Assessment of Whole Body and Local Muscle Fatigue Using Electromyography and a Perceived Exertion Scale for Squat Lifting

Imran Ahmad, Jung-Yong Kim, Imran Ahmad, Jung-Yong Kim

Abstract

This research study aims at addressing the paradigm of whole body fatigue and local muscle fatigue detection for squat lifting. For this purpose, a comparison was made between perceived exertion with the heart rate and normalized mean power frequency (NMPF) of eight major muscles. The sample consisted of 25 healthy males (age: 30 ± 2.2 years). Borg’s CR-10 scale was used for perceived exertion for two segments of the body (lower and upper) and the whole body. The lower extremity of the body was observed to be dominant compared to the upper and whole body in perceived response. First mode of principal component analysis (PCA) was obtained through the covariance matrix for the eight muscles for 25 subjects for NMPF of eight muscles. The diagonal entries in the covariance matrix were observed for each muscle. The muscle with the highest absolute magnitude was observed across all the 25 subjects. The medial deltoid and the rectus femoris muscles were observed to have the highest frequency for each PCA across 25 subjects. The rectus femoris, having the highest counts in all subjects, validated that the lower extremity dominates the sense of whole body fatigue during squat lifting. The findings revealed that it is significant to take into account the relation between perceived and measured effort that can help prevent musculoskeletal disorders in repetitive occupational tasks.

Keywords: Borg scale; assessment; electromyography; muscle; musculoskeletal disorders; principal component analysis; squats; whole body fatigue.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Muscle activation pattern of rectus femoris. The onset and offset of the muscle are designated by the arrows pointing upwards for the onset and downward for the offset.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Symmetric lifting and lowering.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Borg scale readings for upper and lower extremity and whole body for the 4 kg and 8 kg weights. Grey areas are highlighted to represent the perceived regions for the response against the Borg scale.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Normalized mean power frequencies (NMPF) for the eight muscles. Medial deltoid (MD), anterior deltoid (AD), upper trapezius (UT), supraspinatus (SP), bicep femoris (BF) vastus laterals (VS), gastrocnemius (GS), and rectus femoris (RF).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Principal muscles reviled by first mode of PCA for squat lifting for 4 and 8 kg weights. Medial deltoid (MD), anterior deltoid (AD), upper trapezius (UT), supraspinatus (SP), bicep femoris (BF) vastus laterals (VS), gastrocnemius (GS), and rectus femoris (RF).

References

    1. Shin H.J., Kim J.Y. Measurement of trunk muscle fatigue during dynamic lifting and lowering as recovery time changes. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2007;37:545–551. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2007.03.006.
    1. Enoka R.M., Duchateau J. Muscle fatigue: What, why and how it influences muscle function. J. Physiol. 2008;586:11–23. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.139477.
    1. Vahdat I., Rostami M., Ghomsheh F.T., Khorramymehr S., Tanbakoosaz A. The effects of task execution variables on the musculature activation strategy of the lower trunk during squat lifting. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2016;55:77–85. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2016.07.007.
    1. Smale K.B., Shourijeh M.S., Benoit D.L. Use of muscle synergies and wavelet transforms to identify fatigue during squatting. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2016;28:158–166. doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2016.04.008.
    1. Rashedi E., Nussbaum M.A. Cycle time influences the development of muscle fatigue at low to moderate levels of intermittent muscle contraction. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2016;28:37–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2016.03.001.
    1. Granata K.P., Marras W.S., Davis K.G. Variation in spinal load and trunk dynamics during repeated lifting exertions. Clin. Biomech. 1999;14:367–375. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(99)00004-2.
    1. Grant S., Aitchison T., Henderson E., Christie J., Zare S., Mc Murray J., Dargie H. A Comparison of the Reproducibility and the Sensitivity to Change of Visual Analogue Scales, Borg Scales, and Likert Scales in Normal Subjects during Submaximal Exercise. Chest. 1999;116:1208–1217. doi: 10.1378/chest.116.5.1208.
    1. Jakobsen M.D., Sundstrup E., Persson R., Andersen C.H., Andersen L.L. Is Borg’s perceived exertion scale a useful indicator of muscular and cardiovascular load in blue-collar workers with lifting tasks? A cross-sectional workplace study. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2014;114:425–434. doi: 10.1007/s00421-013-2782-9.
    1. Andersen L.L., Clausen T., Persson R., Holtermann A. Dose—Response relation between perceived physical exertion during healthcare work and risk of long-term sickness absence. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health. 2012;38:582–589. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3310.
    1. Ditchen D.M., Ellegast R.P., Gawliczek T., Hartmann B., Rieger M.A. Occupational kneeling and squatting: Development and validation of an assessment method combining measurements and diaries. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health. 2015;88:153–165. doi: 10.1007/s00420-014-0946-5.
    1. Au J.S., De Zepetnek J.O.T., Macdonald M.J. Modeling Perceived Exertion during Graded Arm Cycling Exercise in Spinal Cord Injury. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2017;49:1190–1196. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001203.
    1. Smirmaul Bde P. Sense of effort and other unpleasant sensations during exercise: Clarifying concepts and mechanisms. Br. J. Sports Med. 2012;46:308–311. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2010.071407.
    1. Dong H., Ugalde I., Figueroa N., El Saddik A. Towards whole body fatigue assessment of human movement: A fatigue-tracking system based on combined semg and accelerometer signals. Sensors. 2014;14:2052–2070. doi: 10.3390/s140202052.
    1. Borg G. Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health. 1990;16:55–58. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.1815.
    1. Borg G.A. Physical Performance and Perceived Exertion. Gleerup; Lund, Sweden: 1962.
    1. Shair E., Ahmad S.A., Marhaban M.H., Mohd Tamrin S.B., Abdullah A.R. EMG Processing Based Measures of Fatigue Assessment during Manual Lifting. BioMed Res. Int. 2017;2017:3937254. doi: 10.1155/2017/3937254.
    1. Ghofrani M., Olyaei G., Talebian S., Bagheri H., Kazemi P. Reliability of SEMG measurements for trunk muscles during lifting variable loads in healthy subjects. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 2017;21:711–718. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2016.12.003.
    1. Özgünen K.T., Çelik U., Kurdak S.S. Determination of an optimal threshold value for muscle activity detection in EMG analysis. J. Sports Sci. Med. 2010;9:620.
    1. Marras W.S., Granata K.P. The development of an EMG-assisted model to assess spine loading during whole-body free-dynamic lifting. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 1997;7:259–268. doi: 10.1016/S1050-6411(97)00006-0.
    1. Haddad O., Mirka G.A. Trunk muscle fatigue and its implications in EMG-assisted biomechanical modeling. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2013;43:425–429. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2013.08.004.
    1. Al-Mulla M.R., Sepulveda F., Colley M. A review of non-invasive techniques to detect and predict localised muscle fatigue. Sensors. 2011;11:3545–3594. doi: 10.3390/s110403545.
    1. Al-Shair K., Kolsum U., Singh D., Vestbo J. The Effect of Fatigue and Fatigue Intensity on Exercise Tolerance in Moderate COPD. Lung. 2016;194:889–895. doi: 10.1007/s00408-016-9931-y.
    1. Merletti R., Farina D. Surface Electromyography: Physiology, Engineering and Applications. John Wiley & Sons; Trenton, NJ, USA: 2016.
    1. Phinyomark A., Thongpanja S., Hu H., Phukpattaranont P., Limsakul C. Computational Intelligence in Electromyography Analysis—A Perspective on Current Applications and Future Challenges. InTech; London, UK: 2012. The usefulness of mean and median frequencies in electromyography analysis.
    1. Jesus I.R., Mello R.G., Nadal J. Muscle Fatigue Assessment during Cycle Ergometer Exercise Using Principal Component Analysis of Electromyogram Power Spectra. J. Appl. Biomech. 2016;32:593–598. doi: 10.1123/jab.2015-0253.
    1. Naik G.R., Selvan S.E., Gobbo M., Acharyya A., Nguyen H.T. Principal component analysis applied to surface electromyography: A comprehensive review. IEEE Access. 2016;4:4025–4037. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2593013.
    1. Jolliffe I.T. Principal Component Analysis. Springer; New York, NY, USA: 2002. Principal component analysis and factor analysis; pp. 150–166.
    1. Jolliffe I.T. Discarding Variables in a Principal Component Analysis. I: Artificial Data. Appl. Stat. 1972;21:160–173. doi: 10.2307/2346488.
    1. Dhindsa I., Agarwal R., Ryait H. Principal component analysis-based muscle identification for myoelectric-controlled exoskeleton knee. J. Appl. Stat. 2017;44:1707–1720. doi: 10.1080/02664763.2016.1221907.
    1. Muniz A.M., Nadal J. Application of principal component analysis in vertical ground reaction force to discriminate normal and abnormal gait. Gait Posture. 2009;29:31–35. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.05.015.
    1. SENIAM SENIAM. [(assecced on 4 March 2018)];2017 Available online:
    1. Ribeiro D.C., de Castro M.P., Sole G., Vicenzino B. The initial effects of a sustained glenohumeral postero-lateral glide during elevation on shoulder muscle activity: A repeated measures study on asymptomatic shoulders. Man. Ther. 2016;22(Suppl. C):101–108. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2015.10.014.
    1. Plews D.J., Scott B., Altini M., Wood M., Kilding A.E., Laursen P.B. Comparison of Heart Rate Variability Recording with Smart Phone Photoplethysmographic, Polar H7 Chest Strap and Electrocardiogram Methods. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2017;12:1324–1328. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0668.
    1. Smith L.H., Hargrove L.J., Lock B.A., Kuiken T.A. Determining the optimal window length for pattern recognition-based myoelectric control: Balancing the competing effects of classification error and controller delay. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 2011;19:186–192. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2010.2100828.
    1. Marras W.S., Lavender S.A., Leurgans S.E., Fathallah F.A., Ferguson S.A., Allread W.G., Rajulu S.L. Biomechanical risk factors for occupationally related low back disorders. Ergonomics. 1995;38:377–410. doi: 10.1080/00140139508925111.
    1. Souissi H., Chtourou H., Chaouachi A., Chamari K., Souissi N., Amri M. Time-of-day effects on EMG parameters during the Wingate test in boys. J. Sports Sci. Med. 2012;11:380.
    1. Serafim T.H., Tognato A.C., Nakamura P.M., Queiroga M.R., Pereira G., Nakamura F.Y., Kokubun E. Development of the color scale of perceived exertion: Preliminary validation. Percept. Mot. Skills. 2014;119:884–900. doi: 10.2466/27.06.PMS.119c28z5.
    1. Villafañe J.H., Gobbo M., Peranzoni M., Naik G., Imperio G., Cleland J.A., Negrini S. Validity and everyday clinical applicability of lumbar muscle fatigue assessment methods in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: A systematic review. Disabil. Rehabil. 2016;38:1859–1871. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1107777.
    1. Egan A.D. Session rating of perceived exertion during high intensity and low intensity bouts of resistance exercise. UW-L J. Undergrad Res. 2003;6:1–6.
    1. Kulkarni S., Swaminathan R. Analysis of surface EMG signals during dynamic contraction using Lempel-Ziv complexity; Proceedings of the 2015 41st Annual Northeast Biomedical Engineering Conference (NEBEC); Troy, NY, USA. 17–19 April 2015.
    1. Hummel A., Läubli T., Pozzo M., Schenk P., Spillmann S., Klipstein A. Relationship between perceived exertion and mean power frequency of the EMG signal from the upper trapezius muscle during isometric shoulder elevation. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2005;95:321–326. doi: 10.1007/s00421-005-0014-7.
    1. Charoenpanicha N., Boonsinsukhb R., Sirisupc S., Saengsirisuwana V. Principal component analysis identifies major muscles recruited during elite vertical jump. ScienceAsia. 2013;39:257–264. doi: 10.2306/scienceasia1513-1874.2013.39.257.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する