4.5 Article

Modulation of motor unit activity in biceps brachii by neuromuscular electrical stimulation applied to the contralateral arm

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 118, 期 12, 页码 1544-1552

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00031.2015

关键词

neuromuscular electrical stimulation; crossed effects; motor unit; biceps brachii; pulse width

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging [T32 AG-000279-08]
  2. King Saud bin Abdulaziz University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of the study was to determine the influence of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) current intensity and pulse width applied to the right elbow flexors on the discharge characteristics of motor units in the left biceps brachii. Three NMES current intensities were applied for 5 s with either narrow (0.2 ms) or wide (1 ms) stimulus pulses: one at 80% of motor threshold and two that evoked contractions at either similar to 10% or similar to 20% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force. The discharge times of 28 low-threshold (0.4-21.6% MVC force) and 16 highthreshold (31.7-56.3% MVC force) motor units in the short head of biceps brachii were determined before, during, and after NMES. NMES elicited two main effects: one involved transient deflections in the left-arm force at the onset and offset of NMES and the other consisted of nonuniform modulation of motor unit activity. The force deflections, which were influenced by NMES current intensity and pulse width, were observed only when low-threshold motor units were tracked. NMES did not significantly influence the discharge characteristics of tracked single-threshold motor units. However, a qualitative analysis indicated that there was an increase in the number of unique waveforms detected during and after NMES. The findings indicate that activity of motor units in the left elbow flexors can be modulated by NMES current and pulse width applied to right elbow flexors, but the effects are not distributed uniformly to the involved motor units.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据