Available at: http://www.nsca-cc.org/ceus/quizzes.

html

Using the Body Weight

Forward Lunge to Screen
an Athlete’s Lunge
Downloaded from https://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3JvjgSxPcaSIX3xu63ujD55qZ9WvGtSoOiw4Kzyo9Lvs= on 05/23/2018

Pattern
Matthew Kritz, MSc, CSCS,1 John Cronin, PhD,1,2 and Patria Hume, PhD1
1
Institute of Sport and Recreation Research New Zealand, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand; and 2School of
Exercise, Biomedical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia

SUMMARY pattern, lunge pattern, upper-body movement and correcting those strat-
push pattern, upper-body pull pattern, egies prior to prescribing heavy loads
THE LUNGE PATTERN IS CONSID-
bending pattern, twisting pattern, and and advanced loading schemes may
ERED A FUNDAMENTAL MOVE-
gait pattern (11). This article focuses on ensure the athlete’s long-term devel-
MENT PATTERN DUE TO ITS opment. This review aims to establish
the lunge pattern given its popularity to
OCCURRENCE IN ACTIVITIES OF sport and sport-specific training. the forward lunge as an effective screen
DAILY LIVING AND SPORT- of the lunge pattern. Existing empirical
SPECIFIC TRAINING. IT IS A The forward lunge, the most popular
lunge pattern exercise, exaggerates the evidence highlighting the regions of
PATTERN OFTEN USED BY SPORT the body that have been identified to
movement that occurs in the lower
MEDICINE PROFESSIONALS AND be areas most susceptible to break-
body during the gait cycle (14). The
STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING downs in technique is presented. Bio-
forward lunge involves: a) calcaneal
SPECIALISTS TO IMPROVE mechanical rationale is provided to
eversion; b) talar plantar flexion and
PROPRIOCEPTION AND
adduction; c) tibial internal rotation; d) assist the reader in understanding the
STRENGTH. THE FORWARD knee flexion, extension, and abduction; consequences poor forward lunge
LUNGE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED and e) hip flexion, extension, and technique has on movement compe-
AS AN EFFECTIVE EXERCISE FOR adduction (14). Various lunge pattern tency, the incidentce of injury, and
IMPROVING COORDINATION AND exercises have been used as assessment sport performance.
MUSCLE BALANCE TO ENHANCE tools for measuring strength, flexibility, KINEMATICS AND KINETICS OF
PERFORMANCE IN UNILATERAL and balance (13,14,36). Hybrids of the THE FORWARD LUNGE
ACTIVITIES SUCH AS SPRINTING forward lunge have been used to screen A forward lunge can in the simplest
AND CHANGE OF DIRECTION. DUE the functional movement of the lower terms be described as an elongated
TO THE PREVALENCE OF THE extremities (13). Given the relevance forward step, flexing the lead hip and
LUNGE PATTERN IN SPORT TRAIN- of the lunge pattern to sport and the knee and dorsiflexing the lead ankle
ING, SCREENING AN ATHLETE’S necessity of the strength and con- while lowering the body toward
LUNGE PATTERN BEFORE EXTEN- ditioning specialist to load the move- the floor (20,22,23). To screen a lunge
SIVE LOADING OF MUSCLE OC- ment pattern to enhance performance, pattern, the strength and conditioning
CURS MAY BE A BEST PRACTICE. screening an athlete’s lunge pattern professional should understand how
may have benefits. It is widely accepted the body is designed to move and the
that an important responsibility of consequences to movement efficiency,
INTRODUCTION strength and conditioning specialists force production, and injury occur-
he lunge pattern is 1 of 7 is to reduce the incident of injury. rence if function is compromised. The

T fundamental movement pat-

terns performed in activities of
daily living, sport, and sport-specific
Understanding how an athlete moves
is of critical importance if strength
training is to be a performance en-
variables that may affect the ability of

KEY WORDS:

training (11). The 7 fundamental hancer rather than an injury mecha- assessment; functional; movement;
movement patterns are the squat nism. Identifying faulty strategies of strength programming; injury

Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 15
 Table 1

16
Optimal forward lunge criteria and viewing position
Optimal
Anatomical viewing Possible contributors
region position Cook (13) Brandon (9) Graham (22,23) Summary Poor pattern to poor pattern
Head Front and side Centrally Central over feet, Erect facing Straight and Positioned Muscle imbalance
positioned neutral position forward centrally aligned forward or of the neck flexors
tilted to one and extensors
side
Thoracic spine Side Straight Vertical, shoulder Erect, shoulders Straight or Flexed Poor or imbalanced
above hips above hips slightly extended trunk extensors
Lumbar spine Side Neutral Neutral, no back Erect Neutral Flexed or Weak deep
extension to assist excessively abdominals and
hip extension, extended gluteus maximus
remains tall and/or poor

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 6 | DECEMBER 2009

and stable coordination, poor
flexibility in hip flexors
Hips Front Horizontally NA Aligned with the Horizontally Dropping to Weak deep
aligned lead knee aligned one side, abdominals and
and ankle rotated medially gluteus maximus,
or laterally medius, and minimus
Knees Front and side Aligned with the Front knee points Front knee over Front knee in Movement Poor sequencing of
hip and foot forward over the the lead ankle line with the medially or gluteus maximus,
small toes and is small toes and laterally during medius, and
above the ankle, over the lead the lunge minimus and deep
back knee flexed ankle core muscles.
Restricted range of
motion with hip flexors,
quadriceps
Ankles Front and side Front—aligned Aligned with Aligned with Aligned with Limited Restricted mobility due
with the knee the knee the knee the knee dorsiflexion to stiffness or restricted
and hip. Side— range of motion of the
directly under gastrocnemius and
the knee soleus muscles
Feet Front and side Front foot flat, Front foot flat, back Front foot flat, Front foot flat, Rolling in or Poor stability and
back foot foot on the ball back foot on back foot on out of the proprioceptive
positioned on of the foot the ball of the ball of the lead foot response
the toes aligned the foot foot with toes
with the heel flexed. Both feet
Using Body Weight Forward Lunge to Screen Athletes’ Lunge Pattern

aligned with aligned and

the knee balanced
an athlete to complete a proper lunge
pattern have been acknowledged to be
anthropometrics, handedness, previous
injury, lack of coordination, range of
motion, and balance (2,13,20,26,35).
Table 1 summarizes published criteria
detailing what is considered to be cor-
rect forward lunge technique. Figure 1
illustrates a forward lunge demonstrat-
ing good alignment, mobility, stability,
and balance. The sections below dis-
cuss the kinematic and kinetic charac-
teristics of the lunge pattern, with
specific focus on those regions of the
body that directly influence forward
lunge movement competency. Figure 1. Optimal forward lunge technique, viewed from the side (A) and the front (B).
ANKLE MOBILITY
The ankle joint complex consists of 3 resulting from bad technique during mobility to perform a good lunge
joints, namely, the ankle joint, subtalar movement overstress joint ligaments pattern (13).
joint, and the midtarsal joint (30,38). and tendons (6,7,20,40). An indicator
The motions that take place at the of good ankle mobility during a forward KNEE CONTROL
ankle are dorsiflexion/plantarflexion, lunge is when the athlete can maintain During a forward lunge, the knee of the
inversion/eversion, and axial rotation a flat foot position of the lead leg and front and back leg should be aligned
(38). Given the ankle’s range of motion an aligned flexed foot position during with the hip and ankle during flexion
capability in frontal, sagittal, and trans- full hip, knee, and ankle flexion (Figure and extension (5,8,13,31). The knee
verse planes and because none of the 1). An athlete must have good ankle joint is the largest joint in the body and
motions take place exclusively at one
joint, the ankle has been identified
as a mobility joint (13,35,38). During
the performance of the forward lunge,
ankle mobility on both the lead and
trail legs is critical to ensure a balanced
biomechanically correct lunge pattern
(6,13). The inability to control foot
position and the lack of ankle mobility
have been reported to encourage move-
ment strategies that have been identi-
fied to be injury mechanisms (33,35).
Movement strategies such as turning
out of the feet, turning in of the feet,
dropping of the arch, and/or lifting of
the lead heel off the ground are
considered faulty during the perfor-
mance of a lunge pattern (4,16–
18,20,32,35). The effects of faulty
strategies on the body during sport
and sport-specific training are not
entirely understood. Kovacs et al. (32)
and Flanagan et al. (20) found that
various biomechanically specious posi-
tions of the ankle and foot during
activities of daily living (i.e., squatting
and lunging) resulted in higher forces
incurred at the knee and hip. It is Figure 2. Medial knee motion, on the forward lunge, which is considered improper
believed that increases in joint forces technique.

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 17

Using Body Weight Forward Lunge to Screen Athletes’ Lunge Pattern

is a modified hinge joint made up of the

tibiofemoral and patellofemoral joints,
which enable flexion in a posterior
direction and extension in the anterior
direction (30). The knee joint is not
designed to accommodate excessive
mediolateral or anteroposterior move-
ment (Figure 2) (16–19). The cause of
mediolateral movement of the lead
knee during a forward lunge is hypoth-
esized to be poor strength or activation
of the rectus femoris, hamstrings, and
hip abductor and adductor muscles
(12,35).
The hamstrings and the rectus femoris
and the gastrocnemius that attach to
the knee and ankle disadvantage the
knee if they are weak or fail to activate
at the right time and may contribute to
a poor movement pattern (13,35). In
addition, when observing the forward
lunge from the side, the athlete should
appear to have stepped out far enough
so that the lead knee is directly over the
Figure 3. Knee position in front of the toes on decent, which is considered improper
lead foot and the heel remains in
technique.
contact with the ground as the athlete’s
center of mass is observed to be
contraindicated. Therefore, a primary can identify that an athlete has diffi-
moving toward the ground (23).
benefit of a movement screen is that culty controlling knee alignment dur-
When the center of mass appears to be the strength and conditioning specialist ing movement and can recommend
moving more forward than down and
the heel of the front foot raises from the
ground to accommodate the forward
momentum, there is less emphasis on
challenging hip mobility and an in-
crease in patellofemoral shear force has
been reported (Figure 3) (3). In addi-
tion, athletes using the aforementioned
movement strategy often report knee
pain. There are many variables that
have been identified as contributors
to an athlete’s inability to control knee
alignment: weak or poor activation of
the gluteus muscles, over- or under-
developed quadriceps muscles, and
poor mobility in the hips and ankles
(3,6,9,14,27,36).
Researchers appear conflicted about
the causes of knee injuries related to an
athlete’s inability to control knee
alignment during movement (16,18,21,
28,29,37,41). Nonetheless, it is clear
that mediolateral movement of the
knee during the eccentric and concen- Figure 4. Lumbar extension providing greater hip mobility and stride length. Excessive
tric phases of a lower limb exercise is lumbar extension is considered improper technique.

18 VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 6 | DECEMBER 2009

Figure 5. (A) Extended, (B) flexed, and (C) neutral lumbar spine during the lunge. Note that spinal flexion is considered improper
technique, and excessive spinal extension is considered improper technique.

a thorough assessment conducted by sagittal (flexion and extension), frontal the lower extremity and pelvis during
a sports medicine professional. (abduction and adduction), and trans- activities such as sprinting and
verse (medial and lateral rotation) change of direction (25). Hip range of
HIP MOBILITY (24,25). One of the primary roles of motion is considerable with flexion
The hip joint is a ball-and-socket joint the hip joint is to provide a pathway between 0 and 135° and extension
that is capable of motion in all 3 planes: for transmission of forces between 0 and 15° (25).

Table 2
Lunge pattern progressions
Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Coaching points Level 1 (assisted) (body weight) (external load) (eccentric) (plyometric) Interventions

Head: centered In-place lunge with Forward lunge Forward lunge Drop and Split jumps Alt hip march
bands (Figure 6) stick split lunge (Figure 11)
(Figure 9)
Shoulders/T-spine: Lateral lunge Box split Band pull hip
held down (Figure 7) jumps flexion
away from (Figure 12)
ears/neutral
position
Lumbar: neutral Back lunge Scissor jumps Crazy Carpet
(Figure 8) (Figure 10) forward
Hips: horizontally lunge
aligned, 90/90 (Figure 13)
stance
Knees: aligned
with the hips
and feet
Ankles: aligned
with the knee
Feet: heel of lead
foot in contact
with the floor
Progression to the next level should only occur if the athlete can demonstrate the exercises detailed in each level with all coaching points
maintained through a complete range of motion.

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 19

Using Body Weight Forward Lunge to Screen Athletes’ Lunge Pattern

During a forward lunge, mean hip

range of motion has been reported to
be 95 6 27° of flexion (28). Hip range
of motion can appear greater if pelvic
and lumbar extensions are allowed to
take place (Figure 4) (25,28). Forces at
the hip during a forward lunge have
been reported to be 1.25 and 1.31 times
the body weight during the downward
and upward phases of the movement
(20). Posterior movement of the pelvic
and lumbar extensions are movement
strategies reported to allow greater
hip mobility (25,28,30,31,35). However,
when an increase in hip mobility is
achieved through pelvic instability and
lumbar extension, the forces incurred
by those 2 regions have been reported
Figure 6. In-place lunge with bands showing the start position (A) and the lunge
to increase 10% to 30% (20).
position (B).
When an athlete performs a forward
lunge, the hips should remain parallel
with the ground (9). There should be
no mediolateral rotation or lateral
dropping of the hip (9,13). The hips
should appear stable to accommodate
the mobility necessary to facilitate
a good lunge pattern.

TRUNK (LUMBAR STABILITY)

According to researchers, the trunk
should remain vertical with the lumbar
spine in a neutral position (Figure 5)
(22,23). Given the prevalence of low
back pain and injuries experienced by
athletes with notoriously tight hip
flexor muscles, it is critical that the
lumbar spine be monitored throughout Figure 7. Lateral lunge.
the lunge pattern. Lunging with an
external load and excessive lumbar
extension has been reported to dra-
matically increase compressive forces
(33,34,39). A 2° increase in extension
from a neutral spine position increased
compressive stress within the posterior
annulus by an average of 16% com-
pared with maintaining a neutral spine
position (39). This is particularly im-
portant because researchers have
found that athletes hyperextend to a
significant degree when lifting heavier
(60% and 80% of 1 repetition maxi-
mum) loads (1,10,39).
Further investigation demonstrated
that the compressive strength of a ver-
tebral body is notably reduced with Figure 8. Back lunge showing the start position (A) and the lunge position (B).

20 VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 6 | DECEMBER 2009

 up to 4.5° (15). Even though the effects
of head position during a forward lunge
have yet to be studied, it appears from
practical experience that a neutral head
position with the direction of gaze
directed straight is what the strength
and conditioning specialist should
expect to see when an athlete performs
a forward lunge (22,23).

PROGRESSING LUNGE PATTERN

MOVEMENT COMPETENCY
Table 2 provides an example of how an
athlete’s lunge pattern may be pro-
gressed based on concerns identified
Figure 9. Drop and stick split lunge: From the start position(A), drop into a split lunge in the screening process (see also Figures
(B) as fast as you can trying to maintain all coaching points at the lowest point. 6–13). The levels detailed in Table 2
progresses along a compendium of
intensity guided by movement ability.
movement patterns using a lumbar HEAD POSITION Progression between levels is deter-
posture that is not neutral (39). It is There is no research that has investi- mined by the athlete’s ability to perform
therefore suggested that the trunk, gated the effects of head position on each level’s exercise with the coaching
in particular the lumbar spine, be lunge kinematics and kinetics. The points maintained as detailed in Table 2.
observed during low- to moderate- only research found that investigated Level 1 uses strength bands to help
intensity activity prior to the prescrip- head position and direction of gaze attenuate the body weight force to
tion of high-intensity training with on movement kinematics involved the enable the athlete to work through a full
heavy loads (33,34,39). The forward bilateral back squat. Donnelly et al. range of motion (Figure 6). The strength
lunge provides an opportunity for the (15) found that when the head position bands also promote activation of the hip
trunk and lumbar spine to demonstrate and direction of gaze were directed flexors and extensors, which assist with
its control and gives the strength and downward, a significant increase in hip controlling lower limb alignment.
conditioning specialists an opportunity and trunk flexion was observed (15). Level 2 is the body weight forward
to better understand an athlete’s ten- Movement of the head with a down- lunge that is used to screen the lunge
dency through the lumbar region ward direction of gaze during a squat pattern and serves as an effective
during movement. movement increased trunk flexion by method for loading the lunge pattern.

Figure 10. Scissor jumps showing the start lunge position (A), middle airborne position (B), and the end lunge position (C).

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 21

Using Body Weight Forward Lunge to Screen Athletes’ Lunge Pattern

The athlete should demonstrate sev-

eral body weight forward lunges with
minimal effort before progressing to
the next level.
Level 3 introduces external loading in
the form of free weights, medicine
balls, and other isoinertial modalities
(Figures 7 and 8). Level 4 focuses on
the eccentric phase of the lunge
pattern. It provides an opportunity
for the athlete to demonstrate control
via strength within the lunge pattern
range of motion where the most joint
forces have been recorded (20). Levels
3 and 4 may be used simultaneously in
complex loading schemes to challenge
the eccentric phase under high loads.
The exercises in level 5 are examples
of traditional lower body plyometric
drills that provide an opportunity for
the athlete to demonstrate move-
ment competency within the lunge
pattern at high velocities. Prescribing
level 5 exercises before the athlete has
demonstrated movement competency
under high force with low velocity is
not recommended.
The intervention exercises detailed in
Table 2 challenge hip flexion and
extension, trunk stability, and lower
limb control (Figures 11–13). These
exercises can be used early in a plan to
Figure 11. Alternate hip march. complement level 1 exercises or used
as movement preparation exercises
given how they target the muscles
and patterning specific to the lunge
pattern.

DISCUSSION
The forward lunge exercise has been
presented as a valid screen of an
athlete’s movement competency re-
lated to the lunge pattern. The authors
recognize the use of the forward lunge,
as a screening tool requires further
investigation. For example: Are joint
kinematics and kinetics required to
accurately screen a forward lunge
movement? What is the correlation
of full 3-dimensional analysis of a
forward lunge pattern to standard
2-dimensional video analysis? When
an athlete can perform a body weight
Figure 12. Band pull with hip flexion showing the start position (A) and the hip flexed forward lunge efficiently and effec-
position (B). tively, does screening the pattern under

22 VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 6 | DECEMBER 2009

Figure 13. Crazy Carpet forward lunge showing the start position (A), the mid position (B), and the end position (C)—The Crazy
Carpet is an 8 3 10 piece of plastic that provides friction resistance to allow a progressive lunge step distance.

high loads and high velocities provide The athlete may use various movement John Cronin is
further useful information? strategies to accomplish a movement a professor at
As a screening tool, the body weight task. However, these strategies may AUT University
forward lunge appears to provide increase the incidence of injury and in Exercise Sci-
valuable information about an athlete’s reduce performance if ignored and ence, Strength and
movement tendency related to lunge excessively loaded. It is recommended Conditioning.
pattern exercises. There has been very that strength and conditioning special-
little research that has investigated the ists screen an athlete’s lunge pattern
validity of interventions that may be with a body weight forward lunge. A
used to correct an athlete’s lunge pattern. simple movement screen performed at
the onset of program design may give Patria Hume is
However, to aid, the strength and con- a professor at
ditioning specialists refer to Table 2 for an the strength and conditioning special-
ists valuable insight into how their AUT University
example of how to progress an athlete’s in Exercise Sci-
lunge pattern from function to fantastic. athlete moves, further assisting them
with developing a strength program ence, Human
CONCLUSION that is specific to their needs and Movement.
The first step toward improving an capabilities.
athlete’s movement competency is
screening fundamental movement pat-
terns to identify strategies of movement Matthew Kritz
that may contribute to injury and impair is a PhD candi- REFERENCES
1. Adams MA and Dolan P. Recent advances
performance. The lunge pattern is date in strength
in lumbar spine mechanics and their clinical
a fundamental pattern that is common and conditioning/ significance. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)
to sport and sport-specific strength human movement 10: 3–19, 1995.
training programs. The forward lunge at the Institute of
2. Adrian MJ and Cooper JM. Biomechanics
has been proven to be an effective Sport and Recrea- of Human Movement (2nd ed). Dubuque.
exercise and appears to have prognostic tion Research, IA: Wm. C. Brown Communications, 1995.
value. To perform a forward lunge New Zealand pp. 135.
correctly, mobility must be present at AUT University, and a senior strength 3. Alkjaer T, Simonsen EB, Magnusson P,
the ankles and hips and stability must be and conditioning specialist for the New Aagaard H, and Dyhre-poulsen P.
maintained at the knees and trunk. Zealand Academy of Sport. Differences in the movement pattern of

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 23

Using Body Weight Forward Lunge to Screen Athletes’ Lunge Pattern

a forward lunge in two types of anterior 16. Escamilla RF. Knee biomechanics of the Correlations between hip strength and
cruciate ligament deficient patients: dynamic squat exercise. Med Sci Sports static foot and knee posture. J Sport
Copers and non-copers. Clin Biomech Exerc 33: 127–141, 2001. Rehabil 15: 12–23, 2006.
(Bristol, Avon) 17(8): 13, 2002. 17. Escamilla RF, Fleisig GS, Lowry TM, 30. Kendall FP, Mccreary EK, Provance PG,
4. Alter MJ. Science of Flexibility (2nd ed). Barrentine SW, and Andrews JR. A three- Rodgers MM, and Romani WA. Muscles
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1996. dimensional biomechanical analysis of the Testing and Function With Posture and
pp. 373. squat during varying stance widths. Med Pain (5th ed). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott
Sci Sports Exerc 33: 984–998, 2001. Williams & Wilkins, 2005. pp. 480.
5. Baechle TR, Earle RW, and Wathen D.
Resistance training. In: Essentials of 18. Escamilla RF, Fleisig GS, Zheng N, 31. Kinakin K. Optimal Muscle Testing.
Strength Training and Conditioning. Barrentine SW, Wilk KE, and Andrews JR. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004. pp.
Baechle TR, Earle RW, and Wathen D, eds. Biomechanics of the knee during closed 122.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2000. kinetic chain and open kinetic chain
32. Kovacs I, Tihanyi J, Devita P, Racz L,
pp. 395. exercises. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 556–
Barrier J, and Hortobagyi T. Foot placement
569, 1998.
6. Bennell K, Talbot R, Wajswelner H, modifies kinematics and kinetics during
Techovanich W, and Kelly D. Intra-rater and 19. Escamilla RF, Lander JE, and Garhammer J. drop jumping. Med Sci Sports Exerc
inter-rater reliability of a weight-bearing Biomechanics of powerlifting and 31: 708–716, 1999.
lunge measure of ankle dorsiflexion. Aust J weightlifting exercises. In: Exercise and
33. Mcgill S. Ultimate Back Fitness and
Physiother 44: 175–180, 1998. Sport Science. Garrett WE and Kirkendall
Performance (3rd ed). Waterloo, Ontario:
DT, eds. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott
7. Beynnon BD, Renstrom PA, Alosa DM, Wabuno, Backfitpro Inc, 2006. pp. 311.
Williams & Wilkins, 2000. pp. 585.
Baumhauer JF, and Vacek PM. Ankle 34. Mcgill SM. The influence of lordosis on axial
ligament injury risk factors: A prospective 20. Flanagan S, Wang M, Greendale GA, Azen
trunk torque and trunk muscle myoelectric
study of college athletes. J Orthop Res SP, and Salem GJ. Biomechanical
activity. Spine 17: 1187–1193, 1992.
19: 213–220, 2001. attributes of lunging activities for older
adults. J Strength Cond Res 18: 599–605, 35. Sahrmann SA. Diagnosis and Treatment
8. Bloomfield J. Posture and proportionality of Movement Impairment Syndromes.
2004.
in sport. In: Training in Sport: St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 2002. pp. 460.
Applying Sport Science. Ellito B, ed. 21. Gelber AC, Hochberg MC, Mead LA,
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc, Wang N, Wigley FM, and Kiag MJ. Joint 36. Thijs Y, Tiggelen DV, Willems T, De Clercq
1998. pp. 426. injury in young adults and risk for D, and Witvrouw E. Relationship between
subsequent knee and hip osteoarthritis. hip strength and frontal plane posture of
9. Brandon R. The Lunge Test: Raphael the knee during a forward lunge. Br J
Ann Intern Med 133: 321–328, 2000.
Brandon Uses the Lowly Lunge to Sports Med 41: 723–727, 2007.
Grapple With a Much Bigger 22. Graham J. Barbell lunge. Strength Cond J
Philosophical Issue, in Sports Injury 24: 30–32, 2002. 37. Toutoungi DE, Lu TW, Leardini A, Catani F,
Bulletin. London, United Kingdom: and O’Connor JJ. Cruciate ligament forces
23. Graham J. DB forward lunge. Strength
Jonathan Pye, 2007. pp. 1–5. in the human knee during rehabilitation
Cond J 29: 36–37, 2007.
exercises. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)
10. Brinckmann P, Biggermann M, and 24. Hall SJ. Basic Biomechanics (5th ed). New 15: 176–187, 2000.
Hilweg D. Fatigue fracture of human lumbar York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2007. pp. 544.
vertebrae. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 38. Vickerstaff JA, Miles AW, and Cunningham
25. Hall CM and Brody LT. Therapeutic JL. A brief history of total ankle replacement
(Suppl 1): 1–23, 1988.
Exercise: Moving Toward Function and a review of the current status. Med Eng
11. Chek P. Movement That Matters. San (2nd ed). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Phys 29: 1056–1064, 2007.
Diego, CA: C.H.E.K Institute, 2000. pp. 54. Williams and Wilkins, 2005. pp. 334.
39. Walsh JC, Quinlan JF, Stapleton R,
12. Claiborne TL, Armstrong CW, Gandhi V, 26. Harman E. The biomechanics of resistance Fitzpatrick DP, and Mccormack D. Three-
and Pincivero DM. Relationship between exercise. In: Essentials of Strength Training dimensional motion analysis of the lumbar
hip and knee strength and knee valgus and Conditioning. Baechle TR and Earle spine during ‘‘free squat’’ weight lift
during a single leg squat. J Appl Biomech RW, eds. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, training. Am J Sports Med 35: 927–932,
22: 41–50, 2006. 2000. pp. 657. 2007.
13. Cook G. Athletic Body in Balance. 27. Hefzy MS, al Khazim M, and Harrison L. 40. Watson AW.Ankle sprains in players of the
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2003. Co-activation of the hamstrings and field-games Gaelic football and hurling.
pp. 222. quadriceps during the lunge exercise. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 39: 66–70.
14. Crill MT, Kolba CP, and Chlebourn GS. Biomed Sci Instrum 33: 360–365, 1997. 1999.
Using lunge measurements for baseline 28. Hemmerich A, Brown H, Smith S, 41. Wilk KE, Escamilla RF, Fleisig GS,
fitness testing. J Sport Rehabil 13: 44–53, Marthandam SSK, and Wyss UP. Hip, knee Barrentine SW, Andrews JR, and Boyd ML.
2004. and ankle kinematics of high range of A comparison of tibiofemoral joint
15. Donnelly DV, Berg WP, and Fiske DM. The motion activities of daily living. J Orthop forces and electromyographic activity
effect of the direction of gaze on the Res 24: 770–781, 2006. during open and closed kinetic chain
kinematics of the squat exercise. J Strength 29. Hollman JH, Kolbeck KE, Hichcock JL, exercises. Am J Sports Med 24: 518–527,
Cond Res 20: 145–150, 2006. Koverman JW, and Krause DA. 1996.

24 VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 6 | DECEMBER 2009