Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2022
Effects of NMES-elicited versus voluntary low-level conditioning contractions on explosive knee extensions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gonnelli Federica, Rejc Enrico, Floreani Mirco, Lazzer Stefano
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Electrically-induced or voluntary conditioning-contractions (CC) can be used to affect contractile properties of a subsequent explosive contraction (EC). Here, we aimed at comparing the effect of neuromuscular-electrical-stimulation (NMES) vs voluntary CC performed prior to explosive contractions of the knee extensors.
METHODS: A 10 sec NMES CC (100Hz, 1000μs, 10% MVC), or a voluntary contraction (VOL CC) mimicking the NMES CC, preceded an isometric EC of the knee extensors. Explosive contraction was performed with the goal to reach the target (70% MVC) as quickly as possible.
RESULTS: All the parameters related with the explosive contractions' muscle-output were similar between protocols (difference ranging from 0.23%, Mean Torque; to 5.8%, Time to Target), except for the Time to Peak Torque, which was lower when preceded by NMES (11.1%, p=0.019). Interestingly, the RTD 0-50 ms_EC was 37.3% higher after the NMES compared with the VOL CC protocol.
CONCLUSION: Explosive contraction was potentiated by an NMES CC as compared with a voluntary CC. This may be due to a reduction in descending drive following VOL CC, which has been shown to occur even with low-level voluntary efforts. These findings could be used to improve rehabilitation or training protocols that include conditioning contractions.
METHODS: A 10 sec NMES CC (100Hz, 1000μs, 10% MVC), or a voluntary contraction (VOL CC) mimicking the NMES CC, preceded an isometric EC of the knee extensors. Explosive contraction was performed with the goal to reach the target (70% MVC) as quickly as possible.
RESULTS: All the parameters related with the explosive contractions' muscle-output were similar between protocols (difference ranging from 0.23%, Mean Torque; to 5.8%, Time to Target), except for the Time to Peak Torque, which was lower when preceded by NMES (11.1%, p=0.019). Interestingly, the RTD 0-50 ms_EC was 37.3% higher after the NMES compared with the VOL CC protocol.
CONCLUSION: Explosive contraction was potentiated by an NMES CC as compared with a voluntary CC. This may be due to a reduction in descending drive following VOL CC, which has been shown to occur even with low-level voluntary efforts. These findings could be used to improve rehabilitation or training protocols that include conditioning contractions.