Analysis of Muscles Electrical Activities During Bench Press

The primary objective of the study was to see the muscle electrical activity of the different muscle groups while performingthe Bench press.In addition to this, the amount of contribution of each mentioned muscle during bench presswas alsoanalyzed. Ten male subjects who have participated in the All India Intervarsity competitionwere selectedfor the purpose of this study.. Their age was between 18-25 years. The muscles included in the study were  Pactoralis major  Anterior Deltoid  Triceps

Before the test could begin the scholar explained the aim and objectives of the present study undertaken. The doubts if anywere clarified. Finally, before the actual testing could begin an informed consent was signed by all the subjects. For the purpose of the study, the athletes were tested for bioelectric activity and muscle activation time in Free EMG BTS system. It was recorded in the measurement system contains the following parts: analogy and digital form and transmitted to microprocessor circuit. The program allows you to synchronize data sampling measurement digital filtering and initial implementation for transferring data to computer. The digital signal representing the measured EMG activity is sent to computer. Name of the test: One repetition maximum (RM) Bench Press Purpose of the test: To measure the muscles electrical activity during bench press. For the collection of data, the subjects were asked to do warm up for the prevention of any injuries during the test. Firstly, the scholar had demonstrated the full skill to the subjects. After the demonstration of the skill by the scholar, the first subject was called and the electrodes were placed on the respective places (Pactoralis major, Anterior Deltoid,Ttriceps). Then the barbell was loaded according to the subject‟s maximum strength capacity. The subject was asked to take position on the bench and hold the barbell only, two assistants were on the side of the bench for safety purpose. The assistant lifted the loaded barbell and place it on the subject hand until and unless the scholar gave the press command. On the command press of the scholar the subject was allowed to press the loaded barbell and place it back on initial position. The data of the muscles contraction of the respective muscles were detected by the EMG machine and displayed on the software installed in the Laptop. The same procedure had followed for the remaining subjects for the collection of data. software was used.

pectoralis major 37.9826±6.79813, triceps 29.1884±6.03188, anterior deltoid 33.9038±7.98464. In the same categories, the minimum and maximum values for different muscles group were: pectoralis major (31.05;51.57), triceps (21.42;36.87), anterior deltoid (21.37;48.56). Table 2: Comparison of Muscle Groups Using One Way ANOVA LINT(EMG) Less than 0.05 hence significant difference exist. P=0.031 In the above-mentioned ANOVA table comparison of muscles activation between 3 muscles involves in bench press was done. The F (2,27) = 3.970 with a significant p value, p = 0.031 (p<0,05) hence it can be stated there exist a significant difference in muscle activation level or electrical activity in between pectoralis, triceps andanteror deltoid during bench press. To find out the significant muscle activation in bench press and for multiple comparison Post Hoc test Least Significant Difference was applied between 3 muscle group. Table 3: Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: LINT(EMG) From the above table it can be stated there exists a significant difference between pectoralis and triceps with p = 0.009 which is less than 0.05. Further comparison of pectoralis and deltoid reveals no significant difference with p = 0.203 (p>0.05), hence no significant difference in muscle activity betweenpectoralis and deltoid was found. Comparisonbetween deltoid and triceps was found insignificant, p = 0.143 which is above the significant value of 0.05. Further studying the data collected from the sample following discussions were made: The results of the study showed that there exist a significant difference inmuscle electrical activity ofthe chosenmuscle group. The group statistics also revealed that the mean for Pectoralis major was greater than the triceps and anterior deltoid. Findings byChris Barnett,(2016)Arthue A. Trebs, (2010)Juan Carlos Santana, (2007), ZhongquiJi, (2016) support the findings of the present study. In light of the above findings, null hypothesis was rejected.

The overall results of this study showed that, that there was a significant difference inmuscle electrical activity among different muscles group. The maximum significance was seen in the pectoralis major thanin the other two muscles.

1. Baechle, TR.” Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning”. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004. 2. Barnett, C, Kippers, V, and Turner, P. “Effects of variations of the bench press exercise on the EMG activity of five shoulder muscles”. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research9: 222–227, 1995. 3. Basmajian, JVand Blumenstein, R. “Electrode Placement in EMG Biofeedback”. Baltimore, MD: The Williams &Wilkins Company, 1980. 4. Clemons, JM and Aaron, C. “Effect of grip width on the myoelectric activity of the prime movers in the bench press”. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research11: 82–87, 1997. 5. Cogley, RM, Archambault, TA, Fibeger, JF, Koverman, MM, Youdas, JW, and Hollman, JH. “Comparison of muscle activation using

6. Cohen, J. “Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences”. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1969. 7. Cotterman, ML, Darby, LA, and Skelly, WA. “Comparison of muscle force production using the Smith machine and free weights for bench press and squat exercises”. Jr. Strength Cond Res19: 169–176, 2005. 8. Di Giacomo, G, Pouliart, N, Costantini, A, and De Vita, A. “Atlas of Functional Shoulder Anatomy”. Milan, Italy: Springer, 2008. 9. Glass, SC and Armstrong, T. “Electromyographical activity of the pectoralis muscles during incline and decline bench presses”. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research11, 163–167, 1997. 10. Graham, JF. “Dumbbell incline press”. Strength Cond J 24: 16–17, 2002. 11. Graham, JF. “Barbell incline press”. Strength Cond J 27: 22–23, 2005. 12. Baechle, TR, Earle, RW, and Wathen, D. “Essentials of Strength & Conditioning”. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2008. 13. Behm, DG, Drinkwater, EJ, Willardson, JM, and Cowley, PM. “The use of instability to train the core musculature”. ApplPhysiolNutrMetab 35: 91–108, 2010. 14. Brindle, TJ, Nitz, AJ, Uhl, TL, Kifer, E, and Shapiro, R. “Kinematic and EMG characteristics of simple shoulder movements with proprioception and visual feedback”. JrElectromyogrKinesiol 16: 236–249, 2006. 15. Burden, A. “How should we normalize electromyograms obtained from healthy participants? What we have learned from over 25 years of research”. Jr.ElectromyogrKinesiol 20: 1023–1035, 2010. 16. Caterisano, A, Moss, RF, Pellinger, TK, Woodruff, K, Lewis, VC, Booth, W, and Khadra, T. “The effect of back squat depth on the EMG activity of 4 superficial hip and thigh muscles”. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research16: 428–432, 2002. 17. Escamilla, RF, Francisco, AC, Kayes, AV, Speer, KP, and Moorman, CT, III. “An electromyographic analysis of sumo and conventional style deadlifts”. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 682–688, 2002. 18. Finucane, SD, Rafeei, T, Kues, J, Lamb, RL, and Mayhew, TP. “Reproducibility of electromyographic recordings of submaximal concentric and eccentric muscle contractions in humans”. ElectroencephalogrClinNeurophysiol 109: 290–296, 1998. 19. Freeman, S, Karpowicz, A, Gray, J, and McGill, S. “Quantifying muscle patterns and spine load during various forms of the push-up”. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38: 570–577, 2006. sensor placement procedures”. Jr.ElectromyogrKinesiol 10: 361–374, 2000. 21. Holtermann, A, Mork, PJ, Andersen, LL, Olsen, HB, and Sogaard, K. “The use of EMG biofeedback for learning of selective activation of intra-muscular parts within the serratus anterior muscle: A novel approach for rehabilitation of scapular muscle imbalance”. Jr.ElectromyogrKinesiol 20: 359–365, 2010. 22. Holtermann, A, Roeleveld, K, Mork, PJ, Gro ¨nlund, C, Karlsson, JS, Andersen, LL, Olsen, HB, Zebis, MK, Sjøgaard, G, and Søgaard, K. “Selective activation of neuromuscular compartments within the human trapezius muscle”. Jr.ElectromyogrKinesiol 19: 896–902, 2009.

Scholar, LNIPE, Gwalior