Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men

The purpose of this study was to compare the absolute and relative peak and mean Ground Reaction Force (GRF) generated by both Conventional Deadlift (CDL) and Romanian Deadlift (RDL) during concentric and eccentric phase as determined by force plate. The time to peak force between these two deadlift...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:AIP Conference Proceedings
Main Author: Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
Format: Conference paper
Language:English
Published: American Institute of Physics 2024
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85189299404&doi=10.1063%2f5.0148593&partnerID=40&md5=963e56d91854e4c5dd9667005a8d2886
id 2-s2.0-85189299404
spelling 2-s2.0-85189299404
Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
2024
AIP Conference Proceedings
2750
1
10.1063/5.0148593
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85189299404&doi=10.1063%2f5.0148593&partnerID=40&md5=963e56d91854e4c5dd9667005a8d2886
The purpose of this study was to compare the absolute and relative peak and mean Ground Reaction Force (GRF) generated by both Conventional Deadlift (CDL) and Romanian Deadlift (RDL) during concentric and eccentric phase as determined by force plate. The time to peak force between these two deadlifts was also compared. Twenty recreationally active male in weight training (age 21.34±1.82 years; body height 170.24±5.71m; body mass 65.34±4.48 kg) were recruited to perform the RDL and CDL. The participant would stand upright with both feet on top of the force platform. Two repetitions of 90% of the participant 1RM deadlift is done. The participant is then allowed to take a 5-minute rest before continuing the same routine for another two set. After 3 sets of 2 reps of CDL or RDL, he is allowed to rest for 3 days before continuing for the next session. The same participant is then required to do the RDL or CDL until each one of them completed both the CDL and RDL session. One tri-axial AMTI force platform with data sampling rate of 1000 Hz were used to collect kinetic data. A repeated measure multivariate analysis of variances (MANOVA) was used to examine the differences in the variables with the significance level set at p<.05. Result showed significant difference found between the Conventional and Romanian deadlift in term of absolute and relative peak and mean concentric force. CDL showed a higher GRF during concentric compared to RDL. Time taken to peak force is also faster in CDL compared to RDL. There is no significant difference found during eccentric movement between CDL and RDL. Overall, the findings showed that there are different biomechanical responses with different types of the deadlift in different phases. © 2024 Author(s).
American Institute of Physics
0094243X
English
Conference paper

author Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
spellingShingle Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
author_facet Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
author_sort Tan K.; Ibrahim T.M.S.T.; Azemi M.A.; Vasanthi R.K.; Ramachandran A.; Nadzalan A.M.
title Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
title_short Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
title_full Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
title_fullStr Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
title_full_unstemmed Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
title_sort Kinetics comparison between conventional and Romanian deadlift among recreationally active men
publishDate 2024
container_title AIP Conference Proceedings
container_volume 2750
container_issue 1
doi_str_mv 10.1063/5.0148593
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85189299404&doi=10.1063%2f5.0148593&partnerID=40&md5=963e56d91854e4c5dd9667005a8d2886
description The purpose of this study was to compare the absolute and relative peak and mean Ground Reaction Force (GRF) generated by both Conventional Deadlift (CDL) and Romanian Deadlift (RDL) during concentric and eccentric phase as determined by force plate. The time to peak force between these two deadlifts was also compared. Twenty recreationally active male in weight training (age 21.34±1.82 years; body height 170.24±5.71m; body mass 65.34±4.48 kg) were recruited to perform the RDL and CDL. The participant would stand upright with both feet on top of the force platform. Two repetitions of 90% of the participant 1RM deadlift is done. The participant is then allowed to take a 5-minute rest before continuing the same routine for another two set. After 3 sets of 2 reps of CDL or RDL, he is allowed to rest for 3 days before continuing for the next session. The same participant is then required to do the RDL or CDL until each one of them completed both the CDL and RDL session. One tri-axial AMTI force platform with data sampling rate of 1000 Hz were used to collect kinetic data. A repeated measure multivariate analysis of variances (MANOVA) was used to examine the differences in the variables with the significance level set at p<.05. Result showed significant difference found between the Conventional and Romanian deadlift in term of absolute and relative peak and mean concentric force. CDL showed a higher GRF during concentric compared to RDL. Time taken to peak force is also faster in CDL compared to RDL. There is no significant difference found during eccentric movement between CDL and RDL. Overall, the findings showed that there are different biomechanical responses with different types of the deadlift in different phases. © 2024 Author(s).
publisher American Institute of Physics
issn 0094243X
language English
format Conference paper
accesstype
record_format scopus
collection Scopus
_version_ 1812871794701369344