Cargando…

Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards

This study aimed to evaluate the degree to which transcutaneous electrical stimulation (ES) enhanced recovery following a simulated water rescue. Twenty-six lifeguards participated in this study. The rescue consisted of swimming 100 m with fins and rescue-tube: 50 m swim approach and 50 m tow-in a s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barcala-Furelos, Roberto, González-Represas, Alicia, Rey, Ezequiel, Martínez-Rodríguez, Alicia, Kalén, Anton, Marques, Olga, Rama, Luís
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32806727
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165854
_version_ 1783576528784719872
author Barcala-Furelos, Roberto
González-Represas, Alicia
Rey, Ezequiel
Martínez-Rodríguez, Alicia
Kalén, Anton
Marques, Olga
Rama, Luís
author_facet Barcala-Furelos, Roberto
González-Represas, Alicia
Rey, Ezequiel
Martínez-Rodríguez, Alicia
Kalén, Anton
Marques, Olga
Rama, Luís
author_sort Barcala-Furelos, Roberto
collection PubMed
description This study aimed to evaluate the degree to which transcutaneous electrical stimulation (ES) enhanced recovery following a simulated water rescue. Twenty-six lifeguards participated in this study. The rescue consisted of swimming 100 m with fins and rescue-tube: 50 m swim approach and 50 m tow-in a simulated victim. Blood lactate clearance, rated perceived effort (RPE), and muscle contractile properties were evaluated at baseline, after the water rescue, and after ES or passive-recovery control condition (PR) protocol. Tensiomiography, RPE, and blood lactate basal levels indicated equivalence between both groups. There was no change in tensiomiography from pre to post-recovery and no difference between recovery protocols. Overall-RPE, legs-RPE and arms-RPE after ES (mean ± SD; 2.7 ± 1.53, 2.65 ± 1.66, and 2.30 ± 1.84, respectively) were moderately lower than after PR (3.57 ± 2.4, 3.71 ± 2.43, and 3.29 ± 1.79, respectively) (p = 0.016, p = 0.010, p = 0.028, respectively). There was a significantly lower blood lactate level after recovery in ES than in PR (mean ± SD; 4.77 ± 1.86 mmol·L(−1) vs. 6.27 ± 3.69 mmol·L(−1); p = 0.045). Low-frequency ES immediately after a water rescue is an effective recovery strategy to clear out blood lactate concentration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7460120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74601202020-09-02 Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards Barcala-Furelos, Roberto González-Represas, Alicia Rey, Ezequiel Martínez-Rodríguez, Alicia Kalén, Anton Marques, Olga Rama, Luís Int J Environ Res Public Health Article This study aimed to evaluate the degree to which transcutaneous electrical stimulation (ES) enhanced recovery following a simulated water rescue. Twenty-six lifeguards participated in this study. The rescue consisted of swimming 100 m with fins and rescue-tube: 50 m swim approach and 50 m tow-in a simulated victim. Blood lactate clearance, rated perceived effort (RPE), and muscle contractile properties were evaluated at baseline, after the water rescue, and after ES or passive-recovery control condition (PR) protocol. Tensiomiography, RPE, and blood lactate basal levels indicated equivalence between both groups. There was no change in tensiomiography from pre to post-recovery and no difference between recovery protocols. Overall-RPE, legs-RPE and arms-RPE after ES (mean ± SD; 2.7 ± 1.53, 2.65 ± 1.66, and 2.30 ± 1.84, respectively) were moderately lower than after PR (3.57 ± 2.4, 3.71 ± 2.43, and 3.29 ± 1.79, respectively) (p = 0.016, p = 0.010, p = 0.028, respectively). There was a significantly lower blood lactate level after recovery in ES than in PR (mean ± SD; 4.77 ± 1.86 mmol·L(−1) vs. 6.27 ± 3.69 mmol·L(−1); p = 0.045). Low-frequency ES immediately after a water rescue is an effective recovery strategy to clear out blood lactate concentration. MDPI 2020-08-12 2020-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7460120/ /pubmed/32806727 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165854 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Barcala-Furelos, Roberto
González-Represas, Alicia
Rey, Ezequiel
Martínez-Rodríguez, Alicia
Kalén, Anton
Marques, Olga
Rama, Luís
Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title_full Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title_fullStr Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title_full_unstemmed Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title_short Is Low-Frequency Electrical Stimulation a Tool for Recovery after a Water Rescue? A Cross-Over Study with Lifeguards
title_sort is low-frequency electrical stimulation a tool for recovery after a water rescue? a cross-over study with lifeguards
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32806727
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165854
work_keys_str_mv AT barcalafurelosroberto islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT gonzalezrepresasalicia islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT reyezequiel islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT martinezrodriguezalicia islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT kalenanton islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT marquesolga islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards
AT ramaluis islowfrequencyelectricalstimulationatoolforrecoveryafterawaterrescueacrossoverstudywithlifeguards