Cargando…

Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function

BACKGROUND: In isometric muscle function, there are subjectively two different modes of performance: one can either hold isometrically – thus resist an impacting force – or push isometrically – therefore work against a stable resistance. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether or not two...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schaefer, Laura V., Bittmann, Frank N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5426061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28503309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0075-z
_version_ 1783235394927591424
author Schaefer, Laura V.
Bittmann, Frank N.
author_facet Schaefer, Laura V.
Bittmann, Frank N.
author_sort Schaefer, Laura V.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In isometric muscle function, there are subjectively two different modes of performance: one can either hold isometrically – thus resist an impacting force – or push isometrically – therefore work against a stable resistance. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether or not two different isometric muscle actions – the holding vs. pushing one (HIMA vs PIMA) – can be distinguished by objective parameters. METHODS: Ten subjects performed two different measuring modes at 80% of MVC realized by a special pneumatic system. During HIMA the subject had to resist the defined impacting force of the pneumatic system in an isometric position, whereby the force of the cylinder works in direction of elbow flexion against the subject. During PIMA the subject worked isometrically in direction of elbow extension against a stable position of the system. The signals of pressure, force, acceleration and mechanomyography/-tendography (MMG/MTG) of the elbow extensor (MMGtri/MTGtri) and the abdominal muscle (MMGobl) were recorded and evaluated concerning the duration of maintaining the force level (force endurance) and the characteristics of MMG-/MTG-signals. Statistical group differences comparing HIMA vs. PIMA were estimated using SPSS. RESULTS: Significant differences between HIMA and PIMA were especially apparent regarding the force endurance: During HIMA the subjects showed a decisively shorter time of stable isometric position (19 ± 8 s) in comparison with PIMA (41 ± 24 s; p = .005). In addition, during PIMA the longest isometric plateau amounted to 59.4% of the overall duration time of isometric measuring, during HIMA it lasted 31.6% (p = .000). The frequency of MMG/MTG did not show significant differences. The power in the frequency ranges of 8–15 Hz and 10–29 Hz was significantly higher in the MTGtri performing HIMA compared to PIMA (but not for the MMGs). The amplitude of MMG/MTG did not show any significant difference considering the whole measurement. However, looking only at the last 10% of duration time (exhaustion), the MMGtri showed significantly higher amplitudes during PIMA. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that under holding isometric conditions muscles exhaust earlier. That means that there are probably two forms of isometric muscle action. We hypothesize two potential reasons for faster yielding during HIMA: (1) earlier metabolic fatigue of the muscle fibers and (2) the complexity of neural control strategies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5426061
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54260612017-05-12 Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function Schaefer, Laura V. Bittmann, Frank N. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Research Article BACKGROUND: In isometric muscle function, there are subjectively two different modes of performance: one can either hold isometrically – thus resist an impacting force – or push isometrically – therefore work against a stable resistance. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether or not two different isometric muscle actions – the holding vs. pushing one (HIMA vs PIMA) – can be distinguished by objective parameters. METHODS: Ten subjects performed two different measuring modes at 80% of MVC realized by a special pneumatic system. During HIMA the subject had to resist the defined impacting force of the pneumatic system in an isometric position, whereby the force of the cylinder works in direction of elbow flexion against the subject. During PIMA the subject worked isometrically in direction of elbow extension against a stable position of the system. The signals of pressure, force, acceleration and mechanomyography/-tendography (MMG/MTG) of the elbow extensor (MMGtri/MTGtri) and the abdominal muscle (MMGobl) were recorded and evaluated concerning the duration of maintaining the force level (force endurance) and the characteristics of MMG-/MTG-signals. Statistical group differences comparing HIMA vs. PIMA were estimated using SPSS. RESULTS: Significant differences between HIMA and PIMA were especially apparent regarding the force endurance: During HIMA the subjects showed a decisively shorter time of stable isometric position (19 ± 8 s) in comparison with PIMA (41 ± 24 s; p = .005). In addition, during PIMA the longest isometric plateau amounted to 59.4% of the overall duration time of isometric measuring, during HIMA it lasted 31.6% (p = .000). The frequency of MMG/MTG did not show significant differences. The power in the frequency ranges of 8–15 Hz and 10–29 Hz was significantly higher in the MTGtri performing HIMA compared to PIMA (but not for the MMGs). The amplitude of MMG/MTG did not show any significant difference considering the whole measurement. However, looking only at the last 10% of duration time (exhaustion), the MMGtri showed significantly higher amplitudes during PIMA. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that under holding isometric conditions muscles exhaust earlier. That means that there are probably two forms of isometric muscle action. We hypothesize two potential reasons for faster yielding during HIMA: (1) earlier metabolic fatigue of the muscle fibers and (2) the complexity of neural control strategies. BioMed Central 2017-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5426061/ /pubmed/28503309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0075-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Schaefer, Laura V.
Bittmann, Frank N.
Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title_full Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title_fullStr Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title_full_unstemmed Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title_short Are there two forms of isometric muscle action? Results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
title_sort are there two forms of isometric muscle action? results of the experimental study support a distinction between a holding and a pushing isometric muscle function
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5426061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28503309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0075-z
work_keys_str_mv AT schaeferlaurav aretheretwoformsofisometricmuscleactionresultsoftheexperimentalstudysupportadistinctionbetweenaholdingandapushingisometricmusclefunction
AT bittmannfrankn aretheretwoformsofisometricmuscleactionresultsoftheexperimentalstudysupportadistinctionbetweenaholdingandapushingisometricmusclefunction