15, 16, 17 and 18 Body builders have also been reported as having
a reduced range of internal rotation ROM 60° and normal ROM for external rotation of 107°.19 Kolber and colleagues20 suggest the position assumed for a behind the head press is unfavourable as it takes the shoulder into a simultaneous abducted and externally rotated “high-five” position, yet the specific angle of external rotation required for this movement has not been reported. The literature suggests that participants in both overhead sports and strength training may incur reductions in internal rotation ROM with no real difference in external rotation ROM.5, 17 and 20 Further, passive ROM for shoulder flexion, abduction, and horizontal adduction appear to differ very little between overhead athletes and the normal population. Studies comparing active versus passive ROM suggest active ROM is generally 5°–10° degrees Screening Library datasheet less than the passive ROM.21 Active and passive ROM for the overhead press was not found in the literature. Whilst the focus of previous research has been on the shoulder it is also important to consider the effect of overhead pressing on the adjacent anatomical region, the spine. The orientation, and subsequent movement of the spine, will naturally influence the action of the adjacent shoulder orientation, and therefore these two regions should be analysed simultaneously. No reported literature was found to describe influence
and changes in spine posture during overhead pressing.
The literature does suggest that in the seated position, overhead pressing may TGF-beta activation Dipeptidyl peptidase invoke greater core stability muscle, but no measures of change in spine posture were included in this study.8 Finally there are no studies providing evidence of any gender differences in the performance of overhead pressing movements. Gender differences have been reported in some lower body exercises such as squatting,17 and 22 but it is not known if differences exist for overhead press. Therefore, the aim of this research was to determine the impact of behind or in-front of the head overhead pressing technique on shoulder ROM and spine posture. To address this aim the timing and synchronisation of the upper limb, shoulder, and spine segments were quantified, with respect to the different technique protocol. To enable individual-specific prescription guidelines to be further established, parameters of segment lengths and gender were also quantified. From a cross-sectional group of 33 participants (18 males and 15 females), anthropometric measures were taken. Passive ROM was quantified using standardised goniometric measures (Table 1). Three dimensional (3D) dynamic ROM of the shoulder and spine was determined during the overhead seated press. Informed consent was obtained and all participants were informed of the experimental risks according to guidelines of the University Human Research and Ethics Committee (Ethics Approval number: A/10/226).