PT on the Net Research

Putting the Maximus Back Into Gluteus Part 3: Correction through Proper Program Design

Getting the kinetic chain to operate with optimal efficiency is predicated on the ability to design a proper program. Proper program design is built upon the compilation of key components.

These components include:

To ensure optimal neuromuscular efficiency throughout the entire kinetic chain, all of these components must be trained in an orderly systematic fashion. Each one of these components will be addressed with regards to the GM.

Kinetic Chain Profile

In order to design a proper program with a specific purpose, it is necessary to gather essential information. A Kinetic Chain Profile provides the blueprint and foundation for precise program design. By using a variety of observations, decisions and judgements can be made more readily concerning the client. Some of the profiles used include:

General and Medical History Profile

A General and Medical History Profile can be of extreme value to a personal trainer who understands common kinetic chain principles. Reviewing the information from the "Common Causes" section of this article, questions that reveal the client’s medical history should trigger an awareness of possible GM weakness/inhibition. Medical history question should illuminate things such as:

Also, looking at the client’s common movement patterns should indicate the possibility of GM weakness/inhibition as well. General history questions should evaluate things such as:

Once general and medical history information has been gathered, it can be correlated to different dynamic movement observations. Two easily performed dynamic movement profiles are the overhead squat and the single leg squat. The overhead squat looks at total kinetic chain neuromuscular efficiency and functional strength as well as dynamic flexibility, while the single leg squat magnifies lower extremity neuromuscular efficiency, functional strength and dynamic flexibility.

Dynamic Movements Profile

Each one of these dynamic movements will give you very similar information. The reason to perform both movements is to look for asymmetrical differences between each side of the body in the single leg squat that may not be as readily observed in the bilateral stance of the overhead squat.

To perform the overhead squat:

  1. Have clients hold a wooden dowel rod in their hands and place it above the head.
  2. Have them place their feet about shoulder width apart and make sure their feet are facing straight ahead.
  3. Have them begin to squat at a comfortable tempo.

To perform the single leg squat:

  1. Have the client lift one foot slightly but completely off the ground, holding it right next to the stance foot far enough away from the other leg so they do not touch one another.
  2. Make sure the foot on the ground is facing straight ahead.
  3. Have them begin to squat at a comfortable tempo.

When viewing clients with either of these movements, the same format and responses may be used. Begin by watching their feet and move up to the next joint every couple of repetitions.

What to watch for:

  1. Do the feet flatten and/or tend to externally rotate (toes peel outward)?
    • This may indicate tightness in the calves (gastrocnemius and/or soleus).
      • Tight calves do not allow the ankle to move properly in the sagittal plane and cause the heel to lift and the knee and hip to flex prematurely. In turn, this makes the iliopsoas work harder and more often than usual during walking and running.
  2. Do the knees cave inward (knocked kneed)?
    • This may indicate tightness in the calves, adductors and iliotibial band (IT band).
    • This may also indicate weakness in the GM and gluteus medius as well.
      • Tightness in the calves has been addressed above. Tightness in the adductors and IT band increases stress placed upon the knee and low back and allow for decreased neural drive to the gluteal muscles, which in turn perpetuates the problem.
  3. Does the low back hyperextend (extreme arching)?
    • This may indicate tightness in the erector spinae, iliopsoas and latissimus dorsi.
    • This may also indicate weakness in the core (deep stabilizing muscles of the spine).
      • Tightness in the erector spinae, iliopsoas and latissimus dorsi can create an anterior pelvic tilt and place increased stress on the low back and allows for decreased neural drive to the GM.
  4. Do the arms fall forward (overhead squat only)?
    • This may indicate tightness in the latissimus dorsi.


If in fact our profiling process has uncovered the possibility of decreased range of motion in structures surrounding the low back, hip and pelvis region, it has already been determined that this can effect the firing of the GM. By performing the necessary flexibility exercises, we can increase the mechanical range of motion of the antagonist (iliopsoas) as well as increase the neural drive to the GM.

Efficient forms of flexibility that can be easily administered to the client for these specific structures include self-myofascial release with a foam roller and some static, active and dynamic stretching. The foam roll should be used prior to the stretching and/or warm ups.

Foam roll and stretching should include:

Core Stabilization Training

It is essential to maintain neuromuscular efficiency through the entire kinetic chain. However, this may be most important throughout the core. The core is the origin of all movement. As such, it sets up the rest of the body for optimal force absorption, distribution and production and ensures neuromuscular efficiency.

As an integral component of the core, the GM must be re-educated to work synergistically with all other components of the core. Some pertinent core exercises include:

Balance Training (Neuromuscular Stabilization)

Balance training is training that places a high demand on the proprioceptive systems of the body. Following a proper flexibility protocol, the kinetic chain is presented with a new range of motion. However, without re-educating the nervous system on how to use and control this new range of motion, the body will return to a sub-optimal state. This has been demonstrated in follow-up studies of patients who were conservatively treated for instability of the ankle. It was shown that 18 to 23 years later, 32 of 49 ankles still showed instability.

Whether a client has suffered an ankle injury, toe injury or muscle imbalances that create reciprocal inhibition, the nervous has been altered and must be re-trained. Neuromuscular stabilization training is training for the nervous system much like resistance training is perceived for the muscular system.

Balance training exercise include:

Power Training (Reactive Neuromuscular Training)

Power training is a progression that necessitates proper levels of flexibility, core and balance. It is essential for everyday functional activities as it prepares the body to move at functionally applicable speeds. Think of your everyday movements. How many of them actually occur at a slow controlled tempo? Very few. As such, we must prepare the nervous system to operate at speeds necessary for proper movement patterns.

Power training exercise include:

Strength Training

By addressing flexibility, core, balance and power, we have set the body up to more maximally utilize and recruit muscles and motor units. Now we can get more effective results from our strength training. The biggest misconception we fall into is that in order to alter the appearance of muscles, we must work them harder and harder. The fact is we need to work them smarter. By changing the plane of motion, stabilization requirements (stable to unstable), range of motion, speed of repetition (tempo), resistance, angle of resistance and volume (total amount of work) of our workouts from day to day, we increase the need for recruitment of our muscles. This means getting out the habitual training routines that we’ve been stuck in for years and designing programs that reflect how the physiology of the human body works.

Strength training exercise include:

If you're currently training clients and not really getting the results you were expecting, perhaps it’s time to change. Remember, a properly designed program includes all of the mentioned components (Flexibility, Core, Balance, Power and Strength).


  1. Clark MA. Integrated training for the new millennium. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001.
  2. Panjabi MM: The stabilizing system of the spine. Part 1. Function, dysfunction, adaptation, and enhancement. J Spinal Disord 1992; 5:383-9.
  3. Bullock-Saxton JE: Muscles and Joint: Inter-Relationships with pain and movement dysfunction. University of Queensland. Course Manual, 1997.
  4. Chaitow L: Muscle Energy Techniques. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1997.
  5. Clark MA. A scientific approach to understanding kinetic chain dysfunction. Thousand Oaks, CA. The National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001.
  6. Janda V, Vavorova M: Sensory Motor Stimulation. Brisbane, Australia: Body Control Systems; 1990.
  7. Edgerton VR, Wolf S, Roy RR. Theoretical basis for patterning EMG amplitudes to assess muscle dysfunction. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996; 28(6):744-51.
  8. Fischer FJ, Houtz SJ. Evaluation of the function of the gluteus maximus muscle: An electromyographic study. Ann Phys Med 1968; 47:182-91.
  9. Clark MA. Human movement science. Thousand Oaks, CA. The National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001.
  10. The National Academy of Sports Medicine. Lower body muscular anatomy. Thousand Oaks, CA: The National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2000.
  11. Porterfield JA, DeRosa C: Mechanical Low Back Pain; Perspectives in functional anatomy. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1998.
  12. Valsilyeva, LF, Lewit K. Diagnosis of muscular dysfunction by inspection. In: Liebenson C (ed.). Rehabilitation of the spine. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1996.
  13. Travell JG, Simons DG. Myofascial pain and dysfunction: The trigger point manual. Volume 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999.
  14. Bronner S. Functional rehabilitation of the spine: The lumbo-pelvis as a key point of control. In: Brownstein B, Bronner S (eds.). Functional movement in orthopedic and sports physical therapy. New York: Churhill Livingston Inc.; 1997.
  15. Clark MA. Integrated core stabilization training. Thousand Oaks, CA. The National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001.
  16. Gray GW: Chain Reaction Festival. Wynn Marketing. Adrian, MI 1996.
  17. Oddsson L, Thorstensson A. Task specificity in the control of intrinsic trunk muscles in man. Acta Physiol Scand 1990; 139(1):123-31.
  18. Tokuhiro A, Nagashima H, Takechi H. Electromyographic kinesiology of lower extremity muscles during slope walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1985; 66(9):610-3.
  19. Greenlaw RK. Function of muscles about the hip during normal level walking. Thesis. Kingston, Ontario: Queens University; 1979.
  20. Zimmermann CL, Cook TM, Bravard MS, Hansen MM, Honomichl RT, Karns ST, Lammers MA, Steele SA, Yunker LK, Zebrowski RM. Effects of stair-stepping exercise direction and cadence on EMG activity of selected lower extremity muscle groups. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1994; 19(3):173-80.
  21. Watkins RG, Dennis S, Dillin WH, Schnebel B, Schneiderman G, Jobe F, Farfan H, Perry J, Pink M. Dynamic EMG analysis of torque transfer in professional baseball pitchers. Spine 1989; 14(4):404-8.
  22. Hertling D, Kessler RM. Management of common musculoskeletal disorders. 3rd edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1996.
  23. Montgomery WH, Pink M, Perry J. Electromyographic analysis of hip and knee musculature during running. Am J Sports Med 1994; 22:272-8.
  24. Winter D. Foot trajectory in human gait: A precise and multifactorial motor control task. Phys Ther 1992; 72:45-53.
  25. Lyons K, Perry J, Gronley JK, Barnes L, Antonelli D. Timing and relative intensity of hip extensor and abductor muscle action during level and stair ambulation. Phys Ther 1983; 63(10):1597-1605.
  26. Inman VT, Ralston HJ, Todd F. Human walking. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1981.
  27. Ericson MO, Nisell R, Ekholm J. Quantified electromyography of lower-limb muscles during level walking. Scand J Rehabil Med 1986; 18(4):159-63.
  28. Ayyappa E. Normal human gait. Ortho Phys Ther Clin North Amer 2001; 10(1):115.
  29. Dostal WF, Soderberg GL, Andrews JG. Actions of hip muscles. Phys Ther 1986; 66(3):351-61.
  30. Gross J, Fetto J, Rosen E. Musculoskeletal examination. Malden, MA: Blackwell Sciences, Inc.; 1996.
  31. Shiavi R. Electromyographic patterns in normal adult locomotion. In: Schmidt GL (ed.). Gait in rehabilitation. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1990.
  32. Vleeming A, Stoeckart R, Snidjers CJ, Stoeckart R, Stijnen T. Load application to the sacrotuberous ligament: Influences on sacroiliac joint mechanics. Clin Biom 1989; 4:204.
  33. Vleeming A, Pool-Gougzwaard AL, Stoeckart R, van Windergarden JP, Snidjers CJ. The posterior layer of the thoracolumbar fascia: Its function in load transfer from spine to legs. Spine 1995; 20:753.
  34. Vleeming A, Snijders CJ, Stoeckart R, Mens JMA. The role of the sacroiliac joints in coupling between spine, pelvis, legs and arms. Chapter 3. In Vleeming a, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  35. Snijders CJ, Vleeming A, Stoeckart R, Mens JMA, Kleinrensink GJ. Biomechanics of the interface between spine and pelvis in different postures. Chapter 6. In Vleeming a, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  36. Mooney V, Pozos R, Vleeming A, Gulick J, Swenski D. Coupled motion of contralateral latissimus dorsi and gluteus maximus: Its role in sacroiliac stabilization. Chapter 7. In Vleeming a, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  37. Mooney V. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Chapter 2. In Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  38. Lee D. Instability of the sacroiliac joint and the consequences for gait. Chapter 18. In Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  39. Lee D. The pelvic girdle. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
  40. Gracovetsky SA. Linking the spinal engine with the legs: A theory of human gait. Chapter 20. In Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  41. Soderberg GL, Dostal WF. Electromyographic study of three parts of the gluteus medius muscle during functional activities. Phys Ther 1978; 58(6):691-6.
  42. Kelso JAS. Dyanmic Patterns. The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1995.
  43. Newton RA. Neural systems underlying motor control. In Montgomery PC, Connoly BH editors. Motor control and physical therapy: Theoretical framework and practical applications. Hixson, TN: Chatanooga Group, Inc; 1991.
  44. Rose DJ. A multi level approach to the study of motor control and learning. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 1997.
  45. Tuller B, Turvey MT, Fitch HL. The Berstein perspective: II. The concept of muscle linkage or coordinative structure. In Kelso JAS editor. Human motor behavior an introduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1982.
  46. Liebension C. Integrating rehabilitation into chiropractic practice (blending active and passive care). Chapter 2. In Liebenson C (ed.). Rehabilitation of the Spine. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1996.
  47. Hammer WI. Muscle imbalance and postfacilitation stretch. Functional Soft Tissue Examination and Treatment by Manual Methods. In Hammer WI (ed.). 2nd edition. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publications; 1999.
  48. Lewit K. Muscular and Articular Factors in Movement Restriction. Manual Med 1984; 1:83-85.
  49. Lovejoy CO, Latimer B. Evolutionary aspects of the human lumbosacral spine and their bearing on the function of the lumbar intervertebral and sacroiliac joints. Chapter 16. In Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997.
  50. Bachrach RM. The relationship of low back pain to psoas insufficiency. J Ortho Med 1991; 13:34-40.
  51. Danaberg HJ. Lower back pain as a gait related repetitive motion injury. Chapter 21. In Vleeming A, Mooney V, Dorman T, Snijders C, Stoeckart R editors. Movement, stability and low back pain. London: Churchill livingstone; 1997. pp. 253-267.
  52. Michaud TC. The Foot: Hyperpronation and hypopronation. Functional Soft Tissue Examination and Treatment by Manual Methods. In Hammer WI eds. (2nd edition). Aspen Publications. Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1999. pp.331-56.
  53. Rowinski MJ: Afferent neurobiology of the joint. In: Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy. Gould JA (ed). St. Louis, Mosby, 1990.
  54. Bullock-Saxton JE. Local sensation changes and altered hip muscle function following severe ankle sprain. Physical Ther 1994; 74(1):17-23.
  55. Bullock-Saxton JE, Janda V, Bullock MI. The influence of ankle sprain injury on muscle activation during hip extension. Int J Sports Med 1994; 15(6):330-4.
  56. Bullock-Saxton JE. Sensory changes associated with severe ankle sprain. Scand J Rehabil Med 1995; 27(3):161-7.
  57. Frymoyer JW. Back pain and sciatica. N Engl J Med 1988; 318:291-300.
  58. Whiting WC, Zernicke RF. Biomechanics of musculoskeletal injury. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1998.
  59. Hides JA, Stokes MJ, Saide M, Jull GA, Cooper DH. Evidence of lumbar multifidus wasting ipsilateral to symptoms in subjects with acute/subacute low back pain. Spine 1994; 19:165-177.
  60. Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Inefficient muscular stabilization of the lumbar spine associated with low back pain. Spine 1996; 21(22):2640-2650.
  61. O’Sullivan PE, Twomey L, Allison G, Sinclair J, Miller K, Knox J. Altered patterns of abdominal muscle activation in patients with chronic low back pain. Aus J Physiother 1997; 43(2):91-98.
  62. Clark MA, Corn RJ, Parracino LA. Integrated program design for the personal trainer. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2000.
  63. Clark MA. Integrated kinetic chain assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001.
  64. Gracovetsky S, Farfan H. The optimum spine. Spine 1986; 11:543-573.
  65. Gracovetsky S, Farfan H, Heuller C. The abdominal mechanism. Spine 1985; 10:317-324.
  66. Panjabi MM, Tech D, White AA: Basic Biomechanics of the Spine. Neurosurgery 1980; 7:76-93.
  67. Lofvenberg R, Karrholm J, Lund B. The outcome of nonoperated patients with chronic lateral instability of the ankle: a 20-year follow-up study. Foot Ankle Int 1994; 15(4):165-9.
  68. Clark MA. Integrated reactive neuromuscular training. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Academy of Sports Medicine; 2001