This inclusion considers the use and possible misuse of the terms “Concentric and
Eccentric” in three possible contexts: first, the origin of terms; second, different
approaches; and third, the possible uses. To the best of our knowledge, three articles (Aboodarda, 2011; Bdel-Aziem and Mohammad, 2012 ; Krol and Mynarski, 2012 ) have been published in the
Journal of Human Kinetics misusing the term “concentric/eccentric
exercise” while none of the articles have used the terms correctly. The purpose of
this letter is to foster the use of the terminology ‘positive/negative work’
together with ‘concentric/eccentric contraction’ to ease references search
(i.e., through key words) and comprehension.
When did these terms initially appear and what do they mean?
The origin of the terms “Concentric and Eccentric” is related to muscle
contraction in basic physiology science. Back to 1925, Hill defined two types of muscle
contractions ( Hill, 1925 ): isometric
where muscle length does not change during contraction and isotonic where tension remains
unchanged or could also vary while the muscle’s length changes. There are two types
of isotonic contractions: (a) concentric and (b) eccentric ( Hill, 1925 ). In a concentric contraction, the muscle tension
rises to meet the resistance, then remains stable as the muscle shortens. During eccentric
contraction, the muscle lengthens as the resistance is greater than the force the muscle is
producing.
Which areas do the terms concentric/eccentric cover?
In the following years, the terms “Concentric and Eccentric” were
frequently used in scientific manuscripts in different areas: physiology, biomechanics, and
neuromechanics. In PubMed a search concerning the years between 1975 and
2012, found n =190087 articles using the words “muscle
contraction” vs. n =2302/1582 articles with
“eccentric/concentric exercises”. Several authors have misused the term
“concentric/eccentric work or exercise” for an exercise with displacement of
the body upwards to overcome gravity (positive work) or landing (negative work), whereas the
terms “Eccentric/Concentric” are strictly linked to a muscular behavior.
Thus, we believe that the discussed terms cannot be used in all contexts.
Is it judicious to use (only) Eccentric/concentric for exercises?
From the point of view of physics, during positive work (rising/accelerating) or negative
work (lowering/decelerating) ( Asmussen, 1953
) some muscles are in eccentric mode. For instance, during concentric elbow flexion,
the biceps brachii contracts concentrically, whereas the antagonist muscle, the triceps
brachii, contracts mildly eccentrically – to allow movement precision and control.
Another example occurs in the leg press machine, during resisting the quadriceps contracts
eccentrically, whereas the biceps femoris contracts mildly concentrically – to allow
movement precision and to control the tension of the extensors that could, if applied
without an antagonist, overstress the knee joint and even damage the ACL (anterior cruciate
ligament). In both cases, a necessary dynamical description of the exercise – e.g.
‘there is positive/negative work’ – is missing. In the first
example, it should be underlined that positive work is developed, while the second example
features negative work.Furthermore, the use of these terms in both exercise and muscle contraction has created
confusion ( Faulkner, 2003 ). Considering
the need to clarify this question we propose that ”positive or negative
work” (Bosco, 1982) terms are more
appropriate for describing some exercise while in another context it would be more correct
to use ”flexion – extension” or ”adduction –
abduction” for single joint exercise or “traction or pushed per multi-joint
exercise” for instance ( Zatsiorsky and
Prilutsky, 2012 ).The correct use of terms “Eccentric and concentric” can be valuable for
understanding results in a journal article and deciding whether the authors’
conclusions are justified by the data. To avoid confusion, words such as positive
(concentric) or negative (eccentric) exercise are preferable as they indicate the importance
of the outcome.We believe Sports Science still presents some confusion for some other concepts and we
invite all our colleagues to discuss them in letters to the editors as we did in this short
letter.
Authors: Johnny Padulo; Karim Chamari; Alberto Concu; Juliano Dal Pupo; Guillaume Laffaye; Alexandro Moura Zagatto; Luca Paolo Ardigò Journal: Muscles Ligaments Tendons J Date: 2014-07-14
Authors: Giorgio Gatta; Bruno Leban; Maurizio Paderi; Johnny Padulo; Gian Mario Migliaccio; Massimiliano Pau Journal: Muscles Ligaments Tendons J Date: 2015-02-05
Authors: S Van de Hoef; B M A Huisstede; M S Brink; N de Vries; E A Goedhart; F J G Backx Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Pedro Olavo de Paula Lima; Paulo Ricardo Pinto Camelo; Victor Matheus Leite Mascarenhas Ferreira; Paulo Jorge Santiago do Nascimento; Márcio Almeida Bezerra; Gabriel Peixoto Leão Almeida; Rodrigo Ribeiro de Oliveira Journal: Muscles Ligaments Tendons J Date: 2018-01-10