Brian Schiff’s Blog
Injury Prevention, Sports Rehab & Performance Training Expert
2
Kettlebells are very popular training tools these days. I find them useful in many ways – improving grip strength, core activation, asymmetrical loading, etc. With that said, I also feel with movement flaws and/or improper technique, they carry an inherent injury risk.
It is interesting to note that some people find swings to be very therapeutic and good for their back, while others who are capable of lifting very high loads with traditional lifts find them to be irritating to the spine. So why is this?
If you are like me, knowing the “why” or “cause and effect” behind exercise is very important. I am not one to blindly use an exercise without knowing its intended purpose and then quantifying risk vs. reward and results. So, it was with great interest I read Stuart McGill and Leigh Marshall’s recent article on kettlebell swings, snatches and bottoms-up carries in the NSCA Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (Jan 2012).
While the sample size is small, I think the article provides some gems in regard to training given no one has really looked at spine loading during various swings and carries. The authors used surface EMG to record muscle activation of the back, hip and core muscles throughout the various exercises – swing, swing with Kime (abdominal pulse at top of the swing), swing to snatch, racked carry and bottoms-up carry.
Without going into all the tiny details, I wanted to share what I consider to be some key takeaways for rehab and training:
- Unlike traditional low back extension exercises such as lifting a bar or squatting exercises, the swing creates a relatively high posterior shear force (namely L4 on L5) in relation to the compressive load – this may explain why some powerlifters have no issues with heavy dead lifts but are bothered by swings
- Both compressive and shear forces were highest at the beginning of the swing
- From a compressive standpoint loads with a 16 kg kettlebell (swing) are less than one-half of that of lifting 27 kg on an Olympic bar and these would seemingly pose a low relative injury risk
- KB swings do appear to require sufficient spine stability in this shear mode to ensure that is is a “safe” exercise selection
- Those with back pain develop movement flaws and the authors report one of the most common is to move the spine under load instead of the hips – so instead of hip hinging, injured clientele are more apt to shift or bend the spine leading to repetitive and harmful forces
- A modified approach to swings with careful cueing and progression is suggested for clinicians
- The bottoms-up carry poses more challenge to the core musculature likely due to requiring more grip strength (thus stiffening the core per McGill in Ultimate Back Fitness & Performance) as well as necessitating more control to carry it, hence making it a good choice for training in terms of activation of these muscles
So, in my mind kettlebell training (like any other form of training) requires proper form, movement assessment and an intimate knowledge of the client’s medical and training history. In addition to that, we must carefully scrutinize execution of the exercise and deliver appropriate feedback and analysis.
While maximal shear occurs at the bottom, I cannot help but wonder about the potential impact of tight iliopsoas muscles given their unique relationship to the lumbar spine and reverse muscle action. It would be interesting to know if those with a greater anterior tilt and tightness are more likely to experience higher shear forces or potential back soreness over time.
This brings the discussion back to quality of movement and movement assessment. In my mind, adequately assessing the hips (flexibility, strength and stability) is also a key variable in determining how best to approach integrating the swings. As Gray would say, the lumbar spine needs stability while the hips require mobility.
A lack of hip mobility is definitely a relative precaution for swings in my mind. On top of that, fundamental hip strength/stability and core strength should be evident. Perhaps even regressing to rudimentary hip thrusts and bridges may be the best place to start for those needing a primer on form and proper movement before moving to a basic swing.
Nonetheless, a big thanks to Stuart McGill and Leigh Marshall for this work and giving us some practical food for thought. I hope this information helps you as much as it did me. May your training be safe and effective!
Research has shown that strengthening the gluteus medius is clearly an essential way to reduce anterior knee pain and improve pelvic stability and function. The exercise I am sharing today is useful for improving hip strength and pelvic stability in a closed chain fashion.
In the video below, I demonstrate a very effective way to strengthen the gluteus medius and improve hip stability.
For a full description of the exercise, check out my latest column, Functionally Fit, by clicking here.
Seldom do I use my blog as a platform to rant, boast or anything in between. I generally like to share evidenced based information that helps improve your health and performance. But, every once in a while I feel the need to share my opinions on things I feel strongly about. Today, I want to offer you my suggestions and theory on professional excellence within the fields of health and fitness.
Let me preface this post by simply saying I would never think of writing this or publishing it online for the whole world to read without having several years (15 now) of professional experience under my belt and a proven track record of getting RESULTS for my clients. In my mind, the very reasons for my success include: being blessed with above average intelligence, a strong work ethic, a desire to help and serve others, unquenchable PASSION to be the very best I can be in my field, and an uncanny knack for seeing things others do not and using that information to make impactful exercise and treatment decisions for my patients and clients.
Where am I going with this? Well, unfortunately, not all trainers, coaches and physical therapists share this same passion or possess this knack that I speak of. Some are content after college (or certification) to be good enough and may not read literature, go above and beyond with continuing education, surround themselves with the best in the business or strive to be better each day. Others may simply not have an innate ability to problem solve and synthesize given data to construct the right plan for the client. Often trainers and clinicians default to what is easy or “what they know” as opposed to viewing each client in a different light. In other words, they lack artistry. They will never be revered like Picasso (pictured below).
Eliminating the “false step” has been a personal mission of many strength coaches I have heard or worked alongside of in my 15 year career. I used to wonder quietly why it was such a bad thing early on in my coaching. Based on angles and observation it seemed almost reflexive for most athletes.
Then a few years ago I had the privilege of seeing Lee Taft present his theory on speed development and multi-directional speed training and it all came together for me. Lee eloquently explained that the “false step” is really just a plyo step – a chance to load the body up for what it was meant to do. It essentially allows the athlete to reposition the body (or center of mass) more efficiently to load and explode. Ever wonder why sprinters use a starting block?
Look at all like an athlete’s body position once they step back and begin to move forward?
This topic has been covered in previous point/counterpoint articles in the NSCA journals and debated on forums, blogs and seminars alike. For me, I have been encouraging the “false step” or “plyo step” the past few years because it is ‘normal’ for athletes to move that way. As a matter of fact, one of the first things I do is put them in an athletic parallel stance position and ask them to accelerate for 10 yards. Not once have I seen them not step back provided I do not cue them to do so.
Keep in mind that previous research done (Kraan, GA, van Veen, J, Snijders, CJ, and Storm, J. Starting from standing: Why step backwards? J Biomech 34: 211–215, 2001.) indicates that stepping back is instinctive in up to 95% of subjects. Pretty telling, right? Even so, many coaches will still argue this technique slows the athletes down.
Through my clinical practice and sports performance training, I continue to focus on eliminating core and hip dysfunction. I think many of the knee problems I see in runners and females are related to weakness in the glutes and small lateral rotators. There has also been quite a buzz about a recent article written in the Strength & Conditioning Journal on crunches and whether spinal flexion may actually be good for you.
This topic alone could take up several posts so, I will not delve into that today. However, as one who has experienced sciatica and disc injury firsthand, I probably tend to fall a little more in the camp of focusing on a neutral spine and resisting external forces as I feel this helps improve performance and reduce injury risk. In that vain, I have been continuing to develop my own core and hip stability progressions with my advanced clients/athletes.
I have been doing a series of posts for BOSU and PFP in my Functionally Fit Column. In my last post, I covered a 3D mountian climber with hip extension. In today’s post, I am covering a great core exercise with the BOSU Ballast Ball focusing on hip extension with the goal of improving shoulder, core and hip stability while promoting hip extension and disassociation.
In the video below you can check out the progressions (incline and decline)
Click here to read the full article on technique and application. The article reviews a regression for those not ready to tackle this quite yet. I think you will find this exercise challenging and rewarding.
Back to top