Álvaro de Almeida Ventura, Denis César Leite Vieira, Luis André de Oliveira Soares, Júlia Aguillar Ivo Bastos, Nicolas Babault, Martim Bottaro, João Luiz Quagliotti Durigan
{"title":"Comparing Nerve Versus Muscle Wide-Pulse High-Frequency Electrical Stimulation for Maximal and Submaximal Efforts.","authors":"Álvaro de Almeida Ventura, Denis César Leite Vieira, Luis André de Oliveira Soares, Júlia Aguillar Ivo Bastos, Nicolas Babault, Martim Bottaro, João Luiz Quagliotti Durigan","doi":"10.1123/jsr.2024-0216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation hinges on the evoked torque level, which can be attained through either conventional (CONV) or wide-pulse high frequency (WPHF). However, the best electrode placement is still unclear. This study adopted a crossover design to compare the effects of WPHF applied to the tibial nerve trunk (N-WPHF) or muscle (M-WPHF) with CONV in healthy participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 30 participants (age: 22.4 [4.5]) were involved in 4 sessions. During each session, participants performed: 2 maximal voluntary contractions, 2 contractions at maximal evoked torque, and 2 contractions at submaximal evoked torque at 20% maximal voluntary contraction. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation intensity-evoked torque, efficiency, and discomfort were measured in maximal and submaximal conditions. Statistical analyses were conducted using a 1-way mixed-model analysis of variance with repeated measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>N-WPHF and M-WPHF showed higher evoked torque than CONV (P = .002 and P = .036) and greater efficiency than CONV for maximal evoked torque (P = .006 and P = .002). N-WPHF induced higher efficiency than M-WPHF and CONV for submaximal evoked torque (P = .004). Higher discomfort was observed for both N-WPHF and M-WPHF for submaximal evoked torque compared with CONV (P = .003 and P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results suggest that WPHF applied at either the nerve or muscle could be the best choice for the maximal condition, whereas nerve application is preferred for the submaximal condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":50041,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2024-0216","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation hinges on the evoked torque level, which can be attained through either conventional (CONV) or wide-pulse high frequency (WPHF). However, the best electrode placement is still unclear. This study adopted a crossover design to compare the effects of WPHF applied to the tibial nerve trunk (N-WPHF) or muscle (M-WPHF) with CONV in healthy participants.
Methods: A total of 30 participants (age: 22.4 [4.5]) were involved in 4 sessions. During each session, participants performed: 2 maximal voluntary contractions, 2 contractions at maximal evoked torque, and 2 contractions at submaximal evoked torque at 20% maximal voluntary contraction. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation intensity-evoked torque, efficiency, and discomfort were measured in maximal and submaximal conditions. Statistical analyses were conducted using a 1-way mixed-model analysis of variance with repeated measures.
Results: N-WPHF and M-WPHF showed higher evoked torque than CONV (P = .002 and P = .036) and greater efficiency than CONV for maximal evoked torque (P = .006 and P = .002). N-WPHF induced higher efficiency than M-WPHF and CONV for submaximal evoked torque (P = .004). Higher discomfort was observed for both N-WPHF and M-WPHF for submaximal evoked torque compared with CONV (P = .003 and P < .001).
Conclusion: Our results suggest that WPHF applied at either the nerve or muscle could be the best choice for the maximal condition, whereas nerve application is preferred for the submaximal condition.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Sport Rehabilitation (JSR) is your source for the latest peer-reviewed research in the field of sport rehabilitation. All members of the sports-medicine team will benefit from the wealth of important information in each issue. JSR is completely devoted to the rehabilitation of sport and exercise injuries, regardless of the age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status of the participant.
JSR publishes peer-reviewed original research, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, critically appraised topics (CATs), case studies/series, and technical reports that directly affect the management and rehabilitation of injuries incurred during sport-related activities, irrespective of the individual’s age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status. The journal is intended to provide an international, multidisciplinary forum to serve the needs of all members of the sports medicine team, including athletic trainers/therapists, sport physical therapists/physiotherapists, sports medicine physicians, and other health care and medical professionals.