Week 4: Discussion B

I will start this discussion the same way as my homework assignment. <span style=”color: #000000; font-family: Georgia; white-space: pre-wrap; line-height: 1.5;”>“Standard anatomical textbook approaches describing the action of certain muscle groups in controlling isolated joint actions, such as flexion, extension and rotation, frequently are used to identify which muscles should be trained to enhance performance in sport.” (Siff. M, p.198) The problem that Siff points out is that it is incomplete to only look at single joints when trying to assess movement. We need to look at the entire body as a system and realize that other muscles and joints that don’t seem to be directly related to a specific movement can still have an affect on the directly related joints and how they operate. </span>

Realizing it is incomplete to use isolation testing protocols, coaches can use a comprehensive model like the Power Athlete Assessment to provide quality feedback to their athletes. This will allow us to assess the entire body as a system rather than just looking at 1 thing. A great example of quality, usable feedback is one of the things Tex (our Brofessor) said in his video teaching the deadbug. He told the athlete that when we see external rotation on the way down with the leg in a deadbug that means tightness in the hip, whereas if we see external rotation on the way up it means weakness. This allows us to program the right fixes to address the athletes limiting factor.

@chobbs has a nice point with linking single joint assessments are quite erroneous because it is rare we use only one joint for a task.

Another limitation that was pointed out was muscle action is completely task dependent (Siff, 2004, p.199). One assessment may be irrelevant for a certain population and completely relevant for another, dependent on the task/sport. We work mostly with athletes so PA uses an assessment that challenges primal movement patterns. this is relevant to the athlete’s task and we use movement in and out of position to find limitations and dysfunction.

Where the coach comes in is being able to find the most relevant and beneficial assessment to the athletes sport and allowing the coach to find the limitations and dysfunction to correct them.

The limitations of anatomical movement analysis, (AMA) eh?  Kind of the same limitations as found when you bring a knife to a gun fight.  You’re simply not ready to deal with the problem at hand.

While applying an anatomical understanding to the function of individual muscles gives us a basic view of their capacities, attempting to analysis movement on a per muscle basis completely misses the fact that all muscle action is DEPENDENT.  All bodily movements, no matter how isolated they may seem, require the interaction of multiple muscles groups to flex, extend, rotate and stabilize joints.  It is not a linear system, but a dynamic structure that produces and reduces forces at all angles.  A single muscle may also act on multiple joints.  Unfortunately, the AMA does not apply to multi-articular joint actions.  (Siff, 2003)

Additionally, the AMA identifies primary muscle functions in an agonist-antagonist model.  That model cannot be applied to situations where a single muscle group performs both stablilizing and moving actions or even act in the same contraction mode as its antagonist group.  A muscle may also act on a certain joint during one movement, but not act the same joint in a different movement.  This is because motions of one body segment may be initiated by another body segment.

Given the interdependency amongst muscles required to produce movement it may be more effective to develop an analysis that is built on muscle synergism instead of antagonism.  Giving an athlete feedback that:

• Identifies the correct position they are working towards.
• Establishes the purpose for the movement.
• Shows them what they are working towards is an opportunity to get better in their chosen sport.

Is an effective method of accelerating their kinesthetic awareness, a huge key in transferring improvements made in training to the field.  All muscle action is dependent on other muscles.  A movement analysis system that takes that into account arms a coach more appropriately for the demands of their job.  Kind of like Tony Montana at the end of Scarface….clearly, not a knife fighter.

Fantastic work gentlemen!!

What happens if they are in pain? How does this synergistic, dependent, multi-joint assessment target an injury/strain/impingement/spasm/knot/owie?

“The anatomical approach implies that complex multi-articular movement is simply the linear superimposition of the actions of the individual joints which are involved in that movement. However, the mechanical systems of the body are nonlinear and superposition does not apply, since there is no simple relationship between velocity, angle and torque about a single joint in a complex sporting movement” (Siff, 198).  Ah Siff, you eloquent bastard.  Not only do the muscles not act single handedly, nor do they just affect one joint, nor are they just prime movers and stabilizers, they are effected by every degree of motion, measurement of force applied, and every possible range of past and future movement.

I loved all of my Star Wars action figures, but GI Joe had the kung-fu grip and articulations at every joint.

Hard to add Siff’s content since @benkuch, @chobbs, @menacedolan and @conorwlynch have very eloquently have pointed out the fact that we can not have simplify anatomical movement by just assuming that the muscle or joint is independently  being used for a specific demand.  We have a complex musculoskeletal system that needs to engage in a pattern to provoke certain isolation (not at its truest form).  What I mean is in order to be able to isolate the bicep on a curl.  We have to set our shoulders, tighten up the trunk, stabilize the hip, squeeze the glutes, grip the floor with your toes to create tension.  We need a synergistic approach vs agonist/antagonist approach.

@menacedolan loved the G.I. Joe analogy! Also to give you my 2 cents… I’m not a Dr. and I haven’t played one on T.V. lately.. well maybe in la telenovela en Mexico.   If a injury/strain/impingement/owie happens the body is very smart and will try to recruit accessory muscle groups or joint to perform what ever task you are demanding to perform.  If you don’t address the source of that synergistic imbalance you will end up with worse owies…  On the other hand if you understand how this multiarticular muscles, joints, levers and so on: you will be able to locate the imbalance and address it correctly.  Yes?

The main limitation of the Anatomical Movement Analysis is at the same time its biggest advantage: simplicity.

Through this kind of kinetic analysis, we can reduce biomechanics to something as simple as muscles and bones, and their function around a joint when the latter is moving,  stabilizing or doing both of those things simultaneously.

Even though this could be helpful when trying to study single joint movements or simple movement patterns, it may fall short when trying to analyze complex movement patterns as the one we find on any sport field. Having a the mobility and stability  on any given joint may not be enough when extrapolating to a specific sport movement in which that joint is involved.

We have all acknowledge that limitations it has of examining the action of single joint. This got me think back to the reading that we had on perfecting the motor pattern of sports movements. It is good to start at the kinematic pair and understand the single joint movements and strengths. Then we move to the kinematic chain and understand movements that are produced by a system of links, and the affect it can have on movement. Then moving onto the kinematic system “Thus, the perfecting of movement is associated with determination of the most effective method of uniting individual kinematic chains and their working mechanisms into a single working system” (Verkhoshansky, 2009 pg. 105).

The biggest limitation to an Anatomical Movement Analysis is two fold: one as @nono explained is it’s simplicity.  We all recognize this as we’ve all said it one way or another above.  The second limitation is where we as coaches have an opportunity to capitalize and that is its lack of context for an athlete.

The average athlete has no interest in learning or understanding how muscle action on a joint help them play or prepare for their sport, that’s our job.  By utilizing the PA Assessment you have an opportunity to connect and explain some “big picture” stuff to the athlete as you propose a problem for them to solve.  You have an opportunity to provide context and explain why mobility, stabilty, movement proficiency, etc. contribute to them excelling on the field.  You also have a standard to measure progress.  You help them understand/develop kinaesthetic sense by feeling positions and cue corrections.  It’s also an opportunity to drive home importance of posture and position, moving efficiently and that it’s not about task completion but about perfect execution.  This assessment gives ample opportunity to the athlete to develop his movement language and the coach to connect the dots of his training principles.