Literature DB >> 17257859

Comparison of electromyographic activity during eccentrically versus concentrically loaded isometric contractions.

John C Garner1, Troy Blackburn, Wendi Weimar, Brian Campbell.   

Abstract

Electromyographic (EMG) amplitude and mechanical tension are directly related during isometric contraction. Maximal voluntary isometric contractions are typically elicited through two different procedures; resisting a load, which is eccentric in nature, and contracting against an immovable object, which is concentric in nature. A wealth of literature exists indicating that EMG amplitude during concentric contractions is greater than that of eccentric contractions of the same magnitude. However, the effects of different methods to elicit isometric contraction on EMG amplitude have yet to be investigated. The purpose of this study was to compare EMG amplitudes under different loading configurations designed to elicit isometric muscle contraction. Twenty healthy volunteers (10 males and 10 females, age=23+/-2 yrs, height=1.7+/-0.09 m, mass=69.9+16.8 kg) performed a maximal voluntary plantarflexion effort for which the vertical ground reaction force (GRFv) sampled from a force plate and surface EMG of the soleus were recorded. Participants then performed isometric plantarflexion at 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% GRFv(max) in a seated position, from a neutral ankle position, under two different counterbalanced isometric loading conditions (concentric and eccentric). For concentric loading conditions, the subject contracted against an immovable resistance to the specified %GRFv identified via visual and auditory feedback. For eccentric loading conditions, subjects contracted against an applied load placed on the distal anterior thigh that produced the specified %GRFv. This applied load had the tendency to force the ankle into dorsiflexion. Therefore, plantarflexion force, in an attempt to maintain the ankle in a neutral position, resisted lengthening of the plantarflexor musculature, thus representing eccentric loading during an isometric contraction. Mean EMG amplitude was compared across loading levels and types using a 2 (loading type: concentric, eccentric)x4 (loading level: 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% GRFv) repeated-measures ANOVA. The main effect for loading level was significant (p=0.007). However, the main effect for loading type, and the loading type x loading level interaction were non-significant (p>0.05). The present findings provide evidence that isometric muscle contractions loaded in either concentric or eccentric manners elicit similar EMG amplitudes, and are therefore comparable in research settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17257859     DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.11.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol        ISSN: 1050-6411            Impact factor:   2.368


  10 in total

1.  Specific modulation of corticospinal and spinal excitabilities during maximal voluntary isometric, shortening and lengthening contractions in synergist muscles.

Authors:  Julien Duclay; Benjamin Pasquet; Alain Martin; Jacques Duchateau
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Paired personal interaction reveals objective differences between pushing and holding isometric muscle action.

Authors:  Laura V Schaefer; Frank N Bittmann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function.

Authors:  Laura V Schaefer; Frank N Bittmann
Journal:  BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil       Date:  2017-05-11

4.  A Comparison of Motor Unit Control Strategies between Two Different Isometric Tasks.

Authors:  Sunggun Jeon; William M Miller; Xin Ye
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  The task dependent differences in electromyography activity of hamstring muscles during leg curls and hip extensions.

Authors:  Norikazu Hirose; Yoshinori Kagaya; Masaaki Tsuruike
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Manual Muscle Testing-Force Profiles and Their Reproducibility.

Authors:  Frank N Bittmann; Silas Dech; Markus Aehle; Laura V Schaefer
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-25

7.  Muscle oxygenation and time to task failure of submaximal holding and pulling isometric muscle actions and influence of intermittent voluntary muscle twitches.

Authors:  Silas Dech; Frank N Bittmann; Laura V Schaefer
Journal:  BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil       Date:  2022-03-30

8.  Case Study: Intra- and Interpersonal Coherence of Muscle and Brain Activity of Two Coupled Persons during Pushing and Holding Isometric Muscle Action.

Authors:  Laura V Schaefer; Frank N Bittmann
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-05-29

9.  Quadriceps Electromyographic Activity in Closed and Open Kinetic-Chain Exercises with Hip-Adductor Co-Contraction in Sedentary Women.

Authors:  Parinyathip Thongduang; Uraiwan Chatchawan; Rungthip Puntumetakul; Junichiro Yamauchi; Punnee Peungsuwan
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-10-09       Impact factor: 4.614

10.  Assessment of the Adaptive Force of Elbow Extensors in Healthy Subjects Quantified by a Novel Pneumatically Driven Measurement System with Considerations of Its Quality Criteria.

Authors:  Silas Dech; Frank N Bittmann; Laura V Schaefer
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-21
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.