| Literature DB >> 32318451 |
Cobra Ghasemi1, Ali Amiri1, Javad Sarrafzadeh1, Hasan Jafari2, Mehdi Dadgoo1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Muscle fatigue affects the precision of the subjects' performance and limits the range of physical and sports activities. There is limited scientific evidence to support the use of soft tissue manipulation for enhancing muscle performance and its recovery. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of soft tissue manipulation and rest on the knee extensor muscle fatigue after maximal isokinetic contractions.Entities:
Keywords: Isokinetic; muscle fatigue; soft tissue manipulation; temporal stability; torque
Year: 2020 PMID: 32318451 PMCID: PMC7114034 DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_838_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Family Med Prim Care ISSN: 2249-4863
Figure 1Positioning a subject on Biodex System 3 for doing the trial
Mean, standard deviation, and ICC for torque and perceived fatigue scales
| Session 1 (soft tissue manipulation), mean±SD | Session 2 (rest), mean±SD | ICC | 95% Confidence interval | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | |||||
| APT (N.M) | ||||||
| Before fatigue | 83.37±25.82 | 77.54±22.36 | 0.85 | 0.6 | 0.94 | 0 |
| After fatigue | 58.36±14.89 | 52.58±9.69 | 0.43 | −0.02 | 0.76 | 0.03 |
| AP (NM.S) | ||||||
| Before fatigue | 57.95±17.61 | 53.52±14.31 | 0.83 | 0.54 | 0.94 | 0 |
| After fatigue | 39.40±12.13 | 37.69±9.85 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.8 | 0.02 |
| VAS (MM) | ||||||
| Before fatigue | 19.33±11.62 | 15.33±12.45 | 0.31 | −0.19 | 0.7 | 0.11 |
| After fatigue | 90.06±10.09 | 90.06±0.88 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.97 | 0 |
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; APT: average of peak torque; AP: average power; VAS: visual analog scale
Comparison of APT, AP, and VAS of concentric knee extensors in different stages of evaluation in each session
| Mean±SD | P | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before fatigue | After fatigue | After intervention | (BF-AF) | (AF-AI) | (BF-AI) | |
| APT | ||||||
| Soft tissue manipulation | 83.37±25.82 | 58.36±14.89 | 91.53±32.64 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.17 |
| Rest | 77.54±22.36 | 52.58±9.69 | 68.10±26.76 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.02 |
| AP | ||||||
| Soft tissue manipulation | 57.95±17.61 | 39.40±12.13 | 63.62±23.87 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.16 |
| Rest | 53.52±14.31 | 37.69±9.85 | 48±17.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.08 |
| VAS | ||||||
| Soft tissue manipulation | 19.33±11.62 | 90.06±10.09 | 12±13.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 |
| Rest | 15.33±12.45 | 90.06±0.88 | 27.33±15.79 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
APT: average of peak torque; AP: average power; VAS: visual analog scale; BF: before fatigue; AF: after fatigue; AI: after intervention
Figure 3The comparison of the APT, AP, and VAS of concentric knee extensors in different stages of evaluation in each session
Comparison of APT, AP, and VAS of concentric knee extensors in different stages of evaluation between soft tissue manipulation and rest
| Mean±SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Soft tissue manipulation | Rest | ||
| APT | |||
| Before fatigue | 83.37±25.82 | 77.54±22.36 | 0.08 |
| After fatigue | 58.36±14.89 | 52.58±9.69 | 0.78 |
| After intervention | 91.53±32.64 | 68.10±26.76 | 0 |
| AP | |||
| Before fatigue | 57.95±17.61 | 53.52±14.31 | 0.06 |
| After fatigue | 39.40±12.13 | 37.69±9.85 | 0.76 |
| After intervention | 63.62±23.87 | 48±17.20 | 0 |
| VAS | |||
| Before fatigue | 19.33±11.62 | 15.33±12.45 | 0.28 |
| After fatigue | 90.06±10.09 | 90.06±0.88 | 1 |
| After intervention | 12±13.20 | 27.33±15.79 | 0 |
APT: average of peak torque; AP: average power; VAS: visual analog scale
Figure 4The comparison of the APT, AP, and VAS of concentric knee extensors in different stages of evaluation between soft tissue manipulation and rest