NASM essentials of sports performance training
578 pág.

NASM essentials of sports performance training


DisciplinaEducação Física61.127 materiais328.421 seguidores
Pré-visualização50 páginas
the
athlete to absorb the shock of landing. These examples get the athlete involved in his/her own
60 CHAPTER 2
Feedback
Internal feedback: sen-
sory information provided by
the body via length-tension rela-
tionships, force-couple relation-
ships, and arthrokinematics to
monitor movement and the en-
vironment.
External feedback: information
provided by some external
source.
Knowledge of Results
Feedback used after the
completion of a movement, to
help inform the athlete about
the outcome of his performance.
Knowledge of
Performance
Feedback that provides
information about the quality of
the movement during exercise.
TABLE 2.5
Muscle Synergies
Bench Press Squats
Prime Mover Pectoralis Major Quadriceps
Gluteus Maximus
Synergists Anterior Deltoid Hamstrings
Triceps Adductor Magnus
Stabilizers Rotator Cuff Lower Extremity Musculature
\u2022 Flexor Hallicus Longus
\u2022 Posterior Tibialis
\u2022 Anterior Tibialis
\u2022 Soleus
\u2022 Gastrocnemius
Lumbo-Pelvic-Hip Complex
\u2022 Adductor Longus
\u2022 Adductor Brevis
\u2022 Transverse Abdominus
\u2022 Gluteus Medius
Scapular Stabilizers
\u2022 Trapezius
\u2022 Rhomboids
Cervical Stabilizers
LWBK329-4205G-c02_p015-064.qxd 27/05/2009 08:53 AM Page 60 Aptara
sensory process. Such feedback will be given less frequently as the athlete becomes more pro-
ficient (63).
These forms of external feedback identify performance errors. This feedback is also an im-
portant component in motivation. Further, feedback gives the athlete supplemental sensory in-
put to help create an awareness of the desired action (21). It is important to state, however, that
an athlete must not become too dependent on external feedback, especially from the Sports Per-
formance Professional, as this may detract from the athlete\u2019s own responsiveness to internal sen-
sory input (21,46). This could alter sensorimotor integration and affect the learning by the ath-
lete and the ultimate performance of new and skilled movement.
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION TO HUMAN MOVEMENT SCIENCE 61
In summary, each component of the HMS is interdependent. The HMS must work inter-
dependently to gather information from internal and external environments to create,
learn, and refine movements (or motor behavior) through proprioception, sensorimotor
integration, and muscle synergies necessary to create efficient movement (motor control).
Then, repeated practice, and incorporating internal and external feedback allows this effi-
cient movement to be reproduced (motor learning).
REFERENCES
1. Newmann D. Kinesiology of the Musculoskeletal System; Foundations for Physical Rehabilitation. St.
Louis: Mosby; 2002.
2. Sahrmann S. Diagnosis and Treatment of Movement Impairment Syndromes. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002.
3. Panjabi MM. The stabilizing system of the spine. Part I. Function, dysfunction, adaptation, and en-
hancement. J Spinal Disord 1992;5:383\u201389; discussion 397.
4. Hamill J, Knutzen KM. Biomechanical Basis of Human Movement, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins; 2003.
5. Levangle PK, Norkin CC. Joint Structure and Function: A Comprehensive Analysis, 3rd ed. Philadelphia:
FA Davis Company; 2001.
6. Watkins J. Structure and Function of the Musculoskeletal System. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1999.
7. Nordin M, Frankel VH. Basic Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippin-
cott Williams & Wilkins; 2001.
8. Kendall FP, McCreary EK, Provance PG. Muscles Testing and Function with Posture and Pain, 5th ed. Bal-
timore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.
9. Luttgens K, Hamilton N. Kinesiology: Scientific Basis of Human Motion, 9th ed. Dubuque, IA: Brown &
Benchmark Publishers; 1997.
10. Powers SK. Exercise Physiology: Theory and Application to Fitness and Performance. Dubuque, IA: Mc-
Graw Hill; 2000.
11. Inman VT, Ralston HJ, Todd F. Human Walking. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1981.
12. Innes KA. The Effect of Gait on Extremity Evaluation. In: Hammer WI. Functional Soft Tissue Examina-
tion and Treatment by Manual Methods, 2nd ed. Gaithsburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, Inc; 1999.
13. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis, 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Hu-
man Kinetics; 1999.
14. Basmajian J: Muscles Alive: Their Functions Revealed by EMG, 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1985.
15. Clark MA. Integrated Core Stabilization Training. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Academy of Sports Med-
icine; 2000.
16. Aidley DJ. Physiology of Excitable Cells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1971.
17. Katz AM. Physiology of the Heart. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006.
18. Vander A, Sherman J, Luciano D. Human Physiology: The Mechanisms of Body Function, 8th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill; 2001.
19. McArdle WD, Katch FI, Katch VL. Exercise Physiology: Energy, Nutrition and Human Performance.
Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
20. McClay I, Manal K. Three-dimensional kinetic analysis of running: significance of secondary planes of
motion. Med Sci Sports Exerc Nov 1999;31:1629\u2013637.
21. Schmidt RA, Wrisberg CA. Motor Learning and Performance, 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics;
2000.
22. Nyland J, Smith S, Beickman K et al. Frontal plane knee angle affects dynamic postural control strategy
during unilateral stance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002;34:1150\u2013157.
23. Coker CA. Motor Learning and Control for Practitioners. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2004.
24. Magill RA. Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2007.
25. Grigg P. Peripheral neural mechanisms in proprioception. J Sport Rehab 1994;3:2\u201317.
26. Edgerton VR, Wolf SL, Levendowski DJ et al. Theoretical basis for patterning EMG amplitudes to assess
muscle dysfunction. Med Sci Sports Exerc June 1996;28:744\u201351.
27. Lieber RL. Skeletal Muscle Structure and Function: Implications for Rehabilitation. Baltimore: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
LWBK329-4205G-c02_p015-064.qxd 27/05/2009 08:53 AM Page 61 Aptara
28. Bergmark A. Stability of the lumbar spine. A study in mechanical engineering. Acta Ortho Scand
1989;230(suppl):20\u20134.
29. Mooney V. Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction. In: Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T et al. Movement, Stabil-
ity and Low Back Pain. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1997.
30. Crisco JJ, Panjabi MM. The intersegmental and multisegmental muscles of the spine: a biomechanical
model comparing lateral stabilizing potential. Spine 1991;7:793\u201399.
31. Richardson C, Jull G, Hodges P et al. Therapeutic Exercise for Spinal Segmental Stabilization in Low Back
Pain. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
32. Culham LC, Peat M. Functional anatomy of the shoulder complex. J Ortho Sports Phys Ther 1993;
18:342\u201350.
33. Wilk KE, Reinold MM, Dugas JR et al. Current concepts in the recognition and treatment of superior
labral (SLAP) lesions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2005;35:273\u201391.
34. Millett PJ, Wilcox RB 3rd, O\u2019Holleran JD et al. Rehabilitation of the rotator cuff: an evaluation-based ap-
proach. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006;14:599\u2013609.
35. Kibler WB, Chandler TJ, Shapiro R et al. Muscle activation in coupled scapulohumeral motions in the
high performance tennis serve. Br J Sports Med. 2007;41:745\u201349.
36. Gottschalk F, Kourosh S, Leveau B. The functional anatomy of tensor fascia latae and gluteus medius and
minimus. J Anat 1989;166:179\u201389.
37. Anderson FC, Pandy MG. Individual muscle contributions to support in normal walking. Gait Posture
2003;17:159\u201369.
38. Hossain M, Nokes LD. A model of dynamic sacroiliac joint instability from malrecruitment of gluteus
maximus and biceps femoris muscles resulting in low back pain. Med Hypotheses 2005;65:278\u201381.
39. Liu MQ, Anderson FC, Pandy MG et al. Muscles that support the body also modulate forward progres-
sion during walking. J Biomech 2006;39:2623\u2013630.
40. Lieb FJ, Perry J. Quadriceps Function. J Bone Joint Surg 1971;50A:1535\u2013548.