Some strategies can be used to improve pectoralis major (PM) demand such as grip width, movement velocity, type of resistance and range of motion. Also, the normalized surface electromyography is commonly used to assess muscle activity during resistance training and allows the analyses of muscle activation across different portions of the exercise. The investigators aimed to compare sternal and clavicular PM's regions activity at the initial, middle, and final portions of the concentric phase during both flat and incline bench press. External and clavicular portions of PM EMG signals of thirteen males which performed 1 set of maximal repetitions of both flat and incline bench press at 60% of maximal load were analyzed. On flat bench press the final portion of concentric phase had lower muscular activation compared to middle (p < 0.001) and initial (p < 0.001) portions (clavicular) and to middle (p < 0.05) portion (sternal). For incline bench press the middle portion had a higher activity than initial (p < 0.001) and final (p < 0.05) portions at clavicular region while in sternal region final portion was lower than initial and middle (both p < 0.001) portions. The results suggest that reducing the range of motion by excluding the final portion of the concentric phase in the bench press may help maintain higher pectoralis major activation. It can be particularly advantageous in hypertrophy-oriented training, as it avoids the decrease in muscle activity during exercise.
CalatayudJBorreaniSColadoJC, et al.Muscle activity levels in upper-body push exercises with different loads and stability conditions. Phys Sportsmed2014; 42: 106–119.
2.
LanzaMBPradoGCLacerdaLT, et al.Muscle hypertrophy response across four muscles involved in the bench press exercise: randomized 10 weeks training intervention. J Bodyw Mov Ther2024; 40: 1417–1422.
3.
MausehundLWerkhausenABartschJ, et al.Understanding bench press biomechanics-the necessity of measuring lateral barbell forces. J Strength Cond Res2022; 36: 2685–2695.
4.
KompfJArandjelovićO. The sticking point in the bench press, the squat, and the deadlift: similarities and differences, and their significance for research and practice. Sports Med2017; 47: 631–640.
5.
LauverJDCayotTEScheuermannBW. Influence of bench angle on upper extremity muscular activation during bench press exercise. Eur J Sport Sci2016; 16: 309–316.
6.
OgasawaraRThiebaudRSLoennekeJP, et al.Time course for arm and chest muscle thickness changes following bench press training. Interv Med Appl Sci2012; 4: 217–220.
7.
Rodríguez-RidaoDAntequera-ViqueJAMartín-FuentesI, et al.Effect of five bench inclinations on the electromyographic activity of the Pectoralis Major, anterior deltoid, and Triceps brachii during the bench press exercise. Int J Environ Res Public Health2020; 17: 7339.
8.
NoteboomLBelliIHoozemansMJM, et al.Effects of bench press technique variations on musculoskeletal shoulder loads and potential injury risk. Front Physiol2024; 15: 1393235.
9.
American College of Sports Medicine. American College of sports medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc2009; 41: 687–708.
10.
SchoenfeldBJ. The mechanisms of muscle hypertrophy and their application to resistance training. J Strength Cond Res2010; 24: 2857–2872.
11.
OttingerCRSharpMHStefanMW, et al.Muscle hypertrophy response to range of motion in strength training: a novel approach to understanding the findings. Strength & Conditioning Journal2023; 45: 162.
12.
CabralHVde SouzaLMLde OliveiraLF, et al.Non-uniform excitation of the pectoralis major muscle during flat and inclined bench press exercises. Scand J Med Sci Sports2022; 32: 381–390.
13.
TrebsAABrandenburgJPPitneyWA. An electromyography analysis of 3 muscles surrounding the shoulder joint during the performance of a chest press exercise at several angles. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research2010; 24: 1925.
14.
ChiuLZF. Biomechanical methods to quantify muscle effort during resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res2018; 32: 502–513.
15.
MerlettiR. Electromyography : Physiology, Engineering, and Non-Invasive Applications. 2004. Epub ahead of print 1 August 2004. DOI: 10.1002/0471678384.
16.
VigotskyADHalperinILehmanGJ, et al.Interpreting signal amplitudes in surface electromyography studies in sport and rehabilitation sciences. Front Physiol2017; 8: 985.
17.
LucaCJD. The Use of Surface Electromyography in Biomechanics. Epub ahead of print 1 May 1997. DOI: 10.1123/jab.13.2.135.
18.
AlvesDMattaTOliveiraL. Effect of shoulder position on triceps brachii heads activity in dumbbell elbow extension exercises. J Sports Med Phys Fitness2018; 58: 1247–1252.
19.
OliveiraLFMattaTTAlvesDS, et al.Effect of the shoulder position on the biceps brachii emg in different dumbbell curls. J Sports Sci Med2009; 8: 24–29.
20.
SengchuaiKKanjanaroatCJaruenpunyasakJ, et al.Development of a real-time knee extension monitoring and rehabilitation system: range of motion and surface EMG measurement and evaluation. Healthcare (Basel)2022; 10: 2544.
21.
AlbarelloJCDSCabralHVLeitãoBFM, et al.Non-uniform excitation of pectoralis major induced by changes in bench press inclination leads to uneven variations in the cross-sectional area measured by panoramic ultrasonography. J Electromyogr Kinesiol2022; 67: 102722.
22.
RotaSRogowskiIChampelyS, et al.Reliability of EMG normalisation methods for upper-limb muscles. J Sports Sci2013; 31: 1696–1704.
23.
SatoKSmithSLSandsWA. Validation of an accelerometer for measuring sport performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research2009; 23: 341.
24.
FloresFJSedanoSde BenitoAM, et al.Validity and reliability of a 3-axis accelerometer for measuring weightlifting movements. Int J Sports Sci Coach2016; 11: 872–879.
25.
JohnsGMorinEHashtrudi-ZaadK. The role of electromechanical delay in modelling the EMG-force relationship during quasi-dynamic contractions of the upper-limb. In: 2016 38th annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC). Orlando, FL: IEEE, 2016, pp.3634–3637.
26.
Posite Team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R.
27.
ElliottBCWilsonGJKerrGK. A biomechanical analysis of the sticking region in the bench press. Med Sci Sports Exerc1989; 21: 450–462.
28.
KompfJArandjelovićO. Understanding and overcoming the sticking point in resistance exercise. Sports Med2016; 46: 751–762.
29.
SaeterbakkenAHAndersenVvan den TillaarR, et al.The effects of ten weeks resistance training on sticking region in chest-press exercises. PLoS One2020; 15: e0235555.
30.
WilsonGJElliottBCKerrGK. Bar path and force profile characteristics for maximal and submaximal loads in the bench press. International Journal of Sport Biomechanics1989; 5: 390–402.
31.
GarnerBAPandyMG. Estimation of musculotendon properties in the human upper limb. Ann Biomed Eng2003; 31: 207–220.
32.
LarsenSGomoOvan den TillaarR. A biomechanical analysis of wide, medium, and narrow grip width effects on kinematics, horizontal kinetics, and muscle activity on the sticking region in recreationally trained males during 1-RM bench pressing. Front Sports Act Living2021; 2: 637066.
PedrosaGFLimaFVSchoenfeldBJ, et al.Partial range of motion training elicits favorable improvements in muscular adaptations when carried out at long muscle lengths. Eur J Sport Sci2022; 22: 1250–1260.
35.
MaeoSWuYHuangM, et al.Triceps brachii hypertrophy is substantially greater after elbow extension training performed in the overhead versus neutral arm position. Eur J Sport Sci2023; 23: 1240–1250.
36.
Martínez-CavaAHernández-BelmonteACourel-IbáñezJ, et al.Bench press at full range of motion produces greater neuromuscular adaptations than partial executions after prolonged resistance training. J Strength Cond Res2022; 36: 10–15.
37.
MookerjeeSRatamessN. Comparison of strength differences and joint action durations between full and partial range-of-motion bench press exercise. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research1999; 13: 76.
38.
DuchateauJBaudryS. Insights into the neural control of eccentric contractions. J Appl Physiol (1985)2014; 116: 1418–1425.
39.
GarnerJCBlackburnTWeimarW, et al.Comparison of electromyographic activity during eccentrically versus concentrically loaded isometric contractions. J Electromyogr Kinesiol2008; 18: 466–471.
40.
GrabinerMDOwingsTM. EMG Differences between concentric and eccentric maximum voluntary contractions are evident prior to movement onset. Exp Brain Res2002; 145: 505–511.
