MEDIUM AND LOW FREQUENCY ELECTROTHERAPY IN THE MUSCLE STRENGTH

Bárbara Campos De Siqueira, L. Santana, Roberta de Souza Rebequi, L. Lazzareschi, Carlos Alberto dos Santos, Alexandre Alcaide, J. Romero, É. Caperuto, E. Filoni, Alexandre Sabbag da Silva
{"title":"MEDIUM AND LOW FREQUENCY ELECTROTHERAPY IN THE MUSCLE STRENGTH","authors":"Bárbara Campos De Siqueira, L. Santana, Roberta de Souza Rebequi, L. Lazzareschi, Carlos Alberto dos Santos, Alexandre Alcaide, J. Romero, É. Caperuto, E. Filoni, Alexandre Sabbag da Silva","doi":"10.16887/90.A1.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) has been used as one of the pillars of the therapeutic modalities for the gain of muscle strength. Objective: To compare the strength gain in the elbow flexor muscles in women after the use of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) of low and medium frequency.  Materials and Methods: 15 women were selected, with normal body mass index (BMI), previously healthy, sedentary and aging from 18 to 27 years old. They were randomically separated in 2 groups, Russian current (n=8) and low frequency (FES) group (n=7), with the stimulation only in the weakest arm of the participants. FES frequency was 50Hz, pulse duration of 200 microseconds and Russian current, medium frequency alternating current of 2,500 Hz, was modulated to 50Hz, duty cycle of 50%, for both methods the ramp-up and ramp-down was 2 seconds, 20 seconds of ON and OFF time, for 20 minutes in the triceps brachii, for 5 weeks, with intensity enough to promote a muscle contraction visible and tolerable. Strength measurements were made with a portable dynamometer before the start of the NMES protocol and after the end of it. Results: we used the paired T test and the T Student test with the significance level set to p<0.05. There was an increase of muscular strength in both arms for the same group, with the average gain in the FES stimulation of 7.2 pounds and in the Russian current stimulation of 14.5 pounds, with intragroup and inter group statistic significance. Conclusion: The Russian current stimulation was more efficient in promoting strength muscular gains when compared to FES, although both low and medium frequency currents were able to promote significant improvements but the groups were different as to the force at the time pre-stimulation.","PeriodicalId":12278,"journal":{"name":"FIEP Bulletin On-line","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FIEP Bulletin On-line","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16887/90.A1.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) has been used as one of the pillars of the therapeutic modalities for the gain of muscle strength. Objective: To compare the strength gain in the elbow flexor muscles in women after the use of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) of low and medium frequency.  Materials and Methods: 15 women were selected, with normal body mass index (BMI), previously healthy, sedentary and aging from 18 to 27 years old. They were randomically separated in 2 groups, Russian current (n=8) and low frequency (FES) group (n=7), with the stimulation only in the weakest arm of the participants. FES frequency was 50Hz, pulse duration of 200 microseconds and Russian current, medium frequency alternating current of 2,500 Hz, was modulated to 50Hz, duty cycle of 50%, for both methods the ramp-up and ramp-down was 2 seconds, 20 seconds of ON and OFF time, for 20 minutes in the triceps brachii, for 5 weeks, with intensity enough to promote a muscle contraction visible and tolerable. Strength measurements were made with a portable dynamometer before the start of the NMES protocol and after the end of it. Results: we used the paired T test and the T Student test with the significance level set to p<0.05. There was an increase of muscular strength in both arms for the same group, with the average gain in the FES stimulation of 7.2 pounds and in the Russian current stimulation of 14.5 pounds, with intragroup and inter group statistic significance. Conclusion: The Russian current stimulation was more efficient in promoting strength muscular gains when compared to FES, although both low and medium frequency currents were able to promote significant improvements but the groups were different as to the force at the time pre-stimulation.
中低频电疗中的肌肉力量
简介:神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)已被用作获得肌肉力量的治疗方式的支柱之一。目的:比较低频和中频神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)对女性肘关节屈肌力量增加的影响。材料与方法:选取年龄在18 ~ 27岁、身体质量指数(BMI)正常、既往健康、久坐不动的女性15名。随机分为俄罗斯电流组(n=8)和低频组(n=7),仅在参与者最弱的手臂进行刺激。FES频率为50Hz,脉冲持续时间为200微秒,俄罗斯电流,2500 Hz的中频交流电,被调制为50Hz,占空比为50%,两种方法的上升和下降为2秒,20秒的开和关时间,在肱三头肌中持续20分钟,持续5周,强度足以促进可见和可容忍的肌肉收缩。在NMES方案开始之前和结束之后,用便携式测功机进行强度测量。结果:采用配对T检验和T学生检验,显著性水平为p<0.05。同一组患者双臂肌肉力量均有增加,FES刺激组平均增加7.2磅,俄罗斯电流刺激组平均增加14.5磅,组内组间均有统计学意义。结论:与FES相比,俄罗斯电流刺激更有效地促进了力量肌肉的增加,尽管低频和中频电流都能促进显著的改善,但两组在刺激前的力方面存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信