Back

The correlation between Rate of Force Development Maximal Strength and Electromyography Variables of Basketball Athletes.

Brandao, H. C. P.; de Andrade, M. M.; Carmo, J. C. d.

2024-02-03 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.01.31.578254 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The rate of force development (RFD), is seen as a determining characteristic in fast actions present in basketball. However, we observed different relationships between RFD and maximum strength, as well as different relationships between RFD and neuromuscular variables according to the evaluated population. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the degree of determination of maximum strength (Tmax) and neuromuscular recruitment variables (RMS), Absolute Energy (AE) and the motor units firing frequencies (MPF) in rate of force development (RFD) for basketball athletes. Nine basketball athletes from the same team (mean {+/-} SD; age: 20.8 {+/-} 2.08 years; body mass: 84.33 {+/-} 8.80kg; height: 1.86 {+/-} 0.095 meters; practice time: 11.67 {+/-} 1.65 years) were evaluated through maximum isometric contraction with highest value of maximum force among 3 attempts. The RFD were evaluated and correlated with the RMS and AE values and the MPF values of the electromyographic signal at instants 0-50; 50-100, 100-150 and 150-200 milliseconds. The results show a reduction in RFD and MPF over the evaluated time windows and also a correlation between MPF and TDF in the 0-50ms time window (R2 0.67 p<0.05). The results show no relationship between RFD and RMS and AE, in addition to these variables not showing significant reductions in the evaluated time windows. The levels of RFD show to be more related to the firing frequency of the motor units than the maximum force and the level of recruitment of the motor units.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.