Brazilian journal of physical therapy · 2024
Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation reduce central and peripheral muscle fatigue in recreational runners? A triple-blind, sham-controlled, randomized, crossover clinical study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Uehara Laura, Coelho Daniel Boari, Baptista Abrahão Fontes, Santana Lucas, Moreira Rafael Jardim Duarte, Zana Yossi, Malosá Luciana, Lima Taiane, Valentim Gabriela, Cardenas-Rojas Alejandra, Fregni Felipe, Corrêa João Carlos Ferrari, Corrêa Fernanda Ishida
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Runners seek health benefits and performance improvement. However, fatigue might be considered a limiting factor. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated to improve performance and reduce fatigue in athletes. While some studies showing that tDCS may improve a variety of physical measures, other studies failed to show any benefit.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acute effects of tDCS on central and peripheral fatigue compared to a sham intervention in recreational runners.
METHODS: This is a triple-blind, controlled, crossover study of 30 recreational runners who were randomized to receive one of the two interventions, anodal or sham tDCS, after the fatigue protocol. The interventions were applied to the quadriceps muscle hotspot for 20 min. Peak torque, motor-evoked potential, and perceived exertion rate were assessed before and after the interventions, and blood lactate level was assessed before, during, and after the interventions. A generalized estimated equation was used to analyze the peak torque, motor-evoked potential, and blood lactate data, and the Wilcoxon test was used for perceived exertion rate data.
RESULTS: Our findings showed no difference between anodal tDCS and sham tDCS on peak torque, motor-evoked potential, blood lactate, and perceived exertion rate.
CONCLUSION: The tDCS protocol was not effective in improving performance and reducing fatigue compared to a sham control intervention.
BRAZILIAN CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: RBR-8zpnxz.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acute effects of tDCS on central and peripheral fatigue compared to a sham intervention in recreational runners.
METHODS: This is a triple-blind, controlled, crossover study of 30 recreational runners who were randomized to receive one of the two interventions, anodal or sham tDCS, after the fatigue protocol. The interventions were applied to the quadriceps muscle hotspot for 20 min. Peak torque, motor-evoked potential, and perceived exertion rate were assessed before and after the interventions, and blood lactate level was assessed before, during, and after the interventions. A generalized estimated equation was used to analyze the peak torque, motor-evoked potential, and blood lactate data, and the Wilcoxon test was used for perceived exertion rate data.
RESULTS: Our findings showed no difference between anodal tDCS and sham tDCS on peak torque, motor-evoked potential, blood lactate, and perceived exertion rate.
CONCLUSION: The tDCS protocol was not effective in improving performance and reducing fatigue compared to a sham control intervention.
BRAZILIAN CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: RBR-8zpnxz.