Differences in Lower Extremity and Trunk Kinematics between Single Leg Squat and Step Down Tasks

Abstract

The single leg squat and single leg step down are two commonly used functional tasks to assess movement patterns. It is unknown how kinematics compare between these tasks. The purpose of this study was to identify kinematic differences in the lower extremity, pelvis and trunk between the single leg squat and the step down. Fourteen healthy individuals participated in this research and performed the functional tasks while kinematic data were collected for the trunk, pelvis, and lower extremities using a motion capture system. For the single leg squat task, the participant was instructed to squat as low as possible. For the step down task, the participant was instructed to stand on top of a box, slowly lower him/herself until the non-stance heel touched the ground, and return to standing. This was done from two different heights (16cm and 24cm). The kinematics were evaluated at peak knee flexion as well as at 60° of knee flexion. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) between the angles at those two time points were also calculated to better understand the relationship between each task. The tasks resulted in kinematics differences at the knee, hip, pelvis, and trunk at both time points. The single leg squat was performed with less hip adduction (p ≤ 0.003), but more hip external rotation and knee abduction (p ≤ 0.030), than the step down tasks at 60° of knee flexion. These differences were maintained at peak knee flexion except hip external rotation was only significant in the 24cm step down task (p ≤ 0.029). While there were multiple differences between the two step heights at peak knee flexion, the only difference at 60° of knee flexion was in trunk flexion (p < 0.001). Angles at the knee and hip had a moderate to excellent correlation (r = 0.51–0.98), but less consistently so at the pelvis and trunk (r = 0.21–0.96). The differences in movement patterns between the single leg squat and the step down should be considered when selecting a single leg task for evaluation or treatment. The high correlation of knee and hip angles between the three tasks indicates that similar information about knee and hip kinematics was gained from each of these tasks, while pelvis and trunk angles were less well predicted.

Movement-Pattern Training to Improve Function in People With Chronic Hip Joint Pain: A Feasibility Randomized Clinical Trial

“…Conservatively assuming that (a) 85% of participants will complete post-treatment testing; (b) the common within-group standard deviation for change between pre- and immediate post-treatment is 15; and (c) no covariates will be informative in the analysis, a sample size of 52 participants per group (with 45 participants per group completing both visits) will have 80% statistical power to detect a 9-point MIC with a two-tailed t-test at alpha 0.05. For kinematic assessment, we will focus on the single leg squat, however will assess other tasks such as step down, 9, 26 sit to stand 10 and when appropriate a drop vertical jump. 9 Finally, we will assess outcomes one year after treatment to assess the sustainability of treatment effects.…”

Comparison of Activities of Tibialis Anterior, Peroneus Longus, and Tibialis Posterior Muscles according to Lunge Squats and Bulgarian Split Squats in a Healthy Population

“…Various types of squat exercise have been used in physical training and rehabilitation of individuals with CAI or knee joint deformities such as knee valgus and patellofemoral pain. [15][16][17] This study was conducted to examine the effect of two types of squat on muscle activities of the anterior tibialis ankle, long calf muscle, and tibialis ankle contributing to the stability of the ankle joint. As a result of this study, when Bulgarian split squat was applied compared to lunge squirt, muscle activities of TA and PL muscle were increased significantly (p<0.05).…”

Hip-Muscle Activity in Men and Women During Resisted Side Stepping With Different Band Positions

“…After affixing the reflective markers, 28 we collected a static standing trial with the participants in a neutral posture. For this trial, they were instructed to stand upright facing straight forward with their feet positioned shoulderwidth apart, upper limbs held out to the sides, and shoulders in approximately 908 of abduction.…”

“…Retroreflective markers were placed bilaterally and secured with tape on the trunk, pelvis, and lower extremities as previously described. 28 Briefly, markers were secured bilaterally with tape over the first and fifth metatarsal heads, calcanei, medial and lateral malleoli, medial and lateral femoral epicondyles, greater trochanter, anterior-superior iliac spines, iliac crests, and acromioclavicular joint. Markers were also placed over the sacrum, spinous process of C7, and sternum.…”