Back

The relationship between voluntary and involuntary muscle contractile properties in young women

Fry, M. J.; Zoughaib, W. S.; Hoffman, R. L.; Coggan, A. R.

2024-11-01 sports medicine
10.1101/2024.10.30.24316419 medRxiv
Show abstract

Isokinetic dynamometry and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) are two commonly used approaches for quantifying muscle contractile properties. Few studies, however, have investigated the relationship between such testing procedures, particularly in women. PURPOSETo determine the relationship between voluntary isometric and isokinetic torque and torque during involuntary, electrically evoked contractions of the knee extensor muscles. METHODSThirty young women (age 23 {+/-} 5 y) performed maximal knee extensions on an isokinetic dynamometer at angular velocities of 0, 1.57, 3.14, 4.71, and 6.28 rad/s. Following this testing, NMES of the quadriceps (400 V, 200 {micro}s) was used to determine unpotentiated and potentiated twitch contractile properties. The quadriceps were also stimulated with 1 s trains at 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 60, 80, and 100 Hz to determine the torque-frequency relationship. RESULTSVoluntary torques at 1.57 and 3.14 rad/s were significantly correlated (i.e., multiplicity-adjusted P[≤]0.01) with the rate of torque development during potentiated twitches (r = 0.60 and 0.55, respectively). No other significant correlations were found between voluntary and involuntary muscle contractile properties, including various measures of the torque-frequency relationship. CONCLUSIONAlthough there is some relationship between voluntary and NMES indices of muscle contractility, such results are only moderately well-correlated at best. The two techniques should therefore be considered complementary rather than interchangeable. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=191 HEIGHT=200 SRC="FIGDIR/small/24316419v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (32K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@8e14b7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1f22be7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@2052deorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@20a02d_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.4%
2
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.3%
3
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
5
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.5%
7
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
8
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
9
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
10
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
11
Muscle & Nerve
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
12
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
14
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
15
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
16
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
17
Gait & Posture
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
18
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
20
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
21
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
22
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
23
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%