Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles
Introduction As it might lead to less discomfort, magnetic nerve stimulation (MNS) is increasingly used as an alternative to electrical stimulation methods. Yet, MNS and electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) have not been formally compared for the evaluation of p...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of applied physiology 2015-07, Vol.115 (7), p.1429-1439 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1439 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 1429 |
| container_title | European journal of applied physiology |
| container_volume | 115 |
| creator | Neyroud, Daria Temesi, John Millet, Guillaume Y. Verges, Samuel Maffiuletti, Nicola A. Kayser, Bengt Place, Nicolas |
| description | Introduction
As it might lead to less discomfort, magnetic nerve stimulation (MNS) is increasingly used as an alternative to electrical stimulation methods. Yet, MNS and electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) have not been formally compared for the evaluation of plantar flexor neuromuscular function.
Methods
We quantified plantar flexor neuromuscular function with ENS, EMS and MNS in 10 volunteers in fresh and fatigued muscles. Central alterations were assessed through changes in voluntary activation level (VAL) and peripheral function through changes in M-wave, twitch and doublet (PS100) amplitudes. Discomfort associated with 100-Hz paired stimuli delivered with each method was evaluated on a 10-cm visual analog scale.
Results
VAL, agonist and antagonist M-wave amplitudes and PS100 were similar between the different methods in both fresh and fatigued states. Potentiated peak twitch was lower in EMS compared to ENS, whereas no difference was found between ENS and MNS for any parameter. Discomfort associated with MNS (1.5 ± 1.4 cm) was significantly less compared to ENS (5.5 ± 1.9 cm) and EMS (4.2 ± 2.6 cm) (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1687348706</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3708294821</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-c45c3fdbc1fa514dd2626c94727b7a7ea9060f83f44a97adedfbfd06a09ea45a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUFv1DAQhS1ERUvLD-ilssSlB9LajmMnR7SigFSJC5wtrzNuUyX21uNUy2_iT-J0l6oFcfLI75s3T3qEnHJ2wRnTl8iYFLxivKlqLmS1fUWOuKy7StVCv36aeXdI3iLeMcZawds35FA0qhW1EEfk1ypOG5sGjIFGT2EEl9Pg7EgDpAegmIdpHm0eYvjwXJ1mdOMLmdrQ08neBMiD-3eb5kgtIiDSfAtFn1NcTIqcqJ-De4RKhEXdjDbk5X-EbUz7Y3hCDrwdEd7t32Py4-rT99WX6vrb56-rj9eVa1ibKycbV_t-7bi3DZd9L5RQrpNa6LW2GmzHFPNt7aW0nbY99H7te6Ys68DKxtbH5Hznu0nxfgbMZhrQwVhCQZzRcNXqWraaqYK-_wu9i3MKJd1CKS07-UjxHeVSREzgzSYNk00_DWdmadLsmjSlSbM0abZl52zvPK8n6J82_lRXALEDsEjhBtKz0_91_Q0O_q9b</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1686749406</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Neyroud, Daria ; Temesi, John ; Millet, Guillaume Y. ; Verges, Samuel ; Maffiuletti, Nicola A. ; Kayser, Bengt ; Place, Nicolas</creator><creatorcontrib>Neyroud, Daria ; Temesi, John ; Millet, Guillaume Y. ; Verges, Samuel ; Maffiuletti, Nicola A. ; Kayser, Bengt ; Place, Nicolas</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
As it might lead to less discomfort, magnetic nerve stimulation (MNS) is increasingly used as an alternative to electrical stimulation methods. Yet, MNS and electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) have not been formally compared for the evaluation of plantar flexor neuromuscular function.
Methods
We quantified plantar flexor neuromuscular function with ENS, EMS and MNS in 10 volunteers in fresh and fatigued muscles. Central alterations were assessed through changes in voluntary activation level (VAL) and peripheral function through changes in M-wave, twitch and doublet (PS100) amplitudes. Discomfort associated with 100-Hz paired stimuli delivered with each method was evaluated on a 10-cm visual analog scale.
Results
VAL, agonist and antagonist M-wave amplitudes and PS100 were similar between the different methods in both fresh and fatigued states. Potentiated peak twitch was lower in EMS compared to ENS, whereas no difference was found between ENS and MNS for any parameter. Discomfort associated with MNS (1.5 ± 1.4 cm) was significantly less compared to ENS (5.5 ± 1.9 cm) and EMS (4.2 ± 2.6 cm) (
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
When PS100 is used to evaluate neuromuscular properties, MNS, EMS and ENS can be used interchangeably for plantar flexor neuromuscular function assessment as they provide similar evaluation of central and peripheral factors in unfatigued and fatigued states. Importantly, electrical current spread to antagonist muscles was similar between the three methods while discomfort from MNS was much less compared to ENS and EMS. MNS may be potentially employed to assess neuromuscular function of plantar flexor muscles in fragile populations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1439-6319</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1439-6327</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25682322</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adult ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Biomedicine ; Electric Stimulation - methods ; Electromyography - methods ; Female ; Human Physiology ; Humans ; Magnetics ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Muscle Contraction - physiology ; Muscle Fatigue - physiology ; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology ; Neuromuscular electrical stimulation ; Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine ; Original Article ; Sports Medicine</subject><ispartof>European journal of applied physiology, 2015-07, Vol.115 (7), p.1429-1439</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-c45c3fdbc1fa514dd2626c94727b7a7ea9060f83f44a97adedfbfd06a09ea45a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-c45c3fdbc1fa514dd2626c94727b7a7ea9060f83f44a97adedfbfd06a09ea45a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25682322$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Neyroud, Daria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Temesi, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millet, Guillaume Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verges, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maffiuletti, Nicola A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kayser, Bengt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Place, Nicolas</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles</title><title>European journal of applied physiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Appl Physiol</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Appl Physiol</addtitle><description>Introduction
As it might lead to less discomfort, magnetic nerve stimulation (MNS) is increasingly used as an alternative to electrical stimulation methods. Yet, MNS and electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) have not been formally compared for the evaluation of plantar flexor neuromuscular function.
Methods
We quantified plantar flexor neuromuscular function with ENS, EMS and MNS in 10 volunteers in fresh and fatigued muscles. Central alterations were assessed through changes in voluntary activation level (VAL) and peripheral function through changes in M-wave, twitch and doublet (PS100) amplitudes. Discomfort associated with 100-Hz paired stimuli delivered with each method was evaluated on a 10-cm visual analog scale.
Results
VAL, agonist and antagonist M-wave amplitudes and PS100 were similar between the different methods in both fresh and fatigued states. Potentiated peak twitch was lower in EMS compared to ENS, whereas no difference was found between ENS and MNS for any parameter. Discomfort associated with MNS (1.5 ± 1.4 cm) was significantly less compared to ENS (5.5 ± 1.9 cm) and EMS (4.2 ± 2.6 cm) (
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
When PS100 is used to evaluate neuromuscular properties, MNS, EMS and ENS can be used interchangeably for plantar flexor neuromuscular function assessment as they provide similar evaluation of central and peripheral factors in unfatigued and fatigued states. Importantly, electrical current spread to antagonist muscles was similar between the three methods while discomfort from MNS was much less compared to ENS and EMS. MNS may be potentially employed to assess neuromuscular function of plantar flexor muscles in fragile populations.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomedicine</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation - methods</subject><subject>Electromyography - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human Physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetics</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Muscle Contraction - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle Fatigue - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</subject><subject>Neuromuscular electrical stimulation</subject><subject>Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Sports Medicine</subject><issn>1439-6319</issn><issn>1439-6327</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUFv1DAQhS1ERUvLD-ilssSlB9LajmMnR7SigFSJC5wtrzNuUyX21uNUy2_iT-J0l6oFcfLI75s3T3qEnHJ2wRnTl8iYFLxivKlqLmS1fUWOuKy7StVCv36aeXdI3iLeMcZawds35FA0qhW1EEfk1ypOG5sGjIFGT2EEl9Pg7EgDpAegmIdpHm0eYvjwXJ1mdOMLmdrQ08neBMiD-3eb5kgtIiDSfAtFn1NcTIqcqJ-De4RKhEXdjDbk5X-EbUz7Y3hCDrwdEd7t32Py4-rT99WX6vrb56-rj9eVa1ibKycbV_t-7bi3DZd9L5RQrpNa6LW2GmzHFPNt7aW0nbY99H7te6Ys68DKxtbH5Hznu0nxfgbMZhrQwVhCQZzRcNXqWraaqYK-_wu9i3MKJd1CKS07-UjxHeVSREzgzSYNk00_DWdmadLsmjSlSbM0abZl52zvPK8n6J82_lRXALEDsEjhBtKz0_91_Q0O_q9b</recordid><startdate>20150701</startdate><enddate>20150701</enddate><creator>Neyroud, Daria</creator><creator>Temesi, John</creator><creator>Millet, Guillaume Y.</creator><creator>Verges, Samuel</creator><creator>Maffiuletti, Nicola A.</creator><creator>Kayser, Bengt</creator><creator>Place, Nicolas</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150701</creationdate><title>Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles</title><author>Neyroud, Daria ; Temesi, John ; Millet, Guillaume Y. ; Verges, Samuel ; Maffiuletti, Nicola A. ; Kayser, Bengt ; Place, Nicolas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-c45c3fdbc1fa514dd2626c94727b7a7ea9060f83f44a97adedfbfd06a09ea45a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomedicine</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation - methods</topic><topic>Electromyography - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human Physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetics</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Muscle Contraction - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle Fatigue - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</topic><topic>Neuromuscular electrical stimulation</topic><topic>Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Sports Medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Neyroud, Daria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Temesi, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millet, Guillaume Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verges, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maffiuletti, Nicola A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kayser, Bengt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Place, Nicolas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of applied physiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Neyroud, Daria</au><au>Temesi, John</au><au>Millet, Guillaume Y.</au><au>Verges, Samuel</au><au>Maffiuletti, Nicola A.</au><au>Kayser, Bengt</au><au>Place, Nicolas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles</atitle><jtitle>European journal of applied physiology</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Appl Physiol</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Appl Physiol</addtitle><date>2015-07-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>115</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1429</spage><epage>1439</epage><pages>1429-1439</pages><issn>1439-6319</issn><eissn>1439-6327</eissn><abstract>Introduction
As it might lead to less discomfort, magnetic nerve stimulation (MNS) is increasingly used as an alternative to electrical stimulation methods. Yet, MNS and electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) have not been formally compared for the evaluation of plantar flexor neuromuscular function.
Methods
We quantified plantar flexor neuromuscular function with ENS, EMS and MNS in 10 volunteers in fresh and fatigued muscles. Central alterations were assessed through changes in voluntary activation level (VAL) and peripheral function through changes in M-wave, twitch and doublet (PS100) amplitudes. Discomfort associated with 100-Hz paired stimuli delivered with each method was evaluated on a 10-cm visual analog scale.
Results
VAL, agonist and antagonist M-wave amplitudes and PS100 were similar between the different methods in both fresh and fatigued states. Potentiated peak twitch was lower in EMS compared to ENS, whereas no difference was found between ENS and MNS for any parameter. Discomfort associated with MNS (1.5 ± 1.4 cm) was significantly less compared to ENS (5.5 ± 1.9 cm) and EMS (4.2 ± 2.6 cm) (
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
When PS100 is used to evaluate neuromuscular properties, MNS, EMS and ENS can be used interchangeably for plantar flexor neuromuscular function assessment as they provide similar evaluation of central and peripheral factors in unfatigued and fatigued states. Importantly, electrical current spread to antagonist muscles was similar between the three methods while discomfort from MNS was much less compared to ENS and EMS. MNS may be potentially employed to assess neuromuscular function of plantar flexor muscles in fragile populations.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>25682322</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1439-6319 |
| ispartof | European journal of applied physiology, 2015-07, Vol.115 (7), p.1429-1439 |
| issn | 1439-6319 1439-6327 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1687348706 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adult Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedicine Electric Stimulation - methods Electromyography - methods Female Human Physiology Humans Magnetics Male Middle Aged Muscle Contraction - physiology Muscle Fatigue - physiology Muscle, Skeletal - physiology Neuromuscular electrical stimulation Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine Original Article Sports Medicine |
| title | Comparison of electrical nerve stimulation, electrical muscle stimulation and magnetic nerve stimulation to assess the neuromuscular function of the plantar flexor muscles |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T03%3A29%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20electrical%20nerve%20stimulation,%20electrical%20muscle%20stimulation%20and%20magnetic%20nerve%20stimulation%20to%20assess%20the%20neuromuscular%20function%20of%20the%20plantar%20flexor%20muscles&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20applied%20physiology&rft.au=Neyroud,%20Daria&rft.date=2015-07-01&rft.volume=115&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1429&rft.epage=1439&rft.pages=1429-1439&rft.issn=1439-6319&rft.eissn=1439-6327&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00421-015-3124-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3708294821%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1686749406&rft_id=info:pmid/25682322&rfr_iscdi=true |