Acute Effects of Fatiguing Low-Load Leg Extension Muscle Actions on Maximal Strength and Neuromuscular Function
Paola M. Rivera, Ethan C. Hill, Chris E. Proppe, Esther Beltran
Acute Effects of Fatiguing Low-Load Leg Extension Muscle Actions on Maximal Strength and Neuromuscular Function
The purpose of this investigation was to examine the acute effects of low-load unilateral submaximal leg extension muscle actions with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) on maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) torque, electromyographic (EMG) amplitude (AMP) and EMG mean power frequency (MPF).
Twelve (mean ± SD; 23 ± 4 years) men performed 75 submaximal (1 × 30, 3 × 15) unilateral leg extension muscle actions with or without BFR. Before and immediately after the 75 reps, ultrasound measures and MVIC muscle actions were performed, and surface EMG was simultaneously assessed from the vastus lateralis. BFR was applied at 60% of total arterial occlusion. Separate repeated measures ANOVA’s, and Bonferroni corrected t-tests were performed to examine MVIC, EMG AMP, and EMG MPF. An alpha of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all comparisons.
There was no significant (P = 0.077) interaction or main effect for Condition (P = 0.442) for EMG AMP. There was, however, an interaction (P = 0.014) for EMG MPF (posttest BFR decrease > posttest non-BFR decrease). There was a main effect for Time, collapsed across Condition, for MVIC torque (P < 0.001; (mean ± SD; 294.9 ± 20.1 N·m to 138.6 ± 12.2 N·m), but no main effect for Time for EMG AMP.
The findings of the present study indicated there were similar fatigue-induced decreases in MVIC torque and mode-specific decreases in EMG mean power frequency between the BFR and non-BFR conditions, but no changes in EMG amplitude. The decrease in MVIC torque may be due, in part, to the fatigue-induced buildup of metabolic byproducts that adversely affects excitation–contraction coupling and force output.
Low intensity / Occlusion / EMG / Muscle fatigue / Torque
[1.] |
|
[2.] |
|
[3.] |
|
[4.] |
|
[5.] |
|
[6.] |
|
[7.] |
|
[8.] |
|
[9.] |
|
[10.] |
|
[11.] |
|
[12.] |
|
[13] |
Haff G, Triplett NT, National Strength & Conditioning Association (U.S.). Essentials of strength training and conditioning, 4th edn. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2016.
|
[14.] |
|
[15.] |
|
[16.] |
|
[17.] |
|
[18.] |
|
[19.] |
|
[20.] |
|
[21.] |
|
[22.] |
|
[23.] |
|
[24.] |
|
[25.] |
|
[26.] |
|
[27.] |
McKay AKA, Stellingwerff T, Smith ES, Martin DT, Mujika I, Goosey-Tolfrey VL, Sheppard J, Burke LM. Defining training and performance caliber: a participant classification framework. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2022;12(2):317–31. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2021-0451
|
[28.] |
|
[29.] |
|
[30.] |
|
[31.] |
|
[32.] |
|
[33.] |
|
[34.] |
|
[35.] |
Yasuda T, Brechue WF, Fujita T, Sato Y, Abe T. Muscle activation during low-intensity muscle contractions with varying levels of external limb compression. J Sports Sci Med. 2008;7(4):467–74.
|
/
〈 | 〉 |