Limits...
Tensiomyography method used for neuromuscular assessment of muscle training.

Rusu LD, Cosma GG, Cernaianu SM, Marin MN, Rusu PF, Ciocănescu DP, Neferu FN - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Bottom Line: Dm for group 1, results in a 6.57 mm/6.85 mm (T1/T2) for the right RF and 6.92 mm/7.06 mm for the left RF, while for group 2, the Dm evolution shows 7.45 mm/5.83 mm (T1/T) for the right RF and 7.41 mm/6.26 mm for the left RF.Also, the evaluation on motor test indicated better results on T2 for the experimental group.Summarizing the results of Student t-test, we found significant differences between the averages of the two groups in all parameters (p < 0.001), the experimental group registering better results than the control one.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Within the structure of the skeletal muscle, there are fascicles of muscular fibers that are made up of serially distributed contractile elements. These elements are controlled by the nervous system, control which results in obtaining the muscular strength required for movement and its control. This study presents the neuromuscular assessment using tensiomyography method (TMG).

Methods: We studied two groups of soccer junior players, group 1 (experimental group) and group 2 (control group), each containing 15 soccer players; we have considered two situations of muscle training: the combination between the isometric-concentric contraction for group 1 and the concentric contraction for group 2. TMG is the electrical stimulation of the muscle group and the recording of the muscle parameters resulting after the isometric contraction: time contraction (Tc) and displacement (Dm) at rectus femoris muscle (RF), pointing out two moments T1 and T2.

Results: Tc decreasing and the Dm increasing involve a good response following the muscle training. For group 1, the Tc evolution is 22.54 ms/22.45 ms (T1/T2) for the right RF and 22.65 ms/22.26 ms for the left RF, while for group 2 results in a Tc evolution of 24.33 ms/28.57 ms (T1/T2) for the right RF and 25.74 ms/28.61 ms for the left RF. Dm for group 1, results in a 6.57 mm/6.85 mm (T1/T2) for the right RF and 6.92 mm/7.06 mm for the left RF, while for group 2, the Dm evolution shows 7.45 mm/5.83 mm (T1/T) for the right RF and 7.41 mm/6.26 mm for the left RF. Also, the evaluation on motor test indicated better results on T2 for the experimental group. Summarizing the results of Student t-test, we found significant differences between the averages of the two groups in all parameters (p < 0.001), the experimental group registering better results than the control one.

Conclusions: It is possible to develop muscle training which can be monitored through TMG.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Standing long jump (m) – averages.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3713716&req=5

Figure 6: Standing long jump (m) – averages.

Mentions: Concerning the Standing Long Jump (see Table 2, Figure 6) the experimental group registers an increase of 4.67% (0.1 m) to the final test as compared to the initial one while the control group had an increase of 4.41% (0.09 m) at the end of the study period. The variable is normally distributed (p > 0.05). The results of Student test show there are significant differences between the means of the two groups (t = 2.8, p < 0.05). The value of statistical power of the test (0.72) is considered acceptable.


Tensiomyography method used for neuromuscular assessment of muscle training.

Rusu LD, Cosma GG, Cernaianu SM, Marin MN, Rusu PF, Ciocănescu DP, Neferu FN - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Standing long jump (m) – averages.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3713716&req=5

Figure 6: Standing long jump (m) – averages.
Mentions: Concerning the Standing Long Jump (see Table 2, Figure 6) the experimental group registers an increase of 4.67% (0.1 m) to the final test as compared to the initial one while the control group had an increase of 4.41% (0.09 m) at the end of the study period. The variable is normally distributed (p > 0.05). The results of Student test show there are significant differences between the means of the two groups (t = 2.8, p < 0.05). The value of statistical power of the test (0.72) is considered acceptable.

Bottom Line: Dm for group 1, results in a 6.57 mm/6.85 mm (T1/T2) for the right RF and 6.92 mm/7.06 mm for the left RF, while for group 2, the Dm evolution shows 7.45 mm/5.83 mm (T1/T) for the right RF and 7.41 mm/6.26 mm for the left RF.Also, the evaluation on motor test indicated better results on T2 for the experimental group.Summarizing the results of Student t-test, we found significant differences between the averages of the two groups in all parameters (p < 0.001), the experimental group registering better results than the control one.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: Within the structure of the skeletal muscle, there are fascicles of muscular fibers that are made up of serially distributed contractile elements. These elements are controlled by the nervous system, control which results in obtaining the muscular strength required for movement and its control. This study presents the neuromuscular assessment using tensiomyography method (TMG).

Methods: We studied two groups of soccer junior players, group 1 (experimental group) and group 2 (control group), each containing 15 soccer players; we have considered two situations of muscle training: the combination between the isometric-concentric contraction for group 1 and the concentric contraction for group 2. TMG is the electrical stimulation of the muscle group and the recording of the muscle parameters resulting after the isometric contraction: time contraction (Tc) and displacement (Dm) at rectus femoris muscle (RF), pointing out two moments T1 and T2.

Results: Tc decreasing and the Dm increasing involve a good response following the muscle training. For group 1, the Tc evolution is 22.54 ms/22.45 ms (T1/T2) for the right RF and 22.65 ms/22.26 ms for the left RF, while for group 2 results in a Tc evolution of 24.33 ms/28.57 ms (T1/T2) for the right RF and 25.74 ms/28.61 ms for the left RF. Dm for group 1, results in a 6.57 mm/6.85 mm (T1/T2) for the right RF and 6.92 mm/7.06 mm for the left RF, while for group 2, the Dm evolution shows 7.45 mm/5.83 mm (T1/T) for the right RF and 7.41 mm/6.26 mm for the left RF. Also, the evaluation on motor test indicated better results on T2 for the experimental group. Summarizing the results of Student t-test, we found significant differences between the averages of the two groups in all parameters (p < 0.001), the experimental group registering better results than the control one.

Conclusions: It is possible to develop muscle training which can be monitored through TMG.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus