi elastic band exercise group exhibited smaller horizontal abduction angle and flexion angle of the shoulder joint, as well as normalized RMS of the anterior deltoid and triceps brachii, compared to the elastic band resistance training group (P < 0.01); the Tai Chi elastic band exercise group exhibited greater elbow flexion angle, elbow flexion torque, and muscle strength of the infraspinatus, coracobrachialis, biceps brachii, brachialis and brachioradialis, compared to the elastic band resistance training group (P < 0.01); the Tai Chi elastic band exercise group exhibited smaller horizontal abduction angular velocity of the shoulder joint and a lower normalized RMS of the posterior deltoid, compared to the elastic band resistance training group (P < 0.05).
Conclusion:
(1) The opening and closing movement of Tai Chi elastic band exercise is characterized by a large elbow flexion angle, a small shoulder joint horizontal angle and flexion angle, and a slow and uniform speed of movement. The reverse fly movement of elastic band resistance training is characterized by a large horizontal abduction angle of the shoulder joint, a large flexion angle of the shoulder joint, a small flexion angle of the elbow joint, and a fast and uneven speed. (2) The opening and closing movement exerts a greater torque on the elbow flexion, while the reverse fly movement exerts a greater torque on the shoulder joint horizontal abduction and external rotation. (3) The opening and closing movement provide greater stimulation to the infraspinatus, coracobrachialis, and elbow flexor, while the reverse fly movement provides greater stimulation to the posterior deltoid, anterior deltoid, subscapularis, and elbow extensor. In summary, the variation in joint angle, joint angular velocity, and hand position could be the factor contributing to the differences in joint torque and muscle activity between the opening and closing movement of Tai Chi elastic band exercise and the reverse fly movement of elastic band resistance training.
Keywords: AnyBody simulation; Elastic band resistance training; Joint; Muscle; Sport health; Tai Chi elastic band exercise.
PMID: 39221286 PMCID: PMC11365477 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.17839