Hip Mobility Is Associated with Isokinetic Hip Adduction Torque in Recreationally Active Females: An Exploratory Study

Öz

This exploratory study examined whether trunk and hip mobility are associated with isokinetic hip torque in recreationally active females. Twenty-two women completed standing isokinetic hip testing at 60°·s⁻¹, yielding peak torque (PT; normalised to body mass), time to peak torque, and joint angle at peak torque for hip flexion–extension and abduction–adduction. Segmental (lumbar, thoracic, hip) and global mobility indices, composites of active range of motion, were quantified with inertial measurement units. Ninety-six Spearman correlations were computed with Benjamini–Hochberg false-discovery-rate (FDR) control; regression models were fitted post hoc. Two associations survived FDR correction: dominant hip adduction PT was related to hip mobility (r = .70, 95% CI .36 to .87) and to global mobility (r = .66, 95% CI .34 to .84). A segmental model accounted for 49% of the variance (adjusted R² = .485), with hip mobility the only stable predictor (β = 0.57, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.00). Sensitivity analyses indicated that this finding was robust to the construction of the indices and was carried mainly by hip flexion range of motion, which is unrelated to the fixed testing excursion. A side-matched analysis weakened the dominant-side association (r = .57). Associations of global mobility with the timing and angle of non-dominant adduction torque did not survive correction. The global index contains the hip index (r = .85), so the two are not independent constructs. Hip mobility is associated with hip adduction torque magnitude; the findings are hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in larger, preferably longitudinal studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• range of motion
• Hip biomechanics
• strength
• wearable technologies

Rekreasyonel Olarak Aktif Kadınlarda Kalça Hareketliliği İzokinetik Kalça Addüksiyon Torku ile İlişkilidir: Keşifsel Bir Çalışma

Öz

Bu keşifsel çalışma, rekreasyonel olarak aktif kadınlarda gövde ve kalça hareketliliğinin izokinetik kalça torkuyla ilişkili olup olmadıBu keşifsel çalışma, rekreasyonel olarak aktif kadınlarda gövde ve kalça hareketliliğinin izokinetik kalça torkuyla ilişkili olup olmadığını incelemiştir. Yirmi iki kadın, 60°·s⁻¹ açısal hızda ayakta izokinetik kalça testini tamamlamış; kalça fleksiyon–ekstansiyon ve abdüksiyon–addüksiyon için zirve tork (PT; vücut kütlesine normalize), zirve torka ulaşma süresi (TPT) ve zirve torktaki eklem açısı (JAP) elde edilmiştir. Segmental (lumbar, torasik, kalça) ve global hareketlilik indeksleri, aktif hareket açıklığının bileşik ölçütleri olarak ataletsel ölçüm birimleriyle hesaplanmıştır. Doksan altı Spearman korelasyonu Benjamini–Hochberg yanlış keşif oranı (FDR) kontrolüyle değerlendirilmiş; regresyon modelleri, nominal düzeyde anlamlı ikili ilişki gösteren çıktılar için post hoc kurulmuştur. FDR düzeltmesinden iki ilişki geçmiştir: dominant kalça addüksiyon PT’si kalça hareketliliği (r = .70, %95 GA .36–.87) ve global hareketlilikle (r = .66, %95 GA .34–.84) ilişkilidir. Segmental model dominant addüksiyon PT’sindeki varyansın %49’unu açıklamış (düzeltilmiş R² = .485), tek kararlı yordayıcı kalça hareketliliği olmuştur (β = 0.57, %95 GA 0.13–1.00). Duyarlılık analizleri bu bulgunun indekslerin kuruluşuna bağlı olmadığını ve esas olarak, sabit test aralığıyla ilgisi bulunmayan kalça fleksiyon açıklığı tarafından taşındığını göstermiştir. Taraf-eşleşmiş analizde dominant taraf ilişkisi zayıflamıştır (r = .57). Global hareketliliğin non-dominant addüksiyon torkunun zamansal ve açısal özellikleriyle ilişkileri düzeltmeden geçememiştir. Global indeks kalça indeksini içerdiğinden (r = .85) ikisi bağımsız yapı değildir. Kalça hareketliliği, kalça addüksiyon torkunun büyüklüğüyle ilişkilidir; bulgular hipotez üretici niteliktedir ve daha büyük örneklemli, tercihen boylamsal çalışmalarla doğrulanmalıdır.ğını incelemiştir. Yirmi iki kadın, 60°·s⁻¹ açısal hızda ayakta izokinetik kalça testini tamamlamış; kalça fleksiyon–ekstansiyon ve abdüksiyon–addüksiyon için zirve tork (PT; vücut kütlesine normalize), zirve torka ulaşma süresi (TPT) ve zirve torktaki eklem açısı (JAP) elde edilmiştir. Segmental (lumbar, torasik, kalça) ve global hareketlilik indeksleri, aktif hareket açıklığının bileşik ölçütleri olarak ataletsel ölçüm birimleriyle hesaplanmıştır. Doksan altı Spearman korelasyonu Benjamini–Hochberg yanlış keşif oranı (FDR) kontrolüyle değerlendirilmiş; regresyon modelleri, nominal düzeyde anlamlı ikili ilişki gösteren çıktılar için post hoc kurulmuştur. FDR düzeltmesinden iki ilişki geçmiştir: dominant kalça addüksiyon PT’si kalça hareketliliği (r = .70, %95 GA .36–.87) ve global hareketlilikle (r = .66, %95 GA .34–.84) ilişkilidir. Segmental model dominant addüksiyon PT’sindeki varyansın %49’unu açıklamış (düzeltilmiş R² = .485), tek kararlı yordayıcı kalça hareketliliği olmuştur (β = 0.57, %95 GA 0.13–1.00). Duyarlılık analizleri bu bulgunun indekslerin kuruluşuna bağlı olmadığını ve esas olarak, sabit test aralığıyla ilgisi bulunmayan kalça fleksiyon açıklığı tarafından taşındığını göstermiştir. Global hareketliliğin non-dominant addüksiyon torkunun zamansal ve açısal özellikleriyle ilişkileri düzeltmeden geçememiştir. Global indeks kalça indeksini içerdiğinden (r = .85) ikisi bağımsız yapı değildir. Kalça hareketliliği, kalça addüksiyon torkunun büyüklüğüyle ilişkilidir; bulgular hipotez üretici niteliktedir ve daha büyük örneklemli, tercihen boylamsal çalışmalarla doğrulanmalıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• hareket açıklığı
• Kalça biyomekaniği
• kuvvet
• giyilebilir teknolojiler

Kaynakça

1. Afonso, J., Ramirez-Campillo, R., Moscão, J., Rocha, T., Zacca, R., Martins, A., Milheiro, A. A., Ferreira, J., Sarmento, H., & Clemente, F. M. (2021). Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Healthcare, 9(4), 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9040427
2. Almansoof, H. S., Nuhmani, S., & Muaidi, Q. (2023). Role of kinetic chain in sports performance and injury risk: A narrative review. Journal of Medicine and Life, 16(11), 1591–1596. https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2023-0087
3. Andersen, L. L., & Aagaard, P. (2006). Influence of maximal muscle strength and intrinsic muscle contractile properties on contractile rate of force development. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 96(1), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-005-0070-z
4. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
5. Borg, G. A. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 14(5), 377–381.
6. Brown, S. H. M., & McGill, S. M. (2010). The relationship between trunk muscle activation and trunk stiffness: Examining a non-constant stiffness gain. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 13(6), 829–835. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255841003630652
7. Cheatham, S., Hanney, W. J., & Kolber, M. J. (2017). Hip range of motion in recreational weight training participants: A descriptive report. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 12(5), 764–773.
8. Contreras-Diaz, G., Chirosa-Rios, L. J., Martinez-Garcia, D., Intelangelo, L., Chirosa-Rios, I., & Jerez-Mayorga, D. (2025). Reliability of isokinetic hip abductor and adductor strength measurements: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology, 239(3), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1177/17543371221137965

9. Cottam, D. S., Campbell, A. C., Davey, M. P. C., Kent, P., Elliott, B. C., & Alderson, J. A. (2022). Measurement of uni-planar and sport specific trunk mo-tion using magneto-inertial measurement units: The concurrent validity of Noraxon and Xsens systems relative to a retro-reflective system. Gait & Posture, 92, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.11.012
10. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
11. Ferber, R., Kendall, K. D., & Farr, L. (2011). Changes in Knee Biomechanics After a Hip-Abductor Strengthening Protocol for Runners With Patellofemo-ral Pain Syndrome. Journal of Athletic Training, 46(2), 142–149. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-46.2.142
12. Freemyer, B., Takata, A., Kim, Y., & Stickley, C. (2026). Decreased Hip Strength Leads to Altered Dynamic Motion Biomechanics in Healthy Female Athletes. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 40(4), 414. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005327
13. Freiberger, C., Thomas, C. M., Lupica, G. M., O’Connell, S., Stamm, M. A., & Mulcahey, M. K. (2024). Hip Range of Motion During Passive and 1-Leg Exercises Is Greater in Women: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, 40(2), 495-512.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2023.04.006
14. Heneghan, N. R., Lokhaug, S. M., Tyros, I., Longvastøl, S., & Rushton, A. (2020). Clinical reasoning framework for thoracic spine exercise prescription in sport: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 6(1), e000713. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2019-000713
15. Heuvelmans, P., Benjaminse, A., Bolt, R., Baumeister, J., Otten, E., & Gokeler, A. (2025). Concurrent validation of the Noraxon MyoMotion wearable inertial sensors in change-of-direction and jump-landing tasks. Sports Biomechanics, 24(2), 184–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2022.2093264
16. Kang, J., Lee, J. Y., & Park, I. B. (2025). Open Versus Closed Kinetic Chain: Exercise Effects on Center of Pressure and Y-Balance in Middle-Aged Women with Knee Osteoarthritis—A Randomized Controlled Trial. Healthcare, 13(17). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13172173
17. Kibler, W. B., Press, J., & Sciascia, A. (2006). The role of core stability in athletic function. Sports Medicine, 36(3), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200636030-00001
18. Lanza, M. B., Arbuco, B., Ryan, A. S., Shipper, A. G., Gray, V. L., & Addison, O. (2022). Systematic Review of the Importance of Hip Muscle Strength, Activation, and Structure in Balance and Mobility Tasks. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 103(8), 1651–1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2021.12.008
19. Lashien, S. A., Abdelnaeem, A. O., & Gomaa, E. F. (2024). Effect of hip abductors training on pelvic drop and knee valgus in runners with medial tibial stress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 19(1), 700. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05139-3
20. Latash, M. L. (2012). The bliss (not the problem) of motor abundance (not redundancy). Experimental Brain Research, 217(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-012-3000-4
21. Lebleu, J., Gosseye, T., Detrembleur, C., Mahaudens, P., Cartiaux, O., & Penta, M. (2020). Lower Limb Kinematics Using Inertial Sensors during Locomo-tion: Accuracy and Reproducibility of Joint Angle Calculations with Different Sensor-to-Segment Calibrations. Sensors, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030715
22. Myer, G. D., Brent, J. L., Ford, K. R., & Hewett, T. E. (2008). A pilot study to determine the effect of trunk and hip focused neuromuscular training on hip and knee isokinetic strength. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 42(7), 614–619. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2007.046086
23. Noraxon. (2025). myoMOTION Hardware User Manual. Noraxon USA Inc.
24. Oliver, G. D., Washington, J. K., Barfield, J. W., Gascon, S. S., & Gilmer, G. (2018). Quantitative Analysis of Proximal and Distal Kinetic Chain Muscula-ture During Dynamic Exercises. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 32(6), 1545. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002036
25. Olmez, C., & Yuksek, S. (2023). Development of the Taekwondo Performance Protocol to Assess Technical Speed and Quickness. Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity, 15(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.29359/BJHPA.15.1.01
26. Parsons, J. L., & Porter, M. M. (2015). Reliability of Measuring Hip and Knee Power and Movement Velocity in Active Youth. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 27(1), 82. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000109
27. Poitras, I., Dupuis, F., Bielmann, M., Campeau-Lecours, A., Mercier, C., Bouyer, L. J., & Roy, J.-S. (2019). Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review. Sensors, 19(7), 1555. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19071555
28. Putnam, C. A. (1993). Sequential motions of body segments in striking and throwing skills: Descriptions and explanations. Journal of Biomechanics, Proceedings of the XIIIth Congress of the International Society of Biomechanics, 26, 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(93)90084-R
29. Sciascia, A., & Cromwell, R. (2012). Kinetic Chain Rehabilitation: A Theoretical Framework. Rehabilitation Research and Practice, 2012(1), 853037. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/853037
30. Trasolini, N. A., Nicholson, K. F., Mylott, J., Bullock, G. S., Hulburt, T. C., & Waterman, B. R. (2022). Biomechanical Analysis of the Throwing Athlete and Its Impact on Return to Sport. Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation, 4(1), e83–e91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.09.027
31. Treacy, D., Hassett, L., Schurr, K., Fairhall, N. J., Cameron, I. D., & Sherrington, C. (2022). Mobility training for increasing mobility and functioning in older people with frailty. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 6(6), CD010494. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010494.pub2
32. Willson, J. D., Dougherty, C. P., Ireland, M. L., & Davis, I. M. (2005). Core Stability and Its Relationship to Lower Extremity Function and Injury. JAAOS - Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 13(5), 316.
33. Zhong, Y., Fu, W., Wei, S., Li, Q., & Liu, Y. (2017). Joint Torque and Mechanical Power of Lower Extremity and Its Relevance to Hamstring Strain during Sprint Running. Journal of Healthcare Engineering, 2017, 8927415. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8927415
34. Zhu, J., Ye, Z., Liu, R., & Liu, J. (2025). Inertial measurement units (IMUs) for biomechanical analysis in sport: A review of applications, challenges and future directions. Sensor Review, 46(1), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/SR-04-2025-0261