Verbal Cueing vs Constraint-Led Approach for Teaching the Kettlebell Swing

NCT ID: NCT05560269

Last Updated: 2024-06-07

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

66 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-05-02

Study Completion Date

2024-05-05

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to determine which method is most effective for teaching the kettlebell swing: verbal cueing, physical constraints, or a combination of the two.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

There is a method of teaching and learning movement and exercise skills known as the constraint-led approach. This method of movement learning has the learner exploring and experimenting different variations of an exercise by self-organizing around a set of given constraints of the individual, environment and task. Individual constraints are qualities about the person performing the task such as their arm length and height. Environmental constraints regard the environment where the task is being performed and include factors such as lighting and temperature. Finally, the task constraints are qualities about the movement and exercises being performed such as asking someone to do a half squat onto a box instead of a full bodyweight squat in the air. This constraints way of teaching movement has the movement educator as a guide or architect that shapes the qualities of the task the learner must navigate.

The kettlebell swing was chosen as the primary exercise for this study due to its efficacy and practicality as a functional movement pattern. Current literature suggests that kettlebell swings may elicit an increase in strength measured in the form of a deadlift exercise, which may have carry over to activities of daily living, such as bending over to lift a box with proper form. In a 2016 study, Edinborough et al. examined the proposed implications that repeated kettlebell swings could be used as a practical tool to increase endurance capacity of the lumbar extensor complex. The investigators of this study found that after a 60 second bout of continuous kettlebell swings, participants demonstrated a reduction in isometric strength, demonstrating fatigue of this musculature. The implications of this study suggest that kettlebell swings may increase the fatigue threshold of the lumbar extensor musculature, which may provide protective measures regarding the development of musculoskeletal conditions such as low back pain, as a decrease in activation of these associated muscles may be apparent during periods of fatigue.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Movement Disorders Muscle Tenderness

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

verbal and physical constraint group

Use of verbal and physical constraint

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Verbal coaching vs. Constraint based coaching

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval

verbal constraint group

Use of verbal constraint only

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Verbal coaching vs. Constraint based coaching

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval

physical constraint group

Use of constraint only

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Verbal coaching vs. Constraint based coaching

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Verbal coaching vs. Constraint based coaching

* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues and physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using verbal cues to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval
* 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to teach the second part of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval→ 15 repetitions of kettlebell swings using physical constraints to combine both parts of the movement → 30 seconds to 1 minute rest interval

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Subjects between the ages of 18 and 55 years.
* Subjective rating of 3/5 or less on confidence with kettlebell swings.

Exclusion Criteria

* Inability to read and write in English.
* Previous injury to the lower extremity that prevents normal squatting motion.
* Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire suggesting inability to safely participate in exercise.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

55 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of Central Florida

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Central Florida

Orlando, Florida, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Levine NA, Hasan MB, Avalos MA, Lee S, Rigby BR, Kwon YH. Effects of kettlebell mass on lower-body joint kinetics during a kettlebell swing exercise. Sports Biomech. 2022 Oct;21(9):1032-1045. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2020.1726442. Epub 2020 Mar 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32131695 (View on PubMed)

McGill SM, Marshall LW. Kettlebell swing, snatch, and bottoms-up carry: back and hip muscle activation, motion, and low back loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):16-27. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823a4063.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21997449 (View on PubMed)

Lyons BC, Mayo JJ, Tucker WS, Wax B, Hendrix RC. Electromyographical Comparison of Muscle Activation Patterns Across Three Commonly Performed Kettlebell Exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Sep;31(9):2363-2370. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001771.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28394829 (View on PubMed)

Andersen V, Fimland MS, Gunnarskog A, Jungard GA, Slattland RA, Vraalsen OF, Saeterbakken AH. Core Muscle Activation in One-Armed and Two-Armed Kettlebell Swing. J Strength Cond Res. 2016 May;30(5):1196-204. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001240.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26473519 (View on PubMed)

Otte FW, Rothwell M, Woods C, Davids K. Specialist Coaching Integrated into a Department of Methodology in Team Sports Organisations. Sports Med Open. 2020 Nov 16;6(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s40798-020-00284-5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 33196910 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

STUDY00004623

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Mental Effort and Muscle Strength
NCT00059436 COMPLETED PHASE1
Effects of Unloading on Muscle Mass
NCT00936039 COMPLETED NA
Physical Fitness in Autism
NCT04199507 COMPLETED
Resistance Training in Children
NCT06096610 COMPLETED NA