» Articles » PMID: 28570490

A Review of the Biomechanical Differences Between the High-Bar and Low-Bar Back-Squat

Overview
Specialty Physiology
Date 2017 Jun 2
PMID 28570490
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Glassbrook, DJ, Helms, ER, Brown, SR, and Storey, AG. A review of the biomechanical differences between the high-bar and low-bar back-squat. J Strength Cond Res 31(9): 2618-2634, 2017-The back-squat is a common exercise in strength and conditioning for a variety of sports. It is widely regarded as a fundamental movement to increase and measure lower-body and trunk function, as well as an effective injury rehabilitation exercise. There are typically 2 different bar positions used when performing the back-squat: the traditional "high-bar" back-squat (HBBS) and the "low-bar" back-squat (LBBS). Different movement strategies are used to ensure that the center of mass remains in the base of support for balance during the execution of these lifts. These movement strategies manifest as differences in (a) joint angles, (b) vertical ground reaction forces, and (c) the activity of key muscles. This review showed that the HBBS is characterized by greater knee flexion, lesser hip flexion, a more upright torso, and a deeper squat. The LBBS is characterized by greater hip flexion and, therefore, a greater forward lean. However, there are limited differences in vertical ground reaction forces between the HBBS and LBBS. The LBBS can also be characterized by a greater muscle activity of the erector spinae, adductors, and gluteal muscles, whereas the HBBS can be characterized by greater quadriceps muscle activity. Practitioners seeking to develop the posterior-chain hip musculature (i.e., gluteal, hamstring, and erector muscle groups) may seek to use the LBBS. In comparison, those seeking to replicate movements with a more upright torso and contribution from the quadriceps may rather seek to use the HBBS in training.

Citing Articles

Identifying the Primary Kinetic Factors Influencing the Anterior-Posterior Center of Mass Displacement in Barbell Squats: A Factor Regression Analysis.

Chen D, Sun D, Li F, Wang D, Zhou Z, Gao Z Sensors (Basel). 2025; 25(2).

PMID: 39860942 PMC: 11769179. DOI: 10.3390/s25020572.


Full-Body Harness versus Waist Belt: An Examination of Force Production and Pain during an Isoinertial Device Maximal Voluntary Isometric Contraction.

Dufner T, Rodriguez J, Kitterman M, Dawlabani J, Moon J, Wells A J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2024; 9(3).

PMID: 39311273 PMC: 11417928. DOI: 10.3390/jfmk9030165.


Comparison of Olympic and Safety Squat Bar Barbells on Force, Velocity, and Rating of Perceived Exertion During Acute High-Intensity Back Squats in Recreationally Trained Men.

Staheli N, Cowley J, Lawrence M Int J Exerc Sci. 2024; 17(7):1120-1133.

PMID: 39257862 PMC: 11385282. DOI: 10.70252/QTXB6775.


The Limitations of Anterior Knee Displacement during Different Barbell Squat Techniques: A Comprehensive Review.

Illmeier G, Rechberger J J Clin Med. 2023; 12(8).

PMID: 37109294 PMC: 10143703. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12082955.


Does Back Squat Exercise Lead to Regional Hypertrophy among Quadriceps Femoris Muscles?.

Kojic F, Ranisavljev I, Obradovic M, Mandic D, Pelemis V, Paloc M Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(23).

PMID: 36498298 PMC: 9737272. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192316226.