Different Smoothing Window Lengths can Estimate the Neuromuscular Fatigue Threshold at The same Intensity of the Lactate Threshold During the Leg Press Exercise

Q3 Health Professions Open Sports Sciences Journal Pub Date : 2023-04-06 DOI:10.2174/1875399x-v16-e2304040-2022-25
Runer Augusto Marson, Nuno Manuel Frade de Sousa, Robson Dias Scoz, Jose Joao Baltazar Mendes, Luciano Maia Alves Ferreira, Marco Aurélio Anunciação de Melo, Vilmar Baldissera, Lucas Filgueiras Freitas, César Ferreira Amorim
{"title":"Different Smoothing Window Lengths can Estimate the Neuromuscular Fatigue Threshold at The same Intensity of the Lactate Threshold During the Leg Press Exercise","authors":"Runer Augusto Marson, Nuno Manuel Frade de Sousa, Robson Dias Scoz, Jose Joao Baltazar Mendes, Luciano Maia Alves Ferreira, Marco Aurélio Anunciação de Melo, Vilmar Baldissera, Lucas Filgueiras Freitas, César Ferreira Amorim","doi":"10.2174/1875399x-v16-e2304040-2022-25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study aimed to compare different smoothing window lengths used to compute the RMS and their impact on RMS slope during leg press exercise and to compare the RMS slope behavior with lactate threshold. Methods: Twelve subjects performed an incremental test on a leg press machine where blood lactate concentration was measured at each stage. The RMS of vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL) and rectus femuralis (RF) were computed for 200, 1500 and 3000ms windows length periods, and the RMS linear slope was used to interpret the results in the amplitude domain. The EMG fatigue threshold (EMGth) was determined for the quadriceps muscle during the three smoothing window lengths. Results: There was no significant difference ( p > 0.05) in RMS slope between the three different RMS window length analyses for VM and VL muscles. The RMS slope was significantly higher ( p ≤ 0.05) for the window length period of 1500 and 3000ms compared to 200ms in some intensities of exercise. The ICCs between the RMS slopes were 0.94 for RF and 0.95 for VL and VM. There was no significant difference ( p > 0.05) between the EMGth at different window length periods and the lactate threshold (28.0 ± 3.7% of 1RM). Conclusion: Different smoothing window lengths to computed RMS could be used during resistance exercise without differences in RMS slope. The smoothing window lengths don´t influence EMGth intensity and are related to the lactate threshold.","PeriodicalId":38865,"journal":{"name":"Open Sports Sciences Journal","volume":"253 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Sports Sciences Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1875399x-v16-e2304040-2022-25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare different smoothing window lengths used to compute the RMS and their impact on RMS slope during leg press exercise and to compare the RMS slope behavior with lactate threshold. Methods: Twelve subjects performed an incremental test on a leg press machine where blood lactate concentration was measured at each stage. The RMS of vastus medialis (VM), vastus lateralis (VL) and rectus femuralis (RF) were computed for 200, 1500 and 3000ms windows length periods, and the RMS linear slope was used to interpret the results in the amplitude domain. The EMG fatigue threshold (EMGth) was determined for the quadriceps muscle during the three smoothing window lengths. Results: There was no significant difference ( p > 0.05) in RMS slope between the three different RMS window length analyses for VM and VL muscles. The RMS slope was significantly higher ( p ≤ 0.05) for the window length period of 1500 and 3000ms compared to 200ms in some intensities of exercise. The ICCs between the RMS slopes were 0.94 for RF and 0.95 for VL and VM. There was no significant difference ( p > 0.05) between the EMGth at different window length periods and the lactate threshold (28.0 ± 3.7% of 1RM). Conclusion: Different smoothing window lengths to computed RMS could be used during resistance exercise without differences in RMS slope. The smoothing window lengths don´t influence EMGth intensity and are related to the lactate threshold.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在相同乳酸阈值强度下,不同的平滑窗长度可以估计腿部按压运动中神经肌肉疲劳阈值
背景:本研究旨在比较腿推运动中用于计算均方根值的不同平滑窗长度及其对均方根斜率的影响,并比较均方根斜率行为与乳酸阈值的关系。方法:12例受试者在压腿机上进行增量试验,测定各阶段血乳酸浓度。计算股内侧肌(VM)、股外侧肌(VL)和股直肌(RF)在200、1500和3000ms窗长周期内的均方根,并利用均方根线性斜率在幅度域解释结果。在三个平滑窗口长度期间确定股四头肌的肌电疲劳阈值(EMGth)。结果:两组间无显著性差异(p >VM和VL肌肉三种不同RMS窗长分析的RMS斜率之间的差异为0.05)。在某些强度的运动中,窗长1500和3000ms的RMS斜率显著高于200ms (p≤0.05)。RMS斜率之间的ICCs为0.94,VL和VM为0.95。无显著性差异(p >0.05),不同窗长的EMGth与乳酸阈值(28.0±3.7%的1RM)之间存在显著性差异。结论:在阻力运动中,不同的平滑窗长度可用于计算均方根,均方根斜率无差异。平滑窗长度不影响EMGth强度,与乳酸阈值有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Open Sports Sciences Journal
Open Sports Sciences Journal Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
Different Smoothing Window Lengths can Estimate the Neuromuscular Fatigue Threshold at The same Intensity of the Lactate Threshold During the Leg Press Exercise Different Smoothing Window Lengths can Estimate the Neuromuscular Fatigue Threshold at The same Intensity of the Lactate Threshold During the Leg Press Exercise Attitudes towards LGBTQ+ Inclusion in Canadian Figure Skating The Post-Exercise Lower Limbs Recovery Process: A Questionnaire Applied To Physiotherapists Inflammatory Indices During and After a Randomized Controlled Trial on Exercise in Old Adults: Could Moderate-Intensity Exercise Be Safe Enough? (Active Elderly and Health – Clinicaltrials.Gov, Nct03858114)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1