Impact of the Nordic hamstring and hip extension exercises on hamstring architecture and morphology: implications for injury prevention

View/ Open
Author(s)
Bourne, Matthew N
Duhig, Steven J
Timmins, Ryan G
Williams, Morgan D
Opar, David A
Al Najjar, Aiman
Kerr, Graham K
Shield, Anthony J
Year published
2017
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background: The architectural and morphological adaptations of the hamstrings in response to training with different exercises have not been explored.
Purpose: To evaluate changes in biceps femoris long head ( BFLH ) fascicle length and hamstring muscle size following 10-weeks of Nordic hamstring exercise ( NHE ) or hip extension ( HE ) training.
Methods: 30 recreationally active male athletes ( age, 22.0±3.6 years; height, 180.4±7 cm; weight, 80.8±11.1 kg ) were allocated to 1 of 3 groups: ( 1 ) HE training ( n=10 ), NHE training ( n=10 ), or no training ( control, CON ) ( n=10 ). BFLH fascicle length was assessed before, ...
View more >Background: The architectural and morphological adaptations of the hamstrings in response to training with different exercises have not been explored. Purpose: To evaluate changes in biceps femoris long head ( BFLH ) fascicle length and hamstring muscle size following 10-weeks of Nordic hamstring exercise ( NHE ) or hip extension ( HE ) training. Methods: 30 recreationally active male athletes ( age, 22.0±3.6 years; height, 180.4±7 cm; weight, 80.8±11.1 kg ) were allocated to 1 of 3 groups: ( 1 ) HE training ( n=10 ), NHE training ( n=10 ), or no training ( control, CON ) ( n=10 ). BFLH fascicle length was assessed before, during ( Week 5 ) and after the intervention with a two-dimensional ultrasound. Hamstring muscle size was determined before and after training via MRI. Results: Compared with baseline, BFLH fascicles were lengthened in the NHE and HE groups at mid-training ( d=1.12–1.39, p < 0.001 ) and post-training ( d=1.77–2.17, p < 0.001 ) and these changes did not differ significantly between exercises ( d=0.49–0.80, p=0.279–0.976 ). BFLHvolume increased more for the HE than the NHE ( d=1.03, p=0.037 ) and CON ( d=2.24, p < 0.001 ) groups. Compared with the CON group, both exercises induced significant increases in semitendinosus volume ( d=2.16–2.50, ≤0.002 ) and these increases were not significantly different ( d=0.69, p=0.239 ). Conclusion: NHE and HE training both stimulate significant increases in BFLH fascicle length; however, HE training may be more effective for promoting hypertrophy in the BFLH.
View less >
View more >Background: The architectural and morphological adaptations of the hamstrings in response to training with different exercises have not been explored. Purpose: To evaluate changes in biceps femoris long head ( BFLH ) fascicle length and hamstring muscle size following 10-weeks of Nordic hamstring exercise ( NHE ) or hip extension ( HE ) training. Methods: 30 recreationally active male athletes ( age, 22.0±3.6 years; height, 180.4±7 cm; weight, 80.8±11.1 kg ) were allocated to 1 of 3 groups: ( 1 ) HE training ( n=10 ), NHE training ( n=10 ), or no training ( control, CON ) ( n=10 ). BFLH fascicle length was assessed before, during ( Week 5 ) and after the intervention with a two-dimensional ultrasound. Hamstring muscle size was determined before and after training via MRI. Results: Compared with baseline, BFLH fascicles were lengthened in the NHE and HE groups at mid-training ( d=1.12–1.39, p < 0.001 ) and post-training ( d=1.77–2.17, p < 0.001 ) and these changes did not differ significantly between exercises ( d=0.49–0.80, p=0.279–0.976 ). BFLHvolume increased more for the HE than the NHE ( d=1.03, p=0.037 ) and CON ( d=2.24, p < 0.001 ) groups. Compared with the CON group, both exercises induced significant increases in semitendinosus volume ( d=2.16–2.50, ≤0.002 ) and these increases were not significantly different ( d=0.69, p=0.239 ). Conclusion: NHE and HE training both stimulate significant increases in BFLH fascicle length; however, HE training may be more effective for promoting hypertrophy in the BFLH.
View less >
Journal Title
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume
51
Issue
5
Copyright Statement
© The Author(s) 2017. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. It is posted here with permission of the copyright owner(s) for your personal use only. No further distribution permitted. For information about this journal please refer to the publisher’s website or contact the author(s).
Subject
Human Movement and Sports Science not elsewhere classified
Engineering
Medical and Health Sciences
Education