Authors: Mayer, F. | Schlumberger, A. | van Cingel, R. | Henrotin, Y. | Laube, W. | Schmidtbleicher, D.
Article Type:
Research Article
Abstract:
Optimization of different forms of training and testing in sports and therapy has traditionally been debated by various groups. Especially, the use of so-called open and closed kinetic chain exercises has frequently been a focal point. Scientific studies have indicated that no specific form of exercise and/or training has any particular advantage over the other. This applies to both assessment of efficiency, consideration of compression and shear forces, muscular activity and the extent of co-contractions.
…Unlike the broadly-applied non-specific and uncritical assessment of open and closed kinetic chain exercises, a specific application using the advantages of both procedures must be considered due to clinical, therapeutic and training-physiological aspects. Specificity refers to the training of either an isolated joint-muscle unit (arthron) or a system (group) of joints and muscles. Considering the original definitions and past misinterpretations, it appears logical to emphasize the role of physiological mechanisms operating in each form of training and testing. Therefore, the use of the term: single-joint (SJ) or multi-joint (MJ) training, is recommended since this would best reflect the area of application, according to a recent consensus expressed by EISCSA. Consequently, SJ and MJ exercises should be applied both in isolation and in combination as indicated by the principles of specificity. On the other hand, continuous use of the terms open and closed kinetic chain exercises is confusing, erroneous, leads to polarizing discussions and should hence be relegated to the past.
Show more
Keywords: open kinetic chain, closed kinetic chain, training, therapy, testing, isokinetics, strength
DOI: 10.3233/IES-2003-0154
Citation: Isokinetics and Exercise Science,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 181-187, 2003
Price: EUR 27.50