{"title":"比较25分钟肌肉电刺激与90分钟全身阻力训练对身体成分和力量的影响:为期20周的干预","authors":"Süleyman Ulupınar , Uğur Arı , Necip Fazıl Kishalı , İzzet İnce , Salih Çabuk , Cebrail Gençoğlu , Serhat Özbay","doi":"10.1016/j.jesf.2025.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Electromyostimulation (EMS) and traditional resistance training (TradRT) are widely used methods for improving muscle strength and body composition. However, comparative studies employing a multi-week longitudinal design remain limited. This study aimed to investigate the effects of 20 weeks of EMS vs. TradRT on body composition and strength performance in physically active adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Forty-six participants were randomly assigned to either the EMS group (n = 22) or the TradRT group (n = 24). The EMS group performed twice-weekly, 25-min whole-body EMS sessions, while the TradRT group completed twice-weekly, 90-min full-body resistance training sessions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Assessments of body weight, body mass index (BMI), fat percentage, and maximal strength were conducted at baseline, 10 weeks, and 20 weeks. A significant time effect was observed for all variables (p < 0.001), indicating improvements in both groups. However, group × time interactions revealed distinct adaptation patterns. The TradRT group exhibited greater reductions in body fat percentage and superior strength gains in bench press, leg press, shoulder press, and triceps pushdown, and abdominal strength. Conversely, the EMS group showed greater reductions in body weight and BMI. No significant interaction effect was observed for biceps curl strength. Both EMS and TradRT were effective in improving strength and body composition, but TradRT led to greater strength development and fat reduction, while EMS was more effective for weight and BMI reduction.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These findings suggest that EMS may serve as a viable alternative for individuals unable to engage in high-load resistance training, whereas TradRT remains superior for maximizing strength and fat loss.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15793,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness","volume":"23 4","pages":"Pages 349-359"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the effects of 25-minute electrical muscle stimulation vs. 90-minute full-body resistance training on body composition and strength: A 20-week intervention\",\"authors\":\"Süleyman Ulupınar , Uğur Arı , Necip Fazıl Kishalı , İzzet İnce , Salih Çabuk , Cebrail Gençoğlu , Serhat Özbay\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jesf.2025.07.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Electromyostimulation (EMS) and traditional resistance training (TradRT) are widely used methods for improving muscle strength and body composition. However, comparative studies employing a multi-week longitudinal design remain limited. This study aimed to investigate the effects of 20 weeks of EMS vs. TradRT on body composition and strength performance in physically active adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Forty-six participants were randomly assigned to either the EMS group (n = 22) or the TradRT group (n = 24). The EMS group performed twice-weekly, 25-min whole-body EMS sessions, while the TradRT group completed twice-weekly, 90-min full-body resistance training sessions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Assessments of body weight, body mass index (BMI), fat percentage, and maximal strength were conducted at baseline, 10 weeks, and 20 weeks. A significant time effect was observed for all variables (p < 0.001), indicating improvements in both groups. However, group × time interactions revealed distinct adaptation patterns. The TradRT group exhibited greater reductions in body fat percentage and superior strength gains in bench press, leg press, shoulder press, and triceps pushdown, and abdominal strength. Conversely, the EMS group showed greater reductions in body weight and BMI. No significant interaction effect was observed for biceps curl strength. Both EMS and TradRT were effective in improving strength and body composition, but TradRT led to greater strength development and fat reduction, while EMS was more effective for weight and BMI reduction.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These findings suggest that EMS may serve as a viable alternative for individuals unable to engage in high-load resistance training, whereas TradRT remains superior for maximizing strength and fat loss.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness\",\"volume\":\"23 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 349-359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1728869X25000541\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1728869X25000541","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing the effects of 25-minute electrical muscle stimulation vs. 90-minute full-body resistance training on body composition and strength: A 20-week intervention
Objectives
Electromyostimulation (EMS) and traditional resistance training (TradRT) are widely used methods for improving muscle strength and body composition. However, comparative studies employing a multi-week longitudinal design remain limited. This study aimed to investigate the effects of 20 weeks of EMS vs. TradRT on body composition and strength performance in physically active adults.
Methods
Forty-six participants were randomly assigned to either the EMS group (n = 22) or the TradRT group (n = 24). The EMS group performed twice-weekly, 25-min whole-body EMS sessions, while the TradRT group completed twice-weekly, 90-min full-body resistance training sessions.
Results
Assessments of body weight, body mass index (BMI), fat percentage, and maximal strength were conducted at baseline, 10 weeks, and 20 weeks. A significant time effect was observed for all variables (p < 0.001), indicating improvements in both groups. However, group × time interactions revealed distinct adaptation patterns. The TradRT group exhibited greater reductions in body fat percentage and superior strength gains in bench press, leg press, shoulder press, and triceps pushdown, and abdominal strength. Conversely, the EMS group showed greater reductions in body weight and BMI. No significant interaction effect was observed for biceps curl strength. Both EMS and TradRT were effective in improving strength and body composition, but TradRT led to greater strength development and fat reduction, while EMS was more effective for weight and BMI reduction.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that EMS may serve as a viable alternative for individuals unable to engage in high-load resistance training, whereas TradRT remains superior for maximizing strength and fat loss.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Exercise Science and Fitness is the official peer-reviewed journal of The Society of Chinese Scholars on Exercise Physiology and Fitness (SCSEPF), the Physical Fitness Association of Hong Kong, China (HKPFA), and the Hong Kong Association of Sports Medicine and Sports Science (HKASMSS). It is published twice a year, in June and December, by Elsevier.
The Journal accepts original investigations, comprehensive reviews, case studies and short communications on current topics in exercise science, physical fitness and physical education.