↓ Skip to main content

How to squat? Effects of various stance widths, foot placement angles and level of experience on knee, hip and trunk motion and loading

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 205)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
119 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How to squat? Effects of various stance widths, foot placement angles and level of experience on knee, hip and trunk motion and loading
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13102-018-0103-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvio Lorenzetti, Mira Ostermann, Fabian Zeidler, Pia Zimmer, Lina Jentsch, Renate List, William R. Taylor, Florian Schellenberg

Abstract

Squatting is a core exercise for many purposes. The tissue loading during squatting is crucial for positive adaptation and to avoid injury. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of narrow, hip and wide stance widths, foot position angles (0°, 21°, and 42°), strength exercise experience, and barbell load (0 and 50% body weight, experts only) during squatting. Novice (N = 21) and experienced (N = 21) squatters performed 9 different variations of squats (3 stance widths, 3 foot placement angles). A 3D motion capture system (100 Hz) and two force plates (2000 Hz) were used to record mediolateral knee displacement (ΔD*), range of motion (RoM) at the hip and knee joints, and joint moments at the hip, knee, and lower back. Both stance width and foot placement angles affected the moments at the hip and knee joints in the frontal and sagittal planes. ΔD* varied with stance width, foot placement angles and between the subjects' level of experience with the squat exercise as follows: increasing foot angle led to an increased foot angle led to an increased ΔD*, while an increased stance width resulted in a decreased ΔD*; novice squatters showed a higher ΔD*, while additional weight triggered a decreased ΔD*. Suitable stance width and foot placement angles should be chosen according to the targeted joint moments. In order to avoid injury, special care should be taken in extreme positions (narrow stand-42° and wide stance-0°) where large knee and hips joint moments were observed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 119 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 30%
Student > Bachelor 28 24%
Other 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Student > Postgraduate 5 4%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 19 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 47 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 13%
Engineering 6 5%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 24 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 109. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2019.
All research outputs
#156,637
of 14,110,605 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#5
of 205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,358
of 273,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,110,605 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them