Bilateral Force Deficit in Proximal Effectors Versus Distal Effectors in Lower Extremities.

IF 1.4 4区 教育学 Q3 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM
M A Aune, T V Roaas, H W Lorås, A Nynes, T K Aune
{"title":"Bilateral Force Deficit in Proximal Effectors Versus Distal Effectors in Lower Extremities.","authors":"M A Aune, T V Roaas, H W Lorås, A Nynes, T K Aune","doi":"10.1080/02701367.2023.2166893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b>: Bilateral force deficit occurs when the maximal generated force during simultaneous bilateral muscle contractions is lower than the sum of forces generated unilaterally. Neural inhibition is stated as the main source for bilateral force deficit. Based on differences in bilateral neural organization, there might be a pronounced neural inhibition for proximal compared to distal effectors. The aim of the present experiment was to evaluate potential differences in bilateral force deficit in proximal compared to distal effectors in lower extremities. <b>Methods</b>: Fifteen young adults performed single-joint maximal voluntary contractions in isometric dorsiflexion of ankle (distal) and knee (proximal) extension unilaterally and bilaterally. <b>Results:</b> Results showed a significant absolute bilateral force deficit for both proximal (123.46 ± 59.51 N) and distal effectors (33.00 ± 35.60 N). Interestingly, the relative bilateral force deficit for knee extension was significantly larger compared to dorsiflexion of ankle, 19.98 ± 10.04% and 10.27 ± 9.57%, respectively. Our results indicate a significantly higher bilateral force deficit for proximal effectors compared to distal effectors. <b>Conclusion</b>: Plausible explanations are related to neuroanatomical and neurophysiological differences between proximal effectors and distal effectors where proximal muscles have a higher potential for bilateral communication compared to distal muscles. In addition, higher forces produced with proximal effectors could cause a higher perceived exertion and cause a more pronounced bilateral force deficit to proximal effectors.</p>","PeriodicalId":54491,"journal":{"name":"Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2023.2166893","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Bilateral force deficit occurs when the maximal generated force during simultaneous bilateral muscle contractions is lower than the sum of forces generated unilaterally. Neural inhibition is stated as the main source for bilateral force deficit. Based on differences in bilateral neural organization, there might be a pronounced neural inhibition for proximal compared to distal effectors. The aim of the present experiment was to evaluate potential differences in bilateral force deficit in proximal compared to distal effectors in lower extremities. Methods: Fifteen young adults performed single-joint maximal voluntary contractions in isometric dorsiflexion of ankle (distal) and knee (proximal) extension unilaterally and bilaterally. Results: Results showed a significant absolute bilateral force deficit for both proximal (123.46 ± 59.51 N) and distal effectors (33.00 ± 35.60 N). Interestingly, the relative bilateral force deficit for knee extension was significantly larger compared to dorsiflexion of ankle, 19.98 ± 10.04% and 10.27 ± 9.57%, respectively. Our results indicate a significantly higher bilateral force deficit for proximal effectors compared to distal effectors. Conclusion: Plausible explanations are related to neuroanatomical and neurophysiological differences between proximal effectors and distal effectors where proximal muscles have a higher potential for bilateral communication compared to distal muscles. In addition, higher forces produced with proximal effectors could cause a higher perceived exertion and cause a more pronounced bilateral force deficit to proximal effectors.

下肢近端效应器与远端效应器的双侧力量不足。
目的:当双侧肌肉同时收缩时产生的最大力量低于单侧产生的力量总和时,就会出现双侧力量不足。神经抑制被认为是双侧力量不足的主要原因。基于双侧神经组织的差异,与远端效应器相比,近端效应器可能存在明显的神经抑制。本实验的目的是评估下肢近端效应器与远端效应器双侧力量缺失的潜在差异。实验方法15 名年轻成年人在单侧和双侧踝关节(远端)和膝关节(近端)伸展的等长背屈状态下进行单关节最大自主收缩。结果显示结果显示,近端效应器(123.46 ± 59.51 N)和远端效应器(33.00 ± 35.60 N)均存在明显的双侧绝对力量不足。有趣的是,与踝关节背屈相比,膝关节伸展的相对双侧力缺失明显更大,分别为 19.98 ± 10.04% 和 10.27 ± 9.57%。我们的结果表明,与远端效应器相比,近端效应器的双侧力量缺失明显更高。结论近端效应器和远端效应器在神经解剖学和神经生理学方面存在差异,与远端肌肉相比,近端肌肉具有更高的双侧沟通潜力,这是合理的解释。此外,近端效应器产生的更大力量可能会导致更高的感知用力,并导致近端效应器更明显的双侧力量不足。
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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport publishes research in the art and science of human movement that contributes significantly to the knowledge base of the field as new information, reviews, substantiation or contradiction of previous findings, development of theory, or as application of new or improved techniques. The goals of RQES are to provide a scholarly outlet for knowledge that: (a) contributes to the study of human movement, particularly its cross-disciplinary and interdisciplinary nature; (b) impacts theory and practice regarding human movement; (c) stimulates research about human movement; and (d) provides theoretical reviews and tutorials related to the study of human movement. The editorial board, associate editors, and external reviewers assist the editor-in-chief. Qualified reviewers in the appropriate subdisciplines review manuscripts deemed suitable. Authors are usually advised of the decision on their papers within 75–90 days.
×
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