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

Remote ball hitting - dominant inferior limb – averages.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 8: Remote ball hitting - dominant inferior limb – averages.

Mentions: Regarding Remote Ball Hitting - (see Table 2 and Figures 8, 9) statistically significant differences of means were registered for both cases: for the dominant inferior limb (t = 2.25, p < 0.05) and for the non-dominant inferior limb (t = 2.21, p < 0.05), the experimental group having better results than the control group. The variables are normally distributed (p > 0.05). The power of the test (0.58 for the dominant inferior limb and 0.56 for the non-dominant inferior limb) conducts to a higher probability for correct decision than error.


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)

Remote ball hitting - dominant inferior limb – averages.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 8: Remote ball hitting - dominant inferior limb – averages.
Mentions: Regarding Remote Ball Hitting - (see Table 2 and Figures 8, 9) statistically significant differences of means were registered for both cases: for the dominant inferior limb (t = 2.25, p < 0.05) and for the non-dominant inferior limb (t = 2.21, p < 0.05), the experimental group having better results than the control group. The variables are normally distributed (p > 0.05). The power of the test (0.58 for the dominant inferior limb and 0.56 for the non-dominant inferior limb) conducts to a higher probability for correct decision than error.

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